Emotional projection: The request could not be satisfied
6 Examples of Psychological Projection We All Commit ⋆ LonerWolf
I tend to make assumptions a lot, about everything and everyone.
While I have mostly learned the hard way that most people don’t actually think, feel and reason the same way I do, I realized long ago that the tendency to make assumptions is a form of naivety that we are all born with to some extent.
Unfortunately, making assumptions – which is closely linked to something known as psychological projection – is not only something that we all do, but it is common for us to suffer greatly at the expense of such a habit. If you are a chronic projector you will experience a great deal of anxiety around other people, as well as other unpleasant emotions like anger, disappointment, resentment and prejudice on a daily basis.
Keep reading to discover whether you’re a “serial projector” or not in your daily life.
What is Psychological Projection (In Layman’s Terms)?
What happens when you have a whole bunch of uncomfortable, embarrassing and annoying emotions that you don’t want to unconsciously deal with? According to famous psychologist Sigmund Freud these emotions are projected on to other people, so that other people become carriers of our own perceived flaws. Fortunately (or unfortunately) for us, this form of emotional displacement makes it much easier to live with ourselves … because everyone else is responsible for our misery – not us!
As a result of externalizing our emotions and perceiving them in others, we continue suffering terribly, often creating false self-images that portray us as “the victim” or “the good/righteous person” when the reality is that we aren’t.
More In-Depth Help
Want to learn how we project our shadow self onto others? In our Shadow Work Journal, we give more in-depth guidance:
Common Examples of Psychological Projection
The trick to seeing through the guise of projection is to become aware of the sneaky habitual cycles we get into on a daily basis. Some of the most common examples of psychological projection that we all commit are expanded on below:
1. “He/she hates me!”
Whether at home, at work or in any other situation, we have all believed that our bosses, co-workers, mother in laws, extended family members and other people we’ve come in contact with “hate” or “dislike” us for no reason. While we are convinced that the words, intonations and brief looks given to us are reflections of hidden hatred, most of us fail to realize that believing someone “hates us” is often a result of projection. If we have a strong dislike for someone in the first place it is common for us to protect ourselves against this feeling by projecting it into another.
2. “Oh my god, she’s so fat/ugly/slutty!”
How often have you bitched about another woman (or man) whose physical appearance was somehow displeasing to you? You might have felt an immense sense of distaste and dislike for this person, when in fact this chagrin is a protection mechanism veiling your own deeper body-image issues. Likely, you are deeply insecure about your own body, and thus unconsciously project this loathing onto others.
3. “Other people make me uncomfortable.”
Often the anxiety and tension we feel around others is a reflection of the way we perceive ourselves. When we are insecure or have low self-esteem, it is common to perceive the problem as being with other people and not ourselves. This classic form of projection is common amongst those suffering from social anxiety.
4. “If I can do it, other people can as well.”
This is perhaps one of the most nauseating types of projection others make – which, while flattering and motivating in some ways, is completely unrealistic in others. How often have you heard commercials or advertisements with happy shiny people proclaiming, “I lost 30 kilos in 3 weeks – you can too!” or, “I earned $1,245 dollars overnight – you can too!” This is a common example of projection that fails to take into account the fact that everyone has a different level of capability. It is also common for us to personally commit this kind of psychological projection as well. For example, with our children we might think, “If I was a good athlete, she will be as well” or with our co-workers we might think, “If I could organize that project, he can as well.” Often this form of projection creates a lot of frustration and disappointment.
5. “That is gross/bad, get it away from me.”
What we react the most strongly to says the most about what we place the most importance in. For instance, if we can’t stand watching sex on TV this could very well be a reflection of a hidden sexual shame or insecurity we have in ourselves. Homophobia as well is also often a type of projection, especially amongst religious people (for instance, did you know the highest amount of gay porn is consumed by “Bible Belt” states in the US?).
Dark Night of the Soul Journal:
For the lost souls who feel lonely and disconnected, this is a profound tool designed to help you overcome your existential depression, explore your Soul Loss, practice Soul Retrieval, and reconnect with your true Spiritual Nature.
6. “He/she is having an affair.”
The fear that your partner/spouse is having an affair or is untrustworthy is often a reflection of the way you feel about yourself. All normal people functioning in relationships feel attracted to other people at one point or another, and sometimes this self-discovery is met with fear and shame which is then often projected onto the other partner.
Remember that these six examples only reflect what sometimes happens, not what always happens. For example, your partner may indeed be cheating on you, in which case something must be done about that. However, psychological projection shouldn’t be ruled out either.
We all project in our daily lives to protect ourselves against emotions, thoughts and perceptions that we judge as being too “bad,” “ugly,” “shameful” or “uncontrollable.” Often these disowned aspects of ourselves form our shadow self and can only be reintegrated through shadow work. This is why it’s important to identify and become aware of what types of projection impact us the most.
What forms of projection have you experienced in your daily life?
What Is Projection Psychology And What Does It Reveal About People? Exploring Projection Psychology
Updated August 04, 2021
Medically Reviewed By: Aaron Horn
When you’re arguing with someone, it can be difficult to break through their defenses. One technique they may be using is projection. You have more than likely met someone who projects when they are angry or all the time. You have probably done it as well. Projection is something everything does. In this post, we’ll explain what projection is, how you can argue against someone who is projecting, and how to check your projection.
What Is Projection Psychology?
The best comparison we can make to projection is a movie theater. In a theater, you see a big screen, and that’s where you see the movie. The movie comes from a projector, locating in the back, in a small area. Sometimes, you may not even notice the projector. Please think of the projector as someone trying to cast their flaws onto that screen where other people see it.
Projection is when someone tries putting their feelings, flaws, and other quirks towards someone else, usually someone they argue with. Someone who projects will shift the blame to ignore their problems.
What’s an example of projection? Let’s look at jealousy. Say a person is always jealous they’ll lose their spouse, and they constantly cling to them and watch their every move. One day, the spouse confronts them about their clinginess. The projecting person will call the spouse jealous for an irrelevant reason. Projecting jealousy onto the spouse is an obvious defense tactic for someone who knows about projection, but you may believe the other person if you aren’t familiar with projection.
Projection can be made on an unconscious level, but other times, it’s done deliberately as a defense tactic. A politician, for example, will use projection to distract from their flaws and shift the blame.
History Of Projection
The first modern psychologist to point out projection was Freud. He believed that every thought, desire, and feeling could be projected to another person if you could not accept their reality.
The concept of projection has been constantly revised since it was first discovered. Everyone has their theory of projection, but the gist is that people will use projection to shift the blame.
Why Do People Project?
The biggest reason, conscious or unconscious, that a person project is that they can’t admit they were wrong about something. For some, the idea of admitting you were wrong is an honest one. It’s a sign you are willing to grow and learn from your past mistakes. If someone doubles down and shifts the blame, it makes them seem like they are stubborn.
Humans tend to have a hard time admitting fault. No matter who you are, it takes some courage to shatter your ego and admit your mistakes. With that said, why do some people have a harder time admitting fault? Here are a few ideas.
The Belief You’re A Bad Person If You Are In the Wrong
Many people see themselves as the hero, and if the hero has a flaw or admits they were wrong, they are no longer the hero but the villain. This is a binary view that is skewed the more you think about it. Many heroes have flaws, and a good hero is willing to correct themselves should they have a flaw. Sometimes, even the best people make mistakes. That doesn’t mean they are bad, but instead, simply human. If you can admit that you were wrong, that means that you are strong enough to admit your flaws.
Defense Comes Naturally
Defending yourself is an emotion that is embedded in our minds. We used to be part of tribes that would defend each other, and our mind still behaves in ways that shield us from danger. Whenever you’re confronted, your mind thinks you’re in danger, and you must defend yourself or die. While some people know that they are not in physical danger, others will fight, flight, fawn, or freeze.
We Have Pride
Someone’s sense of pride comes before wanting to admit they were wrong, which is a challenge for many. You may think that admitting you were wrong means sacrificing your pride, and you may think that people will dislike you. But being prideful can sometimes mean that you admit you were wrong. The people who we look up to have their problems as well, so admitting fault isn’t a bad thing.
We Don’t Want People To Get Mad At Us
In some situations, admitting fault means that people are going to criticize us harshly. This especially applies to a famous person. If a celebrity or politician admits they were wrong, the public tends to go after them. Sometimes, the public goes after a famous person due to the projection of their own. With that said, if people are harsh with you for admitting you were wrong, you should probably see new people.
There are more reasons why we get defensive. Humans have many motivations, both unconscious and conscious. Sometimes, we may be defensive because of our society, where it seems that admitting you were wrong is the end of the world. However, if everyone could be humble and admit fault, the world would be a lot better.
A person who projects may use other techniques not to admit fault. Here is a list of projection techniques that you may find people using against you.
- Someone may bully you into projecting their feelings. If a person is bullying you, they want to make you feel weak. However, the bully is usually the one with insecurities.
- They may victim blame. This is when someone is the victim of a crime, and someone blames their actions for the crime happening. If someone was sexually assaulted, the projector might blame the person assaulted for dressing provocatively.
The projector may use other tactics to seem honest. This is just a small sample of what they may do.
Fighting Back Against Projection
Let’s first talk about what you should do if you’re the person who is projecting. Self-awareness is the first step to stop. The projection may come unconsciously, and if there is self-awareness, you can take steps to fix it.
Awareness is a good first step to stop projecting. You can then learn how to cope with your arguments by speaking to a professional or changing them with time. You won’t change them overnight, and that shouldn’t stop you from working on your techniques.
Arguing With A Projector
How does one argue with someone who is a projector? Do they tell them about their projection, and the projector realizes it? Probably not.
The best approach to confronting a projecting person is after the argument. During an argument, emotions fly high, and the person will probably not listen. Once the argument is over and there are cooler heads, talk to them about it. If they see their flaws and they want to improve, then good job. Don’t feel like you are obligated to change a person. Unless you are a professional, you may not be able to. Instead, the person projecting needs to talk to a professional to live a better life without projection.
Projecting is a way for you to ignore your flaws. If you’re noticing you’re projecting and want to change, or help a loved one change, don’t be afraid to speak to a therapist. A therapist can help bring the projecting to the conscious forefront of your mind and teach you how to project less. Often, the projecting is unconscious. A therapist can teach a person how to be more mindful during a conversation and teach them ways to explain their points without projecting. Then, they can improve on the flaws they find themselves projecting onto others. There are many ways to treat projecting so you can stop projecting and start improving.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is an example of projecting in psychology?
Psychological projection is any behavior in which someone asserts that someone else has beliefs, behaviors, problems, or insecurities that they themselves have. This includes complementary projection, in which people assume that others “complement” their way of thinking (e.g., share certain viewpoints or attitudes), and complimentary projection, in which they assume that others have the same skills they do (e.g., that everyone can drive a car).
Sometimes, projection can be toxic. For example, some public figures who expressed homophobic opinions or voted against gay rights later admitted to struggling with their sexual orientations. They picked up on negative attitudes about homosexuality projected onto them, and they internalized that negativity. Over time, these negative feelings welled up and caused them to fight against homosexuality publicly. This is an example of projective identification.
One of the most common types of projecting is when someone accuses others of being angry or a bully. This can be a way to deflect attention from that person’s own feelings of anger and their guilt over having those feelings.
However, psychological projecting is not always this cut-and-dry. Complimentary projecting is very common and can lead to relationship issues when people assume that everyone around them shares the same skills, talents, and knowledge they do.
How can you tell if someone is projecting?
Common signs of psychological projection include unprovoked or exaggerated statements about other people. People who project may claim to know what someone else is thinking or feeling, or they may accuse them of poor behavior. If a person’s statements don’t add up, or if they seem to whip out accusations whenever they are uncomfortable, they may be projecting. Another tell-tale sign is when you talk to someone about their behavior or thoughts, and they immediately re-direct the conversation to you or another person.
Is projection a sign of mental illness?
Yes and no. While psychological projection itself is not a mental illness, people experiencing depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and/or codependency may struggle to cope with negative feelings or perceive criticism. This can lead to projection as a defense mechanism to deflect those uncomfortable feelings rather than process them healthily. These people are also more susceptible to projective identification, in which they internalize feelings that are projected onto them. For example, someone who feels overweight may project their anger onto a friend who has low self-esteem. The first person feels better after the project, but now the friend with low self-esteem feels fat.
