Bad Art Friend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I continue to be inordinately enraged by people who keep characterizing Dawn's actions as "narcissistic" or claiming that anyone who "brags" about their kidney donation like Dawn did is a narcissist. I just... fundamentally do not even comprehend that line of thinking.

When you read the article as written she can come off that way especially to people who have one in their lives. Narcissists use public forums and public deeds to cover up how nasty and manipulative they are in private - they have to cover up their shame from both themselves and to hide it from others - and that public promotion is sometimes over the top. And they lack boundaries. Without having the context (that the NYT lacked) of the correct timeline of how it played out, or that she was following donor protocol in setting up the group, it is easy to read into her actions that way. The story was very misleading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I continue to be inordinately enraged by people who keep characterizing Dawn's actions as "narcissistic" or claiming that anyone who "brags" about their kidney donation like Dawn did is a narcissist. I just... fundamentally do not even comprehend that line of thinking.

Yeah, what they don't get is that weakens the definition of narcissism. It is illogical and weak thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You're trying to tell me that Dawn posting about her kidney donation and advocating for live organ donations on Facebook is somehow *more attention-seeking* or narcissistic or whatever-have-you than writers shamelessly publicizing their books, tweeting about their good deeds, hawking their writing, etc.? Let whoever among us who have never posted a humblebrag or something feel-good or anything remotely attention-seeking on social media throw the first stone. I feel like I'm talking to aliens.

Haha, I've never done it because I am not on social media.

But I was ream Dawn from the beginning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're trying to tell me that Dawn posting about her kidney donation and advocating for live organ donations on Facebook is somehow *more attention-seeking* or narcissistic or whatever-have-you than writers shamelessly publicizing their books, tweeting about their good deeds, hawking their writing, etc.? Let whoever among us who have never posted a humblebrag or something feel-good or anything remotely attention-seeking on social media throw the first stone. I feel like I'm talking to aliens.

Haha, I've never done it because I am not on social media.

But I was ream Dawn from the beginning.

OMG, fat fingers - TEAM Dawn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're trying to tell me that Dawn posting about her kidney donation and advocating for live organ donations on Facebook is somehow *more attention-seeking* or narcissistic or whatever-have-you than writers shamelessly publicizing their books, tweeting about their good deeds, hawking their writing, etc.? Let whoever among us who have never posted a humblebrag or something feel-good or anything remotely attention-seeking on social media throw the first stone. I feel like I'm talking to aliens.

Haha, I've never done it because I am not on social media.

But I was ream Dawn from the beginning.

OMG, fat fingers - TEAM Dawn.

Good Lord. Ream Dawn is something completely else. Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I continue to be inordinately enraged by people who keep characterizing Dawn's actions as "narcissistic" or claiming that anyone who "brags" about their kidney donation like Dawn did is a narcissist. I just... fundamentally do not even comprehend that line of thinking.

+1

I would feel so differently about that characterization if they’d been criticizing ACTUALLY obnoxious, self-centered social media behavior. Like if Dawn had been building a custom home and posting day by day photos and updates of it with zero awareness of her privilege, I’d totally get why Larson et al were talking about it and making fun of it. I still think in that situation the solution is “mute and ignore.” But at least then I would get WHY people were so angry about it.

But even if you don’t like how she wrote about this on social media, I just don’t see how you can not just let it go since she did actually do an incredibly generous thing.

I had an acquaintance who did a bone marrow donation. I really don’t like this person for reasons unrelated to her donation. But when she was posting all over Facebook about it, I had to acknowledge to myself this was a good thing to do. It didn’t change my opinion of her (you can’t erase your bad deeds with good deeds, that’s not how life works). But I sure as hell didn’t get obsessed with or make fun of her donation posts! And if I had, literally everyone in my life would have called me on it immediately because that’s a bridge too far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I continue to be inordinately enraged by people who keep characterizing Dawn's actions as "narcissistic" or claiming that anyone who "brags" about their kidney donation like Dawn did is a narcissist. I just... fundamentally do not even comprehend that line of thinking.

When you read the article as written she can come off that way especially to people who have one in their lives. Narcissists use public forums and public deeds to cover up how nasty and manipulative they are in private - they have to cover up their shame from both themselves and to hide it from others - and that public promotion is sometimes over the top. And they lack boundaries. Without having the context (that the NYT lacked) of the correct timeline of how it played out, or that she was following donor protocol in setting up the group, it is easy to read into her actions that way. The story was very misleading.

Yes, this! I am the immediate PP who has the acquaintance who was privately terrible to