Of course, projection is also a natural occurrence. It partly stems from our assumptions as we relate to others. For example, complementary projection happens when you assume that other people feel the same way you do, and complimentary projection is when you assume they can do things as well as you can. These types of psychological projections aren’t necessarily harmful, although they can lead to confirmation bias (e.g., you don’t see others’ viewpoints because you assume they’re thinking the way you are).
What is the difference between transference and projection?
Technically, psychological projection is a natural result of egocentric bias. We all tend to assume that other people have similar thoughts and feelings to us. This concept of projection is called social projection, and it’s the basis of projection behavior that can be problematic.
Transference is a bit more nuanced. When your feelings about one person are subconsciously shifted to another person, especially if that person holds a similar role to the original person, for example, after you move away from home and get your first job, you may see your boss’s mannerisms that remind you of your father. The psychological projection may happen if you have unresolved feelings toward your father that you act upon toward your boss.
What is toxic projection?
Most types of projection, while frustrating, are relatively benign. People project when they feel stressed. In the workplace, someone may project their insecurities onto a coworker. Couples may quarrel over household chores, each partner projecting their annoyances onto the other. These situations can often be resolved by good communication. But in some cases, projection behavior becomes toxic and potentially abusive.
For example, in emotional abuse, psychological projection and gaslighting often go hand-in-hand. The abuser will deflect their problems and flaws onto the victim, then create situations to justify that deflection. One classic example is the woman who complains that her husband is distant and forgetful. In response, he turns on the lamp after she’s already turned it off, then accuses her of being forgetful and nearly burning the house down. After he repeats this behavior, she begins to doubt her sanity. This is projective identification in action: eventually, the victim feels full responsibility for the projected feelings from their abuser. Toxic projection creates a powerful sense of self-blame in the victim, while the abuser gets to absolve themselves of responsibility.
What is projection in narcissism?
People with narcissistic tendencies tend to project differently than many other people. In the narcissist’s mind, any criticism is unacceptable. Any mentions of their flaws or poor behavior cause a cognitive dissonance that runs counter to a narcissist’s exaggerated self-image and feelings of power. Rather than admit any problems or weaknesses, they redirect the conversation to someone else.
Many narcissists also feel an overpowering need to control other people. This is not necessarily malicious but rather a side effect of their deep-seated sense of superiority. Psychological projection can be an effective tool for manipulating a social situation. For example, a narcissist may respond to someone’s complaint about their behavior by deflecting the accusation onto them. This makes the other person feel uncomfortable and defensive, while the narcissist feels relief because they no longer have that cognitive dissonance.
What to do when someone is projecting onto you?
Remember, the primary goal of psychological projection is to shift the focus to someone else. So as soon as you take that bait, the projector has successfully avoided taking responsibility for their negative thoughts or behavior. The best way forward is with compassion, not defensiveness. If you’re trying to talk to a loved one about your concerns, do not let them redirect the topic to your flaws. Ask constructive questions to help them identify their projected feelings. Never respond to their accusations with more accusations.
If a stranger is projecting onto you, it is best to disengage from their behavior. The projection reflects their issues more than yours.
Why do I project my feelings on others?
Psychological projection is often a subconscious activity. When you’re projecting, your mind is trying to protect itself from perceived harm. People project to deflect that threat away from themselves. So if you harbor negative feelings toward yourself, struggle with feelings of inferiority, or are guilty about something you’ve done, you may find it easier to identify that behavior in other people — even if they are not doing it. This is a defense mechanism meant to protect your reputation and prevent you from feeling slighted, stupid, or powerless. However, it can lead you to cause projective identification, in which someone else is left feeling bad or prevent you from processing your feelings healthily.
Blog Therapy, Therapy, Therapy Blog, Blogging Therapy, Therapy,..
Projection is a psychological defense mechanism in which individuals attribute characteristics they find unacceptable in themselves to another person. For example, a husband who has a hostile nature might attribute this hostility to his wife and say she has an anger management problem.
In some cases projection can result in false accusations. For example, someone with adulterous feelings might accuse their partner of infidelity.
Types of Projection
Like other defense mechanisms, projection is typically unconscious and can distort, transform, or somehow affect reality. A classic example of the defense mechanism is when an individual says “She hates me” instead of expressing what is actually felt, which is “I hate her.”
There are three generally accepted types of projection:
- Neurotic projection is the most common variety of projection and most clearly meets the definition of defense mechanism. In this type of projection, people may attribute feelings, motives, or attitudes they find unacceptable in themselves to someone else.
- Complementary projection occurs when individuals assume others feel the same way they do. For example, a person with a particular political persuasion might take it for granted that friends and family members share those beliefs.
- Complimentary projection is the assumption other people can do the same things as well as oneself. For example, an accomplished pianist might take it for granted that other piano students can play the piano equally well.
What Is the Purpose of Projection?
Sigmund Freud believed projection to be a defense mechanism often used as a way to avoid uncomfortable repressed feelings. Feelings that are projected may be controlling, jealous, angry, or sexual in nature. These are not the only types of feelings and emotions projected, but projection most often occurs when individuals cannot accept their own impulses or feelings.
In modern psychology, the feelings do not necessarily have to be repressed to constitute projection. Projection can be said to provide a level of protection against feelings a person does not wish to deal with. Engaging in either complimentary and complementary projection can allow people to feel more like others or relate to them easily.
It is fairly common for people to engage in projection from time to time, and many people who project their feelings on occasion do not do so as a result of any underlying issue. In some cases projection can contribute to relationship challenges. Projection may also be a symptom of other mental health concerns.
Projection and Mental Health Concerns
Projection, one main mechanism of paranoia, is also frequently a symptom of narcissistic and borderline personalities. A person with narcissistic traits who does not respect their partner may say to the partner, “You don’t respect me or see my true worth.” Some individuals with borderline personality may be afraid of losing the people they love and project this fear by frequently accusing friends or partners of planning to leave. However, individuals who project their feelings in this way do not necessarily have either of these conditions.
A person in therapy may be able to address these projections with the help of a qualified mental health professional. When a person can explore the reasons behind any projected feelings, it may be possible to prevent or reduce occurrences of this behavior in the future.
- American Psychological Association. APA Concise Dictionary of Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2009. Print.
- Corsini, R. J., & Wedding, D. (Eds.). (2007). Current Psychotherapies (Eighth ed.). Brooks Cole.
- Perry, J. C., Presniak, M. D., & Olson, T. R. (2013). Defense Mechanisms in Schizotypal, Borderline, Antisocial, and Narcissistic Personality Disorders. Psychiatry, 76(1), 32-52.
- Projection. (n.d.). Changing Minds. Retrieved from http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/coping/projection.htm
Please fill out all required fields to submit your message.
Please confirm that you are human.
8 Examples Of Feelings We Project
Deep in the recesses of our minds lurk many thoughts and feelings that we’d like to deny ever having.
These desires and impulses are so offensive to the conscious part of the mind that it launches various psychological defense mechanisms to keep them out.
One way it does this is by projecting these feelings onto other people (for the most part, but also onto events and objects) in an attempt to externalize the problem.
What does this mean? Well, let’s begin with a simple definition:
Psychological projection is a defense mechanism that occurs when a conflict arises between your unconscious feelings and your conscious beliefs. In order to subdue this conflict, you attribute these feelings to someone or something else.
In other words, you transfer ownership of these troubling feelings to some external source.
You effectively trick yourself into believing that these undesirable qualities actually belong elsewhere – anywhere but as a part of you.
This approach, Freud theorized, is a way for our minds to deal with aspects of our character that we considered to be flawed.
Rather than admit to the flaw, we find a way to address it in a situation where it is free from personal connotations.
By projecting these flaws, we can avoid having to consciously identify them, take ownership of them, and deal with them.
Projecting emotions onto others is something we all do to some degree, and it has some psychological value, but as we’ll discuss later, it also has its drawbacks.
There’s no end to the types of feelings we can project onto others. Whenever any internal conflict arises, there is always the temptation (though unconscious) to shift the troubling feeling elsewhere.
The more upsetting we find the feeling, the greater the impulse to project it onto someone else.
But let’s look at some clear examples to help explain the idea. Here are 8 of the most common examples of projection:
1. Attraction To And Arousal By Someone Other Than Your Partner
The classic example often used to explain projection psychology is that of the husband or wife who feels a strong sense of attraction to a third person.
Their inner values tell them that this is unacceptable, so they project these feelings onto their spouse and accuse them of being unfaithful.
This blame is actually a mechanism of denial so that they do not have to deal with, or feel guilty about, their own wandering desires.
This sort of projection in relationships can put a great deal of stress and strain on things.
After all, the innocent party is being accused of something they haven’t done. They will quite rightly defend themselves, often quite adamantly.
Before long, you’ve got a breeding ground of mistrust, poor communication, and doubt.
2. Body Image Issues
When you look in the mirror and regard your reflection as in some way imperfect, you might choose to overlook these so-called flaws by taking every opportunity to spot them in others.
Proclaiming someone else to be overweight, ugly, or to have some other unappealing physical attribute is most likely to occur when you have deep-seated image issues yourself.
Projection allows you to take the loathing you may have for your looks and distance yourself from it by focusing it on other people.
You may also project behaviors that you are uncomfortable with onto others.
For example, you may criticize someone for being greedy at the dinner table, or for wearing unflattering clothing in order to hide your own insecurities regarding these things.
3. Disliking Someone
When we are young, we tend to get along with everyone, and this desire remains a part of us as we grow older.
With this in mind, it should come as no surprise to learn that when we find ourselves disliking someone, we seek to project this feeling onto them so that we may justify our own less than friendly behavior.
To put it another way, if you dislike Joe, but are not willing to consciously admit to this, you might convince yourself that it is Joe who doesn’t like you.
This protects you against feeling bad for disliking someone, no matter what your reasons are.
Because let’s face it, if you had to really say why you disliked Joe (perhaps he is charming and you are not, or maybe he has a successful career and you’re unfulfilled in yours), you’d come face to face with qualities that you don’t want to admit exist in you.
4. Insecurity And Vulnerability
When we feel insecure about some aspect of ourselves (such as the body image discussed above), we seek out ways to identify some insecurity in other people.
This is often the case with bullying behavior where the bully will target the insecurities of others in order to avoid dealing with his/her own concerns.
This is why they will look for the most vulnerable individuals who can be easily attacked without risk of emotionally painful retribution.
It doesn’t have to be exactly the same insecurity that is targeted; often any will do.
So the person who worries that they are not smart enough will pick on the lack of romantic confidence in another who might target the financial anxieties of a third person.
In an attempt to mask the anger that may be raging on the inside, some people project it onto those they are angry with.
During an argument, for instance, you may try to maintain a cool and measured exterior and even tell the other person to ‘calm down’ so as to deny the anger you are harboring.
Or you may use the actions of others to justify your anger towards them, even when an alternate approach could have been taken.
Projecting anger onto someone else shifts the blame in your mind. No longer are you the reason for the conflict; you see yourself as the attacked, not the attacker.
You may also like (article continues below):
6. Irresponsible Behavior
We may not like to admit it, but we all partake in behavior that could be considered irresponsible.
Whether it’s having a few too many drinks, taking unnecessary risks with our safety, or even being reckless with our money, we are all guilty of doing things that we probably shouldn’t.
To avoid feelings of remorse, we project our irresponsibility onto others and criticize them for their actions.
Sometimes we hone in on things that bear no relation to our own misdemeanors, but other times we scold people for doing precisely the things that we, ourselves, have done (the hypocrites).
When we perceive ourselves to have failed at something, it is common for us to push others to succeed in an attempt to deny our failure.
This is borne out by the parents who enthusiastically – sometimes overbearingly – encourage their children to try hard at something that they, in their mind, failed at.
Take the failed athlete who forces their child down the sporting road, or the musician who never quite made it who pushes their child into learning a musical instrument.
It makes no difference to the parent whether the child actually wants to pursue these activities, because, for them, it is a chance to make amends for their own shortcomings.
This is one of those rare instances where we actually project positive aspects of our own personality onto others, although it doesn’t always come across that way.
Take the animal welfare activist who projects his dislike of cruel farming practices onto everyone else, only to be shocked when they don’t seem to share his concerns.
Or consider the business owner who struggles to understand why his employees aren’t as driven as he is to make the business a success.
The Problem With Projection
This element of psychology may appear to be effective in defending our minds against pain, but there are two fundamental problems that run counter to this argument.
The first is that projection makes us feel superior to everyone else because it allows us to overlook our own faults and inadequacies while simultaneously honing in on what we perceive to be imperfect in others.
This can not only be the source of much conflict, but it gives us a false impression and false expectations of other people. We fail to see all the good in people, because we are too busy examining their flaws.
The second issue with projection as a defense mechanism is that it fails to address the underlying feelings themselves. As long as we continue to deny the existence of these feelings, there is no mechanism that can help us to tackle and overcome them.
It is only when we accept they are a part of us that we can begin to work through them and eventually rid ourselves of them altogether.
The first step is, as you’d expect, the hardest one to take because it effectively invites pain upon yourself.
Yet, until dealt with, this pain is always present, and while you may not feel its full effect when it is being suppressed, it contributes to an unease that never quite leaves you.
Moving Away From Projection
Projection can be a conscious thing, but much of the time, it takes place below the surface as a function of the unconscious.
Before you can begin to tackle the underlying issues, you must first recognize when and how you might be projecting onto others.
While bringing your own awareness to the situation might help uncover some instances, it is not always easy to identify those feelings that you’ve buried deepest.
You might find great value in talking to a psychotherapist who is trained to spot and gently tease out things that we might not immediately be aware of.
They can help to bring these issues to the surface where they can be examined and, finally, dealt with.
If you feel you might benefit from speaking to a therapist, simply – click here to find one.
Projection is often damaging to our relationships with others, so any attempt to eradicate it as a habit – either by yourself or with professional help – is worth it.
When you are capable of facing unwelcome feelings head on, you’ll find they are far less draining or damaging in the long term.
Psychological projection was first conceptualised by Sigmund Freud as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects their own unacceptable attributes/characteristics/emotions and ascribes them to people in the outside world instead.
Have you ever disliked someone only to become convinced that the person had a vendetta against you? This is a common example of psychological projection. Your negative feelings about that person have been projected onto them and they become the one that has taken on your dislike – something that could be far from reality.
Another example of psychological projection is someone who feels a compulsion to steal things then projects those feelings onto others. She might begin to fear that her purse is going to be stolen or that she is going to be shortchanged when she buys something. She pushes her qualities away, as if they originate from someone else.
External attribution of your own emotions = projection
Luckily, there are methods you can use to identify why you are projecting your emotions and put a stop to this coping mechanism.
Other common defense mechanisms include:
Denial – Refusing to admit to yourself that something is real
Distortion – Changing the reality of a situation to suit your needs
Passive Aggression – Indirectly acting out your aggression. examples: procrastination, non-cooperation etc
Repression – Covering up feelings or emotions instead of coming to terms with them (see earlier post on suppression and why it is bad for you)
Dissociation – Removing yourself emotionally from a situation, almost as if you are watching yourself do something – it isn’t you.
Sometimes, defense mechanisms work well for us and help us to cope with life, they are not always unhealthy.
Self awareness and acceptance
Ask yourself why you are projecting. Awareness is the first step to dealing with this coping mechanism. Confronting emotions that we don’t want to feel can be cathartic and can lead to an inner sense of peace. Avoidant coping is not always the best way forward and can lead to depression and anxiety in the long term.
Be aware of the above defense mechanisms (denial etc) and figure out what the triggers are for these negative emotions. There may be something you can do about it and dealing with the issue rather than avoiding will feel like a weight lifted off your shoulders
Psychological Projection – TV Tropes
“To the selfish, all are selfish.”
— Aesop of “The Fox and the Bramble”
Psychological Projection is a common behavioral phenomenon in which a character projects their own character traits, emotions, or desires to another character by presuming they feel or think the same as they. Most often, the character denies some aspect of their own thoughts or behavior while simultaneously assuming or accusing other people of doing or thinking those same things (e.g. The Bully says, “I’m not a bully; that guy [that I’m picking on] is just a big Jerkass!”). They are using themselves as a basis for understanding others and through their perception see their own flaws and virtues in other people. This is usually done unconsciously and never explicitly stated by the character, which can make it hard to notice. But if a character presumes something about another without having any reasons to think so and the presumption has something in common with themselves, they are probably projecting.
Often (though not always) a Sub-Trope of Hypocrite. Clone by Conversion is the literal version of this. This trope can sometimes be a manifestation of The Golden Rule, because people will by nature project themselves on to others and expect them to act the same as themselves. Often overlaps with Evil Cannot Comprehend Good, Good Cannot Comprehend Evil, Straw Hypocrite, Boomerang Bigot, and Protagonist-Centered Morality. Related to All Psychology Is Freudian, Darwinist Desire, and The Golden Rule. The Shadow Archetype is essentially this trope given a tangible form.
Contrast Hypocrite Has a Point, where the character’s accusations have merit, despite the accuser not living up to them themselves. Not to be confused with Astral Projection or Enemy Without, which are rather more fantastic.
open/close all folders
Anime & Manga
- A Certain Magical Index: Kakeru Kamisato absolutely hates suddenly gaining a superpower and being compelled to use it to save people. He believes it to be a curse and tries to become normal again by attacking the beings he believes are responsible for empowering him. When he learns of Touma Kamijou and his similar ability, he automatically assumes Touma feels the same way and tries to get him to join forces in his goal, and is thrown for a loop when Touma explains that powers or no powers, he’s all about saving and protecting people.
- Domestic Girlfriend: Subverted in the first chapter. When Natsuo looks at Rui, he sees Hina, his teacher he has a crush on. He acknowledges that he’s projecting and ignores it. The truth is that Rui is Hina’s little sister, and they genuinely look very similar. Natsuo finds this out after his father remarries to Rui and Hina’s mother, making them his step-sisters. This is after he had sex with Rui and confessed his love to Hina.
- Dragon Ball:
- During the Cell Saga, Goku ends up doing this to Gohan, automatically assuming that Gohan, in addition to his potential as a fighter, wants a good and challenging fight with Cell purely because it’s what he would do in such a situation, going so far as to give Cell a Senzu Bean before the fight. It takes getting a major What the Hell, Hero? from Piccolo (who by this point understands Gohan more than his own father), and seeing the danger he’s put Gohan in firsthand, for Goku to realize that this is not the case.
- When you think about it, this is at least partially what Frieza’s obsession with fear is all about. Frieza enjoys taking the time to install fear and horror in others, but when we see his actions, such as blowing up Planet Vegeta to make sure no one opposes him, he shows that deep inside, Frieza is nothing but a coward utterly terrified of the possibility someone would grow strong enough to face him on even terms, and in his fight with Super Saiyan Goku, where he blows up Namek in desperation to kill Goku, combined with his frantic attempts to kill him and shamelessly begging for his life when hes bifurcated by his own attack, its all the more obvious.
- Dragon Ball Super: Throughout the Future Trunks Saga, Zamasu constantly condemns mortals for being warlike, destructive, all about conflict, and sinful with disrespect to everything the gods stand for; when it comes down to it, the only one who’s as twisted as Zamasu claims the mortals are is Zamasu himself, considering the fact that, among other things, he cut down an inhabitant of Planet Babari when he could have simply walked away, murdered his own master and stole his Time Rings and Potaras for his plan, and went so far as to kill all of the other gods in The Multiverse of Future Trunks’ Alternate Timeline to prevent them from interfering. It’s especially jarring since, as a Supreme Kai, Zamasu is supposed to be a Big Good who protects and watches over mortals.
- Goku Black partakes in this just as much as Zamasu, his former and future selves, prattling on about how mortals are violent, destructive creatures who cannot learn from their mistakes and are inflexible in their ways. All of this coming from the person who is fanatically and unbendingly obsessed with annihilating all mortal-kind, completely and utterly insane and a danger to everyone around him barring literally himself, and whose first actions upon taking Gokus body to fulfill his mad quest for power being to gruesomely murder him, his wife and youngest son, just as a final insult to the man for bruising his ego.
- Fruits Basket:
- Akito Sohma treats other women like her worst enemy because she’s projecting her demented Abusive Mom onto them. This is especially evident in her cruelty towards poor Rin because the latter’s black Rapunzel Hair heavily reminds Akito of Ren, to the point Akito first gave her the nickname “Rin” because it sounds like Ren.
- Yuki’s mother says she must decide everything for Yuki because she thinks he’s self-centered, selfish, and unreasonable. Those three words are a better description for her than they ever will be for Yuki.
- In One Piece, during the Water 7 arc, the crew learned that the Going Merry, the Straw Hats’ first ship, had been damaged beyond repair in their previous adventure and Luffy reluctantly decided to replace it. Usopp, who had been in the crew as long as the Merry and had recently gotten curbstomped by a group of bounty hunters whom the rest of the crew managed to beat with ease, started projecting himself onto the ship, desperately and angrily insisting that the Merry could be fixed and that Luffy getting a new ship was akin to abandoning a crew mate for being weak.
- The Rising of the Shield Hero:
- One bad experience after another with the royal family members, King Aultcray and Princess Malty, leads the titular hero, Naofumi, initially projecting his feelings of animosity onto the second princess Melty, immediately thinking she was untrustworthy and was secretly planning to set him up, due to being related to Aultcray and Malty, the two who placed a False Rape Accusation on him and continued to dog his steps. This is despite Melty presenting herself as a genuinely kind hearted princess when they first met, and even personally intervening to prevent Malty and Motoyasu from forcing Naofumi to fight a duel with the latter in the middle of a public area just moments prior. Naofumi does eventually realize his mistake and now sees her as trusted ally and friend.
- Aultcray himself projects his Irrational Hatred of the Shield Hero in general and his hatred of demi-humans onto Naofumi, which led to him to try and ruin the latter’s life and reputation as much as possible. Not helping was the King’s eldest daughter manipulating him into continuously making life hard for the new Shield Hero. This, as well as his incompetence in watching over Melromarc, catch up to him when his wife Queen Mirelia strips him and Malty of their royal status and allows Naofumi to legally change their names to “Trash” and “Bitch” respectively.
- This is part of the reason Kazuki becomes The Kindnapper in Snow White with the Red Hair. Having previously been made a slave and bought as “decoration” by nobles, similar to what Prince Raj initially had attempted with Shirayuki in the beginning of the manga, Kazuki assumes she’d appreciate being taken as far away from nobles as possible and goes about doing so by attacking Obi and drugging her to get her away without even trying to talk to her first.
- In Sword Art Online, Kyouji Shinkawa admired his older brother for his ability to kill while he was trapped in SAO. He projects his adulation onto his crush Shino Asada, due to her own past as a killer, despite knowing the fact that she hates being labeled as a killer. When she was younger, she had to kill a bank robber in self-defense, and has regretted it ever since.
- In Vampire Knight, Yuuki thought she and Zero were struggling with the same pain and fears, but when Zero denies it, she says, “I guess I was only seeing myself”.
- A variant happens in Zoids: Chaotic Century. One episode has Reese trying to screw with Fiine, by showing her visions of Van getting shot and killed protecting her, and telling her that Van will die if she stays close to him. Fiine quickly realizes that those visions are actually Reese’s own memories, of when she was a child and a boy she befriended was killed trying to protect her, and she blames herself for that.
- Several Batman villains project their own origins and insecurities onto Batman.
- This is what Joker is ultimately trying to prove in The Killing Joke that everyone is really like him deep down — justifying his murderous madness by trying to demonstrate people being strained by worries and neuroses until they have a particularly bad day, and snap just like he did. He fails in the general sense, but in the end he still has a kindred spirit in Batman himself.
- Hugo Strange thinks that Batman does what he does because he enjoys being powerful and feared, since that is what Strange wants to be (and for extra irony, he’s a psychologist).
- Tommy Elliot/Hush knows Batman’s true identity, but thinks that Bruce Wayne is happy that his parents were killed, because Elliot’s parents were abusive and he celebrated when they died.
- In the story The Black Ring, Lex Luthor claims Superman doesn’t empathize with humanity at all, but it’s pretty clear he’s projecting this trait onto his archnemesis.
- In general, it’s sometimes implied that the reason why Lex often accuses Superman of using his powers to lord over humanity is because, if their positions were reversed, that’s exactly what Lex would do.
- Stories by Grant Morrison in Justice League and 52 show that Lex believes that Superman is as obsessed with him as he is with Superman, and truly thinks that everything Superman does—even just saving some random people’s lives—is somehow an attempt to show him up.
- Iron Man came to think during Secret Invasion that Captain America had been replaced by a Skrull before the events of Civil War because Cap is a reasonable person and would have agreed the Superhero Registration Act was the right thing to do if it were really him… right? Meanwhile, every other hero is trying to get at Tony to prove he was replaced by a Skrull for the opposite reasons. No one important was actually replaced by skrulls, so their actions are their own. For better or worse.
- Sonic the Hedgehog (Archie Comics). Invoked in Sonic Universe #63 when Espio accuses Knuckles of projecting fear of ghosts on to him.
- Harry Osborn, shortly before his original death in the comics, claimed that Spider-Man only tried to ‘destroy’ the Osborn family because he resented their ‘stable’ family dynamic while he had been a burden on relatives who never wanted him, Harry’s mind now so twisted that he was incapable of recognizing Norman’s flaws as a parent.
- J. Jonah Jameson’s distrust of Spider-Man is often portrayed as him projecting his own cynicism and selfishness onto Spider-Man, concluding he has some sort of secret self-serving agenda.
- Wonder Woman (1987): Circe believes everyone, including Wonder Woman, is as cynical and cruel as she is and tries to prove it by getting Diana to murder her on live television. Diana not only refuses to kill Circe, but she retorts that Circe is merely angry that she has spent a lifetime being angry over a lifetime of loneliness and rejection.
- All’s Fair in Love and War (And Turnabout’s Fair Play): Lila firmly believes that there’s no such thing as friendship — instead, all relationships boil down to people trying to manipulate each other for their own gain. She also believes that the only real difference between her and Marinette is that her rival is a bit too cautious, and simply lacks the wherewithal to make the kind of bold moves she does.
- Children of Remnant: Emerald constantly talks about how much Jaune likes Cinder, and how they’re obviously going to announce their engagement any day now. The truth is that Emerald is so deep in the closet that projecting her own feelings for Cinder onto Jaune is the only way she knows how to deal with them. Jaune does have some feelings for Cinder (he’s a little offended with how quickly she denies being in a relationship with him), but certainly not to the extent that Emerald pretends.
- In Chloe’s Lament, Chloe accuses Marinette of being Secretly Selfish, only protecting Paris as Ladybug for admiration and praise while looking down upon the rabble as beneath her. Adrien calls her out on it — while she only cared about being a Nominal Hero in order to feed her ego, that doesn’t mean Marinette shares her motivations. This directly leads to her downfall, as she Wishes to trade places with her, expecting to become Ladybug in the new reality while Marinette abuses her position as the Mayor’s daughter and is just as despised as she was… only to find that no, Marinette is just as kind as ever, and she’s still built up a reputation for being a bully. Except now she’s in a world where her father’s connections aren’t good enough to protect her from the consequences of her actions.
- Fate/Black Dawn:
- Shirou spends quite a lot of time worried about how much he might be projecting his feelings for Arturia onto Morgan. Even Morgan notices that he looks at them in a similar way.
- He also compares Morgan to Rin quite a bit, though that’s a less positive association because Rin had become bitter and angry by the time he cast his final ritual.
- Fragmentation points this out as being the dirty secret behind ComStar.
Historically, men judge others by their own acts. If a man is willing to steal from others, he lives in fear that others will steal from him. Murderers fear being murdered themselves. ComStar’s greatest fear was that the technological advances that Kerensky had taken with him would one day return in the hands of others, making ComStar itself obsolete. So when rumors of new weapons of types never before seen had surfaced, weapons that even the Star League hadn’t possessed, ComStar felt an understandable tremor of fear work its way down the backs of the persons responsible for maintaining that edge.
- In A Game of Cat and Cat, Kazuya gets upset when Soma tells him that he left his friend Mina behind in Castlevania, until Soma specifies that she stayed in a safe room while he explored dangerous territory. Soma thinks that Kazuya is suffering from Survivor Guilt because he wasnt there when a loved one died, the same way his past life was away on a Crusade when his wife died. However, it’s implied that Kazuya is bitter because he was abandoned; in his game, the Chaos Hero left him and the Law Hero to fend for themselves after fusing with a demon.
- This is one of Alya’s Fatal Flaws in LadyBugOut: While she’s quick to believe the worst of Ladybug and Marinette — that they’ve betrayed her by setting up the titular blog — she fails to recognize how her own actions set things into motion. This results in her unintentionally describing herself while trying to convince Marinette that she needs to make amends:
Alya: “I can’t be friends with someone who won’t apologize and can’t even see what she did.”
Marinette: “I can’t be friends with someone like that either. So I guess we’re not friends anymore.”
- Rosario Vampire: Brightest Darkness Act IV: Hokuto constantly condemns other living things, human and monster alike, for being evil, destructive beings who only care about themselves and will destroy everything around them and attack anything different. Considering the fact that Hokuto’s idea of “true peace” amounts to reviving Alucard to destroy the world, as well as the fact that he set Kuyou loose on Yokai Academy, let Jovian and Jacqueline rape Felucia to near-insanity, and specifically ordered them to kill as many people and destroy as much as Tsukune’s hometown as possible in an effort to prove to Moka that his nihilism is justified and humans and monsters can never co-exist, when it comes down to it, the only one who’s as destructive and evil as Hokuto claims all living things are is Hokuto himself.
Films Live Action
- In 12 Angry Men, Juror 3 is extremely insistent on the defendant being guilty and gets almost violently angry when this is questioned. He keeps insisting that the boy has to be guilty and compares the situation to his strained relationship with his own son. Soon it becomes clear that the real reason he’s so sure the defendant is guilty is because he’s projecting his feelings about his son onto the case. When 3 realizes what he’s doing, he breaks down into tears and changes his verdict to not guilty.
- In Boyhood, Olivia tends to project her own flaws onto her daughter Samantha, angrily lecturing her for having a “bullshit attitude” and her selfishness, two things that apply to Olivia herself and she tends to ignore the fact that she consistently shows more preference to Mason Jr. Samantha even calls her out on it.
- In The Frighteners, Agent Dammers claims that Frank’s efforts are all based around his own pathetic need for self-gratification, Dammers’ mental issues and Wrong Genre Savvy leaving him incapable of acknowledging that Frank is genuinely trying to stop a killer ghost, as opposed to Dammers’ belief that Frank is a killer psychic.
- In Irreconcilable Differences, Lucy tells Casey at her emancipation trial, “I know why you want to divorce your father. I know you never got over his abandoning us.” Casey replies, “No, Mom, you never got over his abandoning us.”
- Marvel Cinematic Universe:
- In What About Bob?, Dr. Marvin tells Dr. Tomsky, “You’ve been duped by a textbook narcissist, a brilliant sociopath!”, right after trying to get Bob admitted to a mental hospital on false pretenses.
- Everything I Never Told You deals with this trope via how the Lee family treat each other. They all constantly project their own issues onto each other instead of communicating about their feelings. For instance, Lydia is the favorite child because James and Marilyn project their hopes and dreams onto her – popularity for James and academic success for Marilyn and remain oblivious to the fact that Lydia is only trying to live up to their expectations to make her parents happy, not because she wants to herself. Meanwhile James and Nath have a very tense relationship because James sees himself as a boy in Nath and resents him for being weak and nerdy like he was. Only Hannah is exempt from this and that’s only because her family never pay any attention to her. Outside the family, Nath’s animosity towards Jack is that he perceives Jack’s behavior towards him as being mockery when it’s actually his own insecurity leading him to jump to assume the worst in his classmate and he’s totally unaware Jack had a crush on him for a very long time and used his friendship with Lydia as an excuse to get closer to Nath.
- Harry Potter: Snape’s attitude towards Harry is part this, part Sins of the Father, as he and Harry’s father James hated each other from day one. Thing is, from what we see of Snape’s past it’s easy to spot that the two were no different from each other while at school, and arguably Snape was the worse of the two given that he loved to dabble with The Dark Arts while James firmly refused them, even saving Snape from a prank from Sirius that could have killed him. The fact that Snape loved Lily but she ultimately married James because he eventually cleaned up his act lends credence to Snape not only projecting James’ bad traits on Harry, but also his own, given that James eventually grew out of them while Snape didn’t.
- Katniss tends to do this a lot in The Hunger Games. For example, in Catching Fire, she insists that the other Tributes are out to get her and Peeta and that they cannot be trusted…but the first thing Katniss does upon entering the Arena is try to kill the other Tributes and she plots about backstabbing them several times, with the justification that it’s to save Peeta.
- Hurog: The villainous characters are very prone to this. Ward’s father regularly beat him, so violently that Ward took some brain damage (he still speaks very slowly) and decided to exaggerate it by Obfuscating Stupidity. There was no sensible reason to attack Ward, but the father had offed his own father for Klingon Promotion, and was now afraid Ward would do the same. Then there is king Jakoven, who is a chronic murderer of innocent people, which is, hilariously enough, caused by his paranoia about others planning things against him. (In part. It’s safe to assume he’s a jerk, too) Each and every villain assumes that Ward would kill his whole family to inherit castle Hurog. While Ward does want to inherit Hurog very much, he would never kill his family over it, but as the villains themselves would, of course, do it, it is “obvious” to them that, of course, that must be what he is planning.
- Judge Dee: The father of a newly-married woman comes barging into the tribunal to vociferously accuse the father of the groom of having abducted his daughter for his own obscene ends. It’s a clue that the man has… issues… with his daughter, and his status as the Big Bad is not much of a surprise.
- Grand Inquisitor Zhaspahr Clyntahn of Safehold tends to project his own Evil Can Not Comprehend Good mentality on others. His second in command, Wyllym Rayno, even lampshades the act as projection when Clyntahn describes the Church’s Captain-General as a weak-willed coward, jumping at shadows and wanting to pull his troops back to safety immediately after Rayno recognizes that Clyntahn, at least subconsciously, fears the Church will lose the war. Church Treasurer Rhobair Duchairn notes much the same when Clyntahn proclaims, without irony, that “men who’ve sold their souls have every reason to murder true servants of God and then lie about their victims to justify their bloody actions.”
- The Stormlight Archive: Sadeas assumes that everyone is secretly as bloodthirsty and manipulative as he is, just that they try to hide it because he’s better at the game than they are. This leads to him getting blindsided several times; at the end of the second book, he tells Adolin about his plans to kill Adolin’s father, assuming that they’ll wage a bloody civil war for a few years and eventually become staunch allies. But they’re alone with no witnesses at the time, so Adolin just kills him on the spot.
- Khofit, a contestant on the second season of the Israeli Beauty and the Geek had a pet pug she would obviously project her negative emotions on. In a particular low point, when the local satire show Eretz Nehederet featured an impression of her and her dog in one of their skits, she said she wasn’t insulted, but her pug was insulted because the pug used in the skit was fat.
- Tiger King: Jeff Lowe describes his first meeting with Joe Exotic as the latter sizing up “his next victim”. While Joe did value his association with Jeff simply for what he assumed Jeff was worth financially, given Jeff’s own status as a very skilled Con Man who later took over the zoo entirely, this was probably going through his own mind at the time as well.
- In Loki (2021), this is Loki’s default psychological defence, just like in The Avengers:
- He states that for most people “choice breeds shame and uncertainty and regret”, because others always take wrong paths. When Mobius asks if Loki is an exemption from this rule, Loki insults Mobius to avoid answering the question.
- When he watches a video of his supposed death in Avengers: Infinity War, it looks like his future self is saying “you will never be a god” to the Variant Loki rather than to Thanos. The worst insult Loki tossed at Thanos when he died was the thing he himself feared the most.
- He initially accuses the TVA of being a fraud, the weak who claim divinity and who’ve conjured a cruel elaborate trick to control others through fear. After seeing the recording of the future events of his life and his eventual death, the disillusioned and broken Loki repeats this diatribe word for word, but now he is refering to himself.
- Could be the point of these lines in Voltaire’s “Future Ex Girlfriend”:
“And no-one cares that you love Keanu
Oh, what’s the difference anyway,
Everybody knows he’s gay
Oh, all right, I don’t really know that,
But let’s face it, he’s too hot to be straight.”
- In Dawn of a New Age: Oldport Blues, Benedict has internalized all of his father’s abuse under layers and layers of lies, and as a result doesn’t believe that anyone else is truthful either.
- This is what the viewer is supposed to do when watching Hello Kitty. Without a mouth, the viewer can project their own feelings upon Kitty.
- Asura’s Wrath: Augus projects his own Blood Knight nature on Asura. Asura, who is fighting to save his daughter and not for fun, is not amused and keeps telling Augus to shut up whenever he tries to claim they aren’t so different during their boss battle. In the end, Asura’s desire to protect his daughter gives him the strength to defeat Augus. As Augus lays dying, he finally acknowledges that he was wrong about Asura and encourages him to walk his own path.
- Fate/Grand Order: Boudica really hates the Romans because in life they invaded Britain, had her whipped, and her daughters raped. Her problem is that she tends to assume the other British Servants hate the Romans just as much as she does. In the “Dead Heat Summer Race”, Altria Alter defends Nero from her. Boudica asks why; since Altria fought the Romans in life, she must hate them too. She is thrown for a loop when Altria says she doesn’t hate the Romans.
- God of War: Kratos has a tendency to blame pretty much all of his problems on the gods or on others, when it’s perfectly clear to everyone and especially himself that his own actions are largely to blame for why his life has been as awful as it is. Naturally, he can’t forgive himself for the things he’s done, because that would actually mean facing his failures head-on, so he ends up causing way more trouble to others than he’s worth.
- Infamous 2: Joseph Bertrand III views all Conduits as monsters and demons, deeming them not part of the “divine plan.” In reality, he’s a Conduit himself, and was more than happy to be one until he discovered his powers were Lovecraftian Superpowers in the form of transforming into an Eldritch Abomination and converting other people into the Corrupted. In Bertrand’s mindset, since he became a monster by activating his powers, then that means all Conduits, active or otherwise, are monsters.
- In The Magic Circle, this is perhaps the crux of a character’s “The Reason You Suck” Speech directed at the player. Ishmael angrily declares that gamers are obsessed with control because they feel they have none in their real lives. He himself is an unquenchable Control Freak driven by inadequacy and overwhelming fear of failure provoked by his personal issues.
- Mugen Souls Z:
- The tired and relaxed Syrma assumes everyone will take the relocation of their planet calmly and Nao lampshades her projection: “You seriously think everyone is as dopey as you? You are in for a big surprise!”.
- Ryuto assumes everyone loves lady Chou Chou, but the others are quick to point out that is only him.
- Persona 4: The Investigation Team project all of their feelings of grief and guilt over Nanako’s death onto to Namatame, who they assume to be the killer throwing victims into the TV World at that point. Depending on the player’s choices, they could either kill him by throwing him back into the TV World, or they can calm down and realize their mistake, which leads to Nanako miraculously coming back to life, and leading them on the right track to finding the true killer.
- Persona 5: When she finds out that Makoto had suspected Kamoshida’s abuse of his female students for some time, but never said or did anything about it, Ann furiously lashes out at her and chews her out for it. When Makoto later apologizes and acknowledges it was most likely her fault that Kamoshida got away with his actions for as long as he did, Ann acknowledges that the same could be said of herself and confesses she’d been projecting her own feelings of guilt onto Makoto.
- Shadowrun Returns: The Dragon of the main campaign projected her Sanity Slippage onto her step-brother, who cut up his mother to sell her organs for booze money (and a new liver), by claiming he was a ruthless junkie who infested everything he touched, and that the organ donors he helped were diseased and had to be erased. When she starts ranting about her newfound addiction to the all-consuming hive, you can call her out for having the same self-destructive tendencies as her brother but to an extreme, claiming that she used her brother and the organ donors as scapegoats to blame for her own repulsive behavior, and then ordered their assassinations to vindicate herself. This gives her a single moment of clarity to realize what a monster she has become, but she shrugs it off.
- Undertale: When you fight Papyrus on a route that you’ve tried to befriend him, he’ll open up to you in his pre-battle speech, talking about the complex feelings you must be having — the joy of finding another pasta-lover, admiration for a Worthy Opponent in solving puzzles, the desire to have a cool, smart person think you’re cool… He then quickly says how much he pities you for that sort of loneliness.
- Illidan Stormrage and Maiev Shadowsong in Warcraft III and World of Warcraft The Burning Crusade. They hate each other precisely because they are so similar: they are both self-centered, self-aggrandizing, obsessive Knight Templars. Although they spent 10,000 years literally locked up together, neither seems to realize how hypocritical they are. Their relationship is quite mutually destructive, as both of them end up hurting people they care about and absolutely bring out the worst in each other. Illidan manages to estrange his twin brother AND his crush, while Maiev almost kills her younger brother Jared when he had the temerity to point out that The Extremist Was Right. Only because Jared refuses to fight her does she realize that she almost crossed the line. Maiev does become less hypocritical, to the point where she grudgingly releases Illidan from prison during Legion. She still despises him, but realizes that he is in fact well-intentioned. Illidan though, is just as hypocritical as ever when he’s released: killing the Prime Naaru X’era for basically the same reasons he always hated Maiev.
- In Red Dead Redemption 2:
- Dutch calls the gang members who left traitors, ignoring that he himself willingly abandoned John and Arthur multiple times in their time of need.
- In the finale, he accuses John of shooting at him, betraying him and only looking after himself. John did none of those things and was looking after his family while Dutch did everything he was accusing John of doing.
- Red vs. Blue: Locus tends to assume that people he feels are similar to him have a similar ‘Just Following Orders’ thought process. Agent Washington regrets that period of his life, Sigma (and by extension, the Meta) wanted to Become a Real Boy instead of becoming a weapon, and Agent Maine before Sigma drove him mad followed orders because he believed they served the greater good; he felt that following orders blindly would make him a slave instead of a soldier. Wash eventually catches on and bluntly spells out that Locus’s projection is just an excuse to not confront the guilt for everything he’s done.
- RWBY: Adam Taurus projects quite a few of his own character flaws onto Blake. He accuses her of cowardice, but he abandoned his own men at Haven Academy to be arrested while he escaped; the White Fang turned on him for doing that. He also calls her selfish, but he is the one determined to stalk her across the continent just to drag her back to his side regardless of what he wants. Blake calls him delusional.
- DuckTales (2017): Negaduck (AKA Jim Starling, the actor who portrayed Darkwing Duck in the in-universe TV series) seems to think that the actor hired to be Darkwing in the film reboot, Drake Mallard, is a selfish gloryhound who only cares for the limelight just like himself, ignoring that the new actor is clearly an Ascended Fanboy who wants to live up to the original show, and that Starling’s attempt to upstage Mallard was what caused the accident that turned him into Negaduck.
- In Gargoyles, this is one of Demona’s many, many, many problems. She tends to assume that all other Gargoyles want to Kill All Humans (untrue), and that, given the opportunity, anyone she allies with is itching to betray her- when in reality, she’s usually the first and only person in any given situation to think of treachery. Demona’s inability to understand motives more altruistic than her own is one of the biggest reasons she spends the series desperately, wretchedly alone, having caused the deaths of basically everyone she ever really cared about because she couldn’t stop mistrusting others.
- Gravity Falls: In “Dipper and Mabel vs. The Future”, while offering Dipper a chance to be his apprentice, Stanford ends up projecting his issues with his twin brother, Stanley onto him. While hes not wrong that Dipper has a right to be his own person separate from Mabel, he also doesnt see how different their relationship is compared to his own broken relationship. Ford gets better in the Grand Finale, deciding to work on reconnecting with Stan rather than run away from his issues.
- Harley Quinn (2019) : In season 2, Harley and crew have to deal with Mr. Freeze. When Harley finds out that his wife, Nora, is sick, she projects her Mad Love issues with The Joker onto the two of them. She assumes that he is a misogynistic Control Freak like Joker and that Noras not really sick. She thinks that he doesnt really love her and that he just keeps her as a Human Popsicle to control her. It’s quite telling that most of everyone around her, including fellow villains, think she’s nuts. Of course, the truth is that Mr. Freeze loves Nora more than anything else in the world and respects her as an equal. When Harley’s involvement jeopardizes her health and he has to give his life to cure Nora, Harley realizes she was projecting her own failures onto them before a distaught Nora tells them to Get Out!.
- My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic episode “Twilight’s Kingdom” (parts 1 and 2). Discord ends up assuming Tirek appreciates their “friendship” as much as he does, but it turns out Tirek only wanted to use Discord for his own benefit.
- Rick and Morty: Some of the stuff Rick Sanchez accuses his opponents of doing (while valid) could equally be said of his own actions and behaviour:
- In “Something Ricked This Way Comes”, he mocks Mr. Needful (The Devil) for his Faustian Jackass Genie shtick but most of Rick’s own devices and contraptions work in similar ironic fashion. Such as giving a device that can make Snuffles understands humans while knowing that it would eventually lead the dogs to be Turned Against Their Masters. The Mr. Meeseeks box meanwhile does create a friendly fellow to help you out, though Rick warns it only does simple errands (it only became problematic because Jerry was not that good at golf though one could assert that he was too specific for his request while Summer and Beth’s were more open-ended.) Most of the times his simple contraptions to help the family only complicates their lives. However, the big difference is that while Mr. Needful does it out of a sense of pleasure for ironic punishments, Rick’s contraptions seem to be more his carelessness.
- In “Vindicators 3”, he mocks the superhero group for keeping a sidekick as a Tagalong Kid just to make themselves look cooler in the eyes of the gullible, but that applies to his dynamic with Morty, where he drags Morty against his will into crazy adventures mostly to prove how awesome he is and prevent his grandson from idolizing anyone but himself. Toxic Rick proves this to Toxic Morty by openly invoking A God Am I and insisting how dumb Morty is in comparison to him. To be fair, unlike the Vindicators, Rick actually needs Morty in his adventures, due to the fact that Morty’s brain waves block Rick’s thus making Rick impossible to be tracked down, and Morty Took a Level in Badass from partaking in Rick’s adventures. Though the reasons why Rick drags Morty along are mostly selfish.
- She-Ra and the Princesses of Power: When Adora defects from the Horde and Catra decides to stay behind, this perceived betrayal hits Catra hard, and she uses any opportunity she can to justify her assumptions about it. She thinks that Scorpia was shunned by the other princesses for looking different, is quick to believe Adora abandoned Entrapta, and calls Adora out for treating her as a sidekick. There are some elements of truth in all those, but it’s clear she’s jumping on whatever allows her to think the worst of Adora and princesses in general.
- South Park: Cartman has a habit of perpetuating his narcissism by pinning the blame onto others, most commonly Kyle, who he accuses of being sneaky, greedy, and selfish on the basis of being Jewish despite those traits fitting Cartman much better. This is most blatant in Season 21, where Cartman frequently mocks and emotionally abuses his girlfriend Heidi, but convinces himself that because she wants to talk about her feelings, that makes her the abuser. In “Put it Down,” he claims that he only stayed in a relationship with her because she threatened suicide, but it soon comes out that Cartman was the one who threatened suicide because Heidi wanted to dump him.
- Star Wars: The Clone Wars: “Deal No Deal” makes it clear that Rafa Martez, who constantly gets herself and her sister Trace embroiled in shady business out of self-interest, engages in this. She accuses Ahsoka of befriending Trace out of some ulterior motive, incapable of believing someone could act selflessly for someone they only just met. Meanwhile, Rafa is pressuring Trace into a mission of dubious legality while keeping her in the dark about the details.
- Star Wars Rebels:
- It quickly becomes apparent that Darth Maul is projecting his relationship with his deceased brother/apprentice Savage onto Ezra, constantly assuming that Ezra will think and act like Savage, while repeatedly slipping into calling Ezra “brother”.
- “Steps Into Shadow”: When the Bendu tells Kanan that he brings conflict with him, Kanan immediately assumes he’s talking about the Sith holocron, even though the Bendu made clear that it’s Kanan causing imbalance in the Force. Later, Kanan pins the fear he’s feeling on the krykna, then Ezra, before realizing it’s his own.
- In Steven Universe, Pearl has done this, particularly in “Sworn to the Sword”, where she ended up (temporarily) indoctrinating Connie into the mindset that she was “nothing” compared to her liege, Steven, and that to protect him she needed to be willing to put herself into hopelessly dangerous situations and even die for him without hesitation. It is revealed that during the war, Pearl “took great pride” in giving her life for Rose Quartz, using herself as a shield and getting needlessly “killed” numerous times despite Rose being much stronger than her and fervently objecting to Pearl senselessly putting herself in danger.
- There’s a Spanish proverb, “cree el ladrón que todos son de su condición”, that translates to “the thief believes everyone is like him”.
- Hell, the whole point of the Audience Surrogate is this trope.
- Fandom Rivalry often takes form in this, especially when particularly toxic parts of a fandom get involved and Fan Hater is invoked. It’s not uncommon for people to complain and accuse the fans of the rival work of the very same things they themselves do, even in the same breath.
- Common romantic advice: 9 times out of 10, the partner who’s overly concerned with your faithfulness to the relationship is the one cheating on you.
- If one has interacted with people with extreme bigotry, it’s easy to notice this as a means used to morally justifying their views. To them, their bigotry is justified because the people they’re bigoted against (IE, another race, gender, sexual identity, etc.) are the real bigoted ones, so it’s completely OK to vote against them having rights and hate them. They also assume that moderates and people in their group who aren’t bigoted are just lying and secretly, everyone hates the other side and are just being too polite/cowardly to admit it. The idea of not being racist/sexist/homophobic/etc is completely alien to them, so they simply don’t believe that there are people who genuinely believe in equality.
What Is Psychological Projection? How The Defense Mechanism Hurts Relationships And How To Control Your Emotions
By Lisa Hawkins
Projection is dangerous in relationships.
Most people don’t know what psychological projection is. Yet, we all feel it when it happens in our relationships
According to Everyday Health, “psychological projection is a defense mechanism people subconsciously employ in order to cope with difficult feelings or emotions.” When you project, you subconsciously place your feelings onto someone else.
In my world, we are told to turn the advice we just said to others around to our self. In other words, when we point our finger to someone we have four fingers pointing back to us. That can be a powerful opportunity for growth.
We often do not ask ourselves questions; we just feel this compulsion and we throw it outward.
RELATED: The Defense Mechanism You Hide Behind, Based On Your Zodiac Sign
I’ll use my experience, as an example, because it is so blatant. I experienced what felt like a huge “projection” towards me when an ex-boyfriend used a Buddhist quote as a jab and encouraged me to “let go.”
When you get angry at someone for “not letting go” while you are leaving messages and texts, letters and posts for that person, who isn’t letting go? The one that is feeling the emotions, dealing and moving on, or the one that is leaving unwanted letters, texts, posts?
This is so very clear when I write it as such, and yet he, like so many others, cannot see it.
In his mind, he was using the quote to give me advice about “letting go” without seeing that his actions are those of “ hanging on.” A Buddhist would “let go” and move on peacefully and not continue to try and convince someone of something.
They would not give this advice when clearly they are doing that very action.
Projection can be a dangerous thing in relationships; we are so attached to the belief that what that person is doing is hurting us, and we are so blinded by that story that we cannot see the elephant (or bull) in the room!
I let go when I ended it, and I’ve been dealing with my own feelings and emotions, taking care of me, and protecting my heart. I had no contact and no compulsion to convince. I did take responsibility for my share, I own my own mistakes.
RELATED: The Zodiac Signs Ranked Most To Least Passive Aggressive
This is the part that those who project want to avoid: their own part in it. It’s often too painful, so they direct it outward.
Subscribe to our newsletter.
Join now for YourTango’s trending articles, top expert advice and personal horoscopes delivered straight to your inbox each morning.
Projection can be dangerous in many ways really, but mostly because we blame and shame, and try and guilt a person to see things our way. It is a way to avoid pain. It festers and will eventually come out again.
This causes drama, hurt, and huge holes in the trust system. It also creates an unsafe place for the person to express themselves and issues to be worked out. It can very well destroy a relationship.
Projection is dangerous in relationships because we don’t take time to look at our own part in a situation and we are using it as a weapon. How can that not be dangerous? In this case, what could have been a more peaceful and eventually loving interaction turned into an unsafe environment and severed any type of connection.
It’s always a good idea to stop yourself from taking those strong feelings (feelings are a response from our thoughts) and doing inquiry with them before we project them onto the other person.
Taking ownership of our feelings, emotions, strong mental beliefs and giving it a good “house cleaning” before we move on it, is a healthy way to interact with our romantic partners. Actually, it is a good way to interact with the world.
RELATED: How You Chase Love Away, Based On Your Zodiac Sign
Lisa Hawkins works with men and women to awaken the conscious part of themselves that knows how to love deeply. Check out her website to learn how to love deeply, freely and open up to be authentic.
This article was originally published at Good Men Project. Reprinted with permission from the author.
Defense Mechanism: Projection
General Concept of Projection as a Defense Mechanism
Projection is the process of subconsciously attributing your own qualities, feelings and desires to the people around you. Projection is a consequence of another protective psychological mechanism – repression. Thanks to projection, a person gets the opportunity to find justification for many of his actions, for example, when showing aggression, a person perceives his environment as aggressive and justifies his behavior as a defensive reaction to negative manifestations of the environment.
Projection is possible not only in relation to negative qualities, but also positive ones. In this case, the individual suppresses positive qualities in himself and projects his positive characteristics onto other people.
In the life of every person, the forms of projection can be traced in everyday affairs and behavior. This is manifested in criticism of their surroundings, while not paying attention to their own shortcomings, blaming other people for their troubles and failures.
Often the protective mechanism of projection leads to a distorted perception of the surrounding reality. Most often, this mechanism finds its manifestation in easily vulnerable and sensitive people prone to low self-esteem and excessively critical attitude to the properties of their own personality to distinguish your fantasies from the real life around you.
Types of projection
The following types of projection are distinguished in psychological research:
- attributive projection – a situation in which a person attributes his feelings, actions and motives of activity to other people;
- autistic projection – situations in which the individual’s own needs determine the person’s perception of other phenomena, objects and people around him;
- rational projection – a situation in which a person denying his own shortcomings ascribes them to other people, and shifts responsibility for them from himself to the people who are guilty in his opinion for their failures;
- complementary projection – the perception of a person as a strong and domineering person surrounded by weak and weak-willed people who are not able to perform the necessary actions and actions.
Finished works on a similar topic
There are many examples of projection as a defense mechanism of the psyche. One of the most striking examples of the manifestation of projection in a person’s life is jealousy on the part of a person who himself does not believe that cheating is something forbidden for him. However, a person is not able to recognize this fact and projects this behavior onto the immediate environment, attributing it regardless of its manifestation.
Thus, we can conclude that a person.who often uses a protective psychological mechanism of projection, most often he is absolutely sure of the lack of decency in other people, although at heart he himself is prone to such manifestations. For such people, manifestations of envy and the search for negative reasons for their own failures and the success of those around them are characteristic.
The connection between projection and empathy
The manifestation of the protective mechanism of projection is not always associated with negative thoughts and asocial phenomena and desires.
The process of transferring emotional states underlies such an important socio-psychological phenomenon as empathy.
Empathy is a person’s ability to empathize, experience the same feelings as his communication partner. It manifests itself in compassion, empathy, empathy, based on their own personal emotional experience.
A person transfers this experience to the closest environment or communication partner, understanding and imagining what exactly the other person feels in this or that situation. Feelings of suffering or a feeling of joy to understand and realize exactly the person who himself experienced these feelings.
The development and formation of mutual understanding between people is impossible without the ability of a person to project his own emotional experience at the command of other people. However, it should be remembered that the projection of a person’s own feelings is not always objective. The perception and strength of a person’s experience of a particular situation may differ from person to person, depending on the characteristics of his character, temperament and existing life experience.
Positive and negative properties of projection
Despite the fact that the projection mechanism refers to the natural reactions of the human psyche to various difficult life situations, it has both positive and negative aspects of its manifestation.
The disadvantages include the following consequences of the manifestation of projection:
- distortion of the surrounding reality, often a person sees exactly what he wants, and not the actual development of a situation or phenomenon;
- inadequate assessment of other people’s behavior;
- the development of interpersonal conflicts due to the fact that a person ascribes to a partner non-existent negative qualities and manifestations;
90,021 people, trying to hide their negative qualities and shortcomings with the help of projection, lose the desire to get rid of them.
However, in addition to the negative manifestations of projection, one should not forget that the projection is not in vain referred to the mechanisms of psychological defense. Consider the positive aspects of using this protective mechanism:
- in the process of displacing negative thoughts and impulses, a person can more easily cope with the existing internal conflict, the development of which could lead to neuroses, psychosis or depression.
- The second undoubted plus of using this mechanism is a person’s ability to feel the experiences of another person and predict them, thereby establishing effective interaction.
Thus, we can conclude that the protective mechanism of projection is necessary to protect the human psyche from too traumatic experiences and to build effective relationships with people around. However, you should remember to control your thoughts and behavior and limit the tendency to shift your problems and negative qualities onto other people and blame them for your troubles.
90,000 Why are people annoying? Carl Jung on the Shadow and the Projection Mechanism
Headings: Translations, Latest Articles, Psychology
We briefly analyze why some people are annoying, that our irritation can tell about the processes that take place inside us, what a projection is, how this psychological defense mechanism works, and how it all relates to the “Shadow” archetype identified by Carl Gustav Jung.
The Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Gustav Jung and the writer Hermann Hesse have strikingly similar thoughts about why some people annoy us so much. Here are a couple of indicative quotes:
If you hate a person, you hate something about him that is part of yourself. What is not part of us does not bother us.
Hermann Hesse, “Demian”
Anything that annoys us in others can lead to an understanding of ourselves.
As Hesse and Jung point out, if someone says or does something that seems selfish or rude, and we feel angry or frustrated in response, then there is something in this experience that can tell us more about ourselves. …
This does not mean that other people do not behave immorally or that our judgment about such behavior is completely unfounded. The point is that our negative emotional reactions to perceived shortcomings in other people reflect something that is happening within us.
Psychological projection is a well-known self-defense mechanism. It causes our own insecurities, flaws and flaws to project onto others. When we severely judge someone else for being rude, selfish, or stupid, in a sense, we do so in order to avoid confronting these characteristics in ourselves.
In his Investigation of the Phenomenology of the Self, Jung speaks of the “shadow” – the unknown, dark side of personality.
She is dark because she is instinctive, irrational and primitive, consisting of such impulses as lust, power, greed, envy, anger and rage.But she is also a hidden source of creativity and intuition. Awareness and integration of the shadow aspect is essential to psychological health, a process Jung called individuation.
The shadow is also dark because it is hidden from the light of consciousness. According to Jung, we suppress these dark aspects of the unconscious, which is why sooner or later we begin to project them onto others. He writes:
These resistances are usually associated with projections. No matter how obvious it may be to an independent observer that this is a matter of projection, there is little hope that the subject will be aware of it himself.As you know, the matter is not in the consciousness of the subject, but in the unconscious, which makes a projection. Hence, he encounters projections, but does not create them. The result of the projection is to isolate the subject from his environment, since the real attitude towards him is replaced by an illusory one. The projection transforms the world into a copy of the subject’s own unknown face.
It is often sad to see a person blatantly confuse his own life and the lives of others, remaining completely unable to see that all this tragedy is happening in himself and how he continues to feed and support her.
No, it is not the person or his behavior that bothers us, but our reaction to him. But we can use this reaction as a reflection tool to figure out why this anger and irritation occurs.
At some deep inner level, we know that all people are essentially the same. It is not “other”. It is “we” or “ours” expressed in different bodies from different points of view. Priest Edward Bickersteth in his Treatise on Prayer describes one episode from the life of the English Christian reformer John Bradford:
The pious martyr Bradford, when he saw the poor prisoner who was being led to execution, exclaimed: “There, if not for the mercy of God, John Bradford would have gone too.”He knew that in his heart there were the same sinful principles that led the criminal to this shameful end.
The quote is open to various interpretations, but in light of this discussion, it can be concluded that Bradford was aware of the evil – the shadow aspect – in himself that led someone else to commit a crime and subsequently to execution.
Each of us has a shadow, as well as the freedom to make our own decisions. And each of us is capable of doing what will bother him.But it is the emergence of this anxiety that makes us confront the shadow aspect of the personality. At the same time, the negative emotions that we have about the behavior of other people (irritation, anger, rage) can be used to carefully study our reaction, get acquainted with our shadow and, ultimately, with our personality in all its versatility.
– How emotions arise that we are not aware of
– Mindfulness: Why Avoid Negative Emotions?
– Interview with Carl Jung: “The only danger that exists is the man himself”
Cover: Douglas Glass / Popperfoto / Getty Images
Adapted from: “Carl Jung and Hermann Hesse Explain Why Other People Irritate Us” / Sam Woolfe
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter .
90,000 Scoliosis, poor posture
The causes of the curvature of the spine can be as congenital , and acquired .
- congenital causes spinal curvature include violations of normal intrauterine development, which leads to underdevelopment of the vertebrae, the formation of wedge-shaped and additional vertebrae and other pathologies.
- Acquired causes of curvature of the spine are as follows: any disease (rickets, poliomyelitis, tuberculosis, pleurisy, sciatica), as well as injuries (fractures of the spine). Incorrect body position due to the physiological characteristics of a person (flat feet, different leg lengths or the absence of one of them, strabismus or myopia due to which a person is forced to take the wrong posture when working) is also the cause of the development of curvature of the spine.
Scoliosis is an arcuate curvature of the spine axis in the frontal plane, i.e. right or left. Scoliosis occurs in various diseases of the musculoskeletal system, the nervous system, diffuse lesions of the connective tissue, it can be of a reflex nature (for example, in pain it is antalgic scoliosis) and even psychological (emotional trauma in a child at school). Back pain is a manifestation of scoliosis.
Types of scoliosis
Depending on the localization of the apex of the curvature of the spine axis, scoliosis can be divided into upper thoracic scoliosis, thoracic scoliosis (occurs most often), thoracolumbar scoliosis, lumbar scoliosis, combined scoliosis (has two curvature tops).
Stoop – a violation of posture, which is based on an increase in thoracic kyphosis (forward bending of the spine) with a simultaneous decrease in lumbar lordosis (backward bending of the spine). The shoulder girdle is raised. The shoulder joints are shown. Slouching is often associated with pterygoid scapulae, when the lower corners or inner edges of the scapulae lag behind the chest wall. The abdomen protrudes.
Round back – posture disorder associated with a significant increase in thoracic kyphosis and the absence of lumbar lordosis.To compensate for the deviation of the projection of the common center of mass posteriorly, children stand and walk on slightly bent legs. The angle of inclination of the pelvis is reduced and this also contributes to the flexion position of the hip relative to the midline of the body. The head is tilted forward, the shoulder girdles are raised, the shoulder joints are brought in, the chest sinks, the arms hang slightly in front of the body. The round back is often combined with pterygoid scapulae. The abdomen protrudes.
Circular back – posture disorder consisting in an increase in all physiological curves of the spine.The legs are slightly bent or in a position of slight hyperextension at the knees. The belly protrudes, or even hangs down. The shoulder girdle is raised, the shoulder joints are brought, the head is pushed forward from the midline of the body. The rounded back is often combined with pterygoid scapulae.
Flat back – posture disorder, characterized by a decrease in all bends of the spine, first of all – lumbar lordosis and a decrease in the angle of inclination of the pelvis. The chest is displaced forward. The lower abdomen will hold up.The shoulder blades are often pterygoid. This posture disorder adversely affects the state of the central nervous system during running, jumping and other sudden movements, causing it to shake and microtraumatize.
Flatback – posture disorder, consisting in a decrease in thoracic kyphosis with normal or increased lumbar lordosis. Cervical lordosis is often flattened too. The pelvis is displaced posteriorly. The legs may be slightly bent or overextended at the knees. Often combined with pterygoid scapula.
The diagnosis of postural disorders is made during a routine examination, but in some cases, x-rays are used.
Manual therapy and manual massage are common treatments for postural disorders. However, these procedures can be ineffective in relaxing and relieving muscle blockages, since a significant amount of energy and time is expended manually.
- The ODA Medical Center has a unique ORMED apparatus, which, due to a multicomponent mechanical effect on the paravertebral longitudinal muscles of the back, allows to achieve relaxation in 3-10 minutes.The entire session of thermal relaxation roller massage takes 15 to 25 minutes, which is optimal for activating blood circulation in the spinal column, for activating the central nervous system. We usually recommend 12-15 sessions. The device “ORMED” also allows the stretching of the intervertebral spaces. As a rule, against the background of treatment and with the observance of the regimen, posture disturbances disappear.
- Xydiphon electrophoresis is very effective for stooped back associated with osteoporosis.Ksidiphon or etidronic acid prevents excessive release of calcium from bones, crystal formation, growth and aggregation of calcium oxalate and calcium phosphate crystals in urine. Supports calcium ions in a soluble state, reduces the possibility of the formation of insoluble calcium compounds with oxalates, mucopolysaccharides and phosphates, thereby preventing recurrence of stone formation. Has a mild anti-inflammatory effect. Electrophoresis with xidiphon is used both alone and in combination with caripazim (papain).The course of treatment is 20 procedures. There was a decrease in back pain in osteoporosis after 2-3 procedures. Electrophoresis with xidiphon increases the effectiveness of therapy with caripazim and calcium preparations.
- In case of “psychological” scoliosis, the Darsonval procedures give a relaxing effect.
- Mud therapy is indicated for adolescents with poor posture. Physiotherapy exercises is the main and mandatory component of the treatment of posture disorders.
Engineering Bulletin of Don | The internal structure of the emotional perception of political power by the students of DSTU
I.N., Yaroshenko A.N., Ivanova M.I.
Date of receipt of the article: 15.06.2014
This paper presents a methodology for processing and interpreting data obtained by the technology of semantic differential. It is shown that emotional perception, calculated according to the generally accepted method of averaged values, gives an incomplete picture. The technique was tested in the study of the emotional perception of political power among the students of the DSTU. It was found that the distribution of the studied group is heterogeneous in terms of the emotional perception of political orders.For the audience, both the average and the most probable levels of perception of the local and central political order are positive and equal to 0.1. However, 27% are characterized by a negative level of emotional perception of the authorities, with an average value of -0.3.
modeling, political order, group attitudes, affective component, semantic differential, questionnaire
05.13.18 – Mathematical modeling, numerical methods and program complexes
At the end of the first semester of the 2013/2014 academic year, we conducted an experimental study of the attitude of the students of the Don State Technical University to political power [1-4].The work was aerobatic in nature, a total of 52 people of the 2nd year of the Faculty of Innovative Business and Management were interviewed. The age and gender composition of the sample was roughly the same as that of the faculty.
The questionnaire consisted of two blocks. In the first block, the cognitive level of perception and behavioral political attitudes were revealed by direct questioning. The results obtained in this case are presented in [1, 3] and we will not dwell on them here.
In the second block of questions, the technology of the semantic differential Ch.Osgood [5.6]. The respondents were asked to rate local and central political orders on 20 seven-point scales. The extreme poles of the scales were set by adjectives-antonyms. In this case, adjectives were used, most of which, in their denotative meaning, cannot describe the objects under study (in this case, local and central authorities). The assessments were of an allegorical nature, based on the connotative sense of the adjectives. As C. Osgood showed, in this case, the respondent’s emotional, subjective perception of the evaluated objects is projected into the semantic space formed by the scales-signs.To set the scale and direction in the semantic space, the respondents were asked to rate two ideal constructs using the same scales. An “ideal positive” political order fully acceptable to those surveyed. And the “ideal negative” completely rejected.
Interpretation of the survey results was based on the Coombs’ model of perception and formation of the response by the respondent, proposed in his theory of the ideal point . In accordance with which the respondent evaluates objects of the same type on the basis of their correlation with the “ideal” (according to his ideas) object of this class.
For our task, this means that the proximity in the abstract semantic space of the images of real political orders to the images of ideal constructs reflects the proximity of the subjective perception of these objects. To quantitatively characterize this perception, we used the level of perception r , normalized from -1 (perception of an ideal negative political order) to +1 (perception of an ideal positive). According to Coombs’ approach, this level monotonically depends on the relative distances in the semantic space between the images of the real order and ideal constructs.In the linear approximation, it is proportional to the half difference of the relative distances of the image of a real object to the images of ideally negative ( d -1, x ) and positive ( d +1, x ), respectively :
rx = ( d -1, x – d +1, x ) / 2, (1)
where x – denotes the real order (in the region or in Russia as a whole).Distances were calculated according to the Cartesian metric in the semantic space, with the same normalization as for the level of perception r.
In the generally accepted method of the semantic differential, group characteristics are considered according to the averaged semantic portraits [5,6]. Using this approach, according to the averaged data, we calculated in a linear approximation the group levels of emotional perception of the local ( r = -0.02) and central ( r = -0.04) authorities .
The use of the linear approximation is not justified by the Coombs model of perception.In accordance with this model, one can only talk about the monotonic dependence of the level of perception on the proximity of the image of the investigated object to the ideal point. Moreover, at the moment in sociology, such methods of processing primary data as one-dimensional and multidimensional deployment, which originate from the works of Coombs [7, 8], are successfully applied. These technologies already take into account the nonlinear nature of the above-mentioned dependencies. In this case, the required degree of nonlinearity is determined statistically, in the process of processing the results [7, 8].
We used a slightly different approach to take into account nonlinearities. Based on the concepts of typicality and structural stability of the results, within the framework of the theory of catastrophes , a psychosemantic phenomenological model was developed [4, 10, 11].
In the model, the change in the level of perception r is described in a gradient manner
dr / dt = – dF / dr , (2)
where F – some function of the general position (potential of emotional perception), depending on the above-mentioned relative distances and the level of perception itself.
As shown in the theory of catastrophes, with a one-dimensional order parameter (the desired level of perception) and two control parameters (two relative distances to the images of ideal constructs), as a typical potential, we can take a fourth-degree polynomial depending on two phenomenological parameters a and b:
F = (1/4) r 4 – (1/2) ar 2 – br . (3)
Where the phenomenological parameters a and b are determined by the relative distances in the semantic space:
a = – (d1x + d -1x) / 2; b = (d -1x – d1x) / 2. (4)
Note that in their sociological meaning, the phenomenological coefficients b and a play the role of an emotional assessment of the political order and emotional activity .
Calculations of the group levels of emotional perception of political orders, carried out according to the refined nonlinear model, showed practically the same results as the linear approximation. Perception levels for the region -0.015 and for Russia as a whole -0.033 .
In both approximations, the relative distances were determined from the averaged semantic portraits. However, the technology of semantic differential is based on the projection of subjective perception into an abstract semantic space. And such a projection is purely subjective and different for each interviewee. For example, from a pair of adjectives “sour – sweet” for some “good” pole “sour”, and for others – “sweet”. When calculating, replacing individual semantic spaces with averaged ones is legitimate in two cases.Either with good homogeneity of the studied audience (according to the perception of the object of interest to us), or with commutativity of the operations of averaging and calculating the level of perception. The latter is possible if all calculation formulas are linear. But the levels of perception are ultimately calculated according to the relative distances, which nonlinearly depend on the coordinates of the images. Those. the above commutativity does not hold in our case. The homogeneity of the target audience is also a big question. Analysis of the primary information shows a great smear of the initial data for almost all 20 used features.
If the initial data is very blurred, the way out of this situation is to change the order of the operations “averaging – calculation”. In particular, in sociology, for such a situation, when calculating latent factors, the calculation is carried out according to individual data, and to characterize the studied group, the distribution function of factors by respondents is used [12, 13].
The method of determining the levels of emotional perception of political orders according to individual data, with the subsequent calculation of the statistical distribution function of these levels, was tested by us for another audience (students of the Russian State Social University) .In particular, it was found that the calculation based on the average data in the case under consideration gives a strongly underestimated level of perception and is incompetent.
The purpose of this work was to test such a technique on the above-described audience of DSTU students, to correct the previously obtained results using averaged semantic portraits and to clarify the internal structure of emotional perception in the group.
Based on the individual primary data for each respondent, the aforementioned relative distances in the semantic space of the image of a real object to the images of ideal constructs were calculated and, according to (1), individual levels of perception were determined in a linear approximation.The obtained histograms of the distribution of the level of perception are shown in Fig. 1. Here horizontally shows the levels of perception, vertically – the percentage of respondents characterized by the corresponding level of perception.
Fig. 1. Function distribution of the level of emotional perception of political order by DSTU students, linear approximation.a) Perceptions of local government, average level 0.035. b) Perception of central authority, average level 0.051.
It was found that the studied audience is highly heterogeneous in terms of emotional perception of political orders. Perception levels are blurred from -0.5 to +0.5. The most probable values (corresponding to the maximum of the distribution function) of the level of perception of both local and central authorities are positive, coincide and equal to 0.1. This level is characterized by more than 20% of respondents in both cases.The average values of the level of perception also practically coincide, both are positive and close to zero. It should be noted that, despite the heterogeneity of the group in terms of the level of perception, the estimates of the mean value obtained earlier [2,4] from the averaged semantic portraits differ insignificantly from the estimates corrected by the method.
To further clarify the results obtained, we calculated individual levels of perception and distribution functions within the framework of a nonlinear psychosemantic phenomenological model.The calculations were carried out using the Any Logic software package for multi-agent modeling. For each respondent, an initial (zero) value of the level of perception was set, and the dynamics of his behavior depending on the model time was calculated using equations (2-4). With fixed values of phenomenological parameters (determined by the results of a questionnaire), in the end, all levels of perception came to a constant, stationary value. And already according to them, the histograms of the distribution of the level of perception were calculated.In fig. 2 shows a fragment of the Any Logic simulation. The lower figure shows the time dependence of the average level of perception, demonstrating the exit to a stationary value. The top figure shows the frequency histogram of the distribution of the level of perception by respondents, which was recalculated every 100 time steps.
Rice. 2. A fragment of modeling on Any Logic. a) Frequency distribution of the level of perception. b) Average level of perception.
The distributions of the levels of perception of political orders by DSTU students obtained by this method within the framework of a nonlinear model are shown in Fig. 3. Compared to the linear approximation, the results differ insignificantly. As before, the levels of perception are highly blurred, from -0.6 to +0.6. The most probable values have not changed, remained +0.1 and more than 20% of respondents are characterized by such a level of perception of both local and central authorities. The average level of perception increased slightly.In the refined model, it is equal to +0.051 for the region and +0.063 for Russia as a whole.
Fig. 3. Function distribution of the level of emotional perception of political order by DSTU students, nonlinear approximation. a) Perceptions of local government, average level 0.051. b) Perception of central authority, average level 0.063.
It should be noted that now it is already clear that the assessment of the average group levels of perception based on the averaged semantic portraits also gives underestimated values (by about 0.1) in this case as compared to the corrected results. This indicates that the generally accepted approach to processing results in the technology of semantic differential based on averaged data is incomplete and should, according to our proposed methodology, calculate more complete statistical characteristics, such as the distribution function.
In addition, with a wide spread across the group of levels of perception, the average and most probable characteristics are not very informative for assessing possible political tension. In particular, we found that for the target audience, both the average and the most probable levels of perception of the local and central political order are positive and of the order of 0.1. Based only on these results, it can be assumed that there are no reasons at the emotional level for the formation of political tension.However, judging by the distribution functions, about a third of the respondents (about 27%) are characterized by a negative level of emotional perception of the authorities, with an average value of about -0.3. And this is already a large enough audience for the formation of tension.
The work was carried out according to the state order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation No. 2014/174, project code 2119.
- Ivanova M.I., Yaroshenko A.N., Moshchenko I.N. Group political attitudes of the students of DSTU [Electronic resource] // “Engineering Bulletin of the Don”, 2013, №3.- Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n3y2013/2238 (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Yaroshenko A.N., Moshchenko I.N. Ivanova M.I. Emotional perception of the political order by the students of DSTU [Electronic resource] // Engineering Bulletin of the Don, 2013, №3. – Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n3y2013/2237 (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Ivanova M.I., Yaroshenko A.N., Moshchenko I.N. Cognitive and behavioral components of the attitude to the political order of the DSTU students (according to 2013) [Electronic resource] // Engineering Bulletin of the Don, 2014, №1.- Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n1y2014/2392/ (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Moshchenko I.N., Yaroshenko A.N., Ivanova M.I. Modeling the emotional perception of the political order by the students of DSTU [Electronic resource] // Engineering Bulletin of the Don, 2014, №1. – Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n1y2014/2471/ (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Osgood C.E. The nature and measurement of meaning // “Psychological Bulletin”, Vol.49, No. 3, May, 1952.- P. 197 – 327
- Tzeng Oliver C. S. A Quantitative Method for Separation of Semantic Subspaces // Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 1, No. 2 Spring, 1977.-pp. 171-184.
- Tolstova Yu.N. Measurement in sociology [Text]: A course of lectures.- M .: Infra-M, 1998.- 224 p.
- Tolstova Yu.N. Fundamentals of multidimensional scaling [Text]: Textbook.-M.: KDU, 2006.- 160 p.
- Poston T. and Stuart I. Catastrophe theory and its applications [Text]: Monograph.- M., Mir, 1980. – 607 p.
- Moshchenko I.N., Ivanova M.I., Bugayan I.F. Typical models of group emotional perception of the political order [Electronic resource] // Scientific Review, 2013, No. 2. – Access mode: http://www.sced.ru/ru/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=107%3A-q&catid=21&Itemid=18 (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Ivanova M.I., Moshchenko I.N. Phenomenological approach to data interpretation in the technology of semantic differential [Text] // Actual problems of modeling, design and forecasting of social and political processes in the multicultural space of modern society.(Rostov-on-Don, March 31-April 3, 2014) – Rostov n / a: Publishing house SKNTs VSh SFU, 2014. p. 20-25.
- Eliseev I.N., Larina T.N. Assessment of the student’s competence level based on the Rush model [Electronic resource] // “Engineering Bulletin of the Don”, 2012, No. 4, Part 2 – Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n4p1y2012/1093/ (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Eliseev I.N., Eliseev I.I., Larina T.N., Krivosheev N.V. Assessment of students’ communicative competencies on the basis of politomistic models [Electronic resource] // “Engineering Bulletin of the Don”, 2013, №4.- Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n4y2013/1987/ (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
- Moshchenko I.N., Bugayan I.F., Ivanova M.I. Dynamics of affective political attitudes of the RSSU students (first half of 2013) [Electronic resource] // “Engineering Bulletin of the Don”, 2013, №4. – Access mode: http://www.ivdon.ru/magazine/archive/n1y2014/2302/ (free access) – Title. from the screen. – Yaz. Russian
90,000 La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la – Adam Curtis sings about you – Session Magazine
Can’t Get You Out Of My Head – now it’s not about Kylie Minogue, but about the movie of Adam Curtis.What is more important for the famous British documentary filmmaker – “medium” or “message”? Daria Serebryanaya tells about another multi-hour hypnosis session, which pretends to be a TV series.
SESSION – 78
In early February BBC iPlayer released a new six-part documentary mindfuck Adam Curtis Can’t Get You Out Of My Head – a mesmerizing sight if you are in your early thirties, and the hope of marrying a prince still compensates for the increasing bewilderment day after day at what a strange world you find yourself in.Something went wrong. And it’s not about coronavirus, isolation, conservative revenge, or liberal stagnation. No, no, just for some reason it began to seem to you that there is an eternal Groundhog Day on the calendar, where shocks and holidays are not. Perhaps you have already guessed something for a long time, but for some reason it was in 2020 that this habitual feeling of irritation hardened in your head with tangible depression. Where did this emotion come from and what drives it? These questions interest the author more than others, the subtitle of the film is “The Emotional History of the Modern World.”
“I can’t get you out of my head.” Dir. Adam Curtis. 2021
The new Adam Curtis will not disappoint his fans – among whom, I must admit, I am – “We live in strange days,” – the British documentary filmmaker habitually begins, unfolding a grandiose intellectual glamor, developing his past works, the heroes of which were also our compatriots ( in the range from Alexei Gastev to Vladislav Surkov). Yes, Curtis unites the worlds: no west, no east, we are all in one common trouble.He has always been engaged in bringing “distant things” closer together, but in the new work he surpasses himself. Can’t Get You Out Of My Head extends its neuro-tentacles from the opium wars to the return of Alexei Navalny and the January 2021 protests in Russia (not just a movie, but a newspaper editorial), from British folklorist Cecil Sharp to Arab sheikhs, from Eduard Limonov to Tupac Shakur – these two are honored to become the protagonists of the many hours of epic in which America and Europe mirror China and Russia.Well, that is, what does mirror mean – this could be said earlier, in the distant twentieth century, and now, when the mirror of the world has broken into hundreds of fragments, we can no longer collect ourselves in reflections. This is done by computers that absorb big data – information will be sent by your vacuum cleaner, your refrigerator, your vibrator in the end. And on the basis of these data and billions of personal universes, a new fairy tale will grow – for each his own.
I’m afraid the mold cannot be separated from the lime honey.
Adam Curtis: “I love YouTube, everything is disordered there.”
Curtis is not the first time recording the state of disunity, disagreement and mutual distrust (a person infuriates a person!), The same bitterness permeated his two last paintings – it is no coincidence that one of them was called “Bitter Lake” – compiled in endless video storages BBC from snippets of news releases and documentary records. [more details about the director’s technology can be found in the interview that The Session did five years ago for the release of Bitter Lake].
“I can’t get you out of my head.” Dir. Adam Curtis. 2021
What makes Can’t Get You Out Of My Head different from previous works?
The feeling that Curtis himself fell into the very traps with which he tried to catch reality – media, dodgy, shimmering and elusive, is growing more acute, he cut it and glued it, and then he himself fell into pieces.He repeats ten times and again – no one knows how to him … And we all too. U.S. too.
Curtis’s most audacious joke: “If you like Obama, you will like Biden.”
To describe the film – the reviewer at Guardian rightly called it an extended version of the three-hour “Hypernormalization” – essentially useless. This is his weakness – a new excursion into the emotional world of a modern person, enslaved by guilt and irritation, is incomprehensible and sometimes confused.Curtis is wise, but at the same time extremely self-righteous, he drives, reveling in his intellectual savvy. But in the same ecstasy is his strength: a drop wears away a stone, and a voice, pronouncing old truths in a new manner, suddenly gains power. This is a sermon that began back in the 1990s, when Curtis inspected the ruins of the rational world in his Pandora’s Box (then he studied the corridors of the State Planning Committee well, in order now to compare the Soviet planned system with the established European bureaucracy).
“I can’t get you out of my head.”Dir. Adam Curtis. 2021
Can’t Get You Out Of My Head is like a hypnosis session, it absorbs the viewer, giving him the freedom of a somnambulist. You can wander through associative editing sequences in the chaos of the soundtrack (a playlist of fifty trump songs Burial , Nine Inch Nails and Aphex Twin ), but you can hardly go beyond the boundaries of the film, wake up from the cinema in a new reality. And yet this forced wandering is spectacular: it very literally, empirically illustrates the flawedness of the main illusions of our world – belief in the existing order and hopes for the possibility of stability.Curtis leads the viewer by the nose, suppresses it, takes his time, but this is for the good, this is YouTube of a healthy person: cinema is a dream, and the world is a dream. Curtis’s method, in my opinion, is much more important for understanding his message than clever behind-the-scenes reasoning about the vicissitudes of cause-and-effect relationships in the divine comedy of human history.
(It is also characteristic that the best review of the film seems to be generated by the alien wisdom of neural networks and came from the buzzing hive reddit , I publish it in the form of a picture).
Curtis’s spin is desperate.
How to see the highest meaning in a narrative woven from Curtis’s brilliant logical jumps (of course, it is clever to link the British feeling of guilt for the Chinese addicted to opium and the sinister image of the criminal genius Fu Manchu) and touching psychedelic finds – like a sparrow freely galloping around the hall Komsomol? I’m afraid the mold cannot be separated from the linden honey. But the bee, as always, is cheerful and sings: “ La-la-la-la-la-la-la-la ” (like Kylie Minogue in the same song) How is this view of the human universe fundamentally different from the famous Google algorithm Deep Dream , who tends to see a dog’s face in everything?
“I can’t get you out of my head.”Dir. Adam Curtis. 2021
Curtis’s spin is filled with despair. He talks about how belief in one’s own exclusivity breeds fear and violence. He talks about complex systems and about humanity, fascinated by this complexity, and therefore afraid of any changes and any ideas (the last stronghold of meaning is money). The complexity of the recorded and processed data also leads to the conservatism of both the authorities and society. He talks about the psychodynamics of the world struggling to slow down in reruns (Curtis’s most daring joke: “If you like Obama, you will like Biden”).But power is just a human projection of stability in the eternal chaos of the universe. And our whole world is a projection of order, it is not for nothing that the Greeks called it “space”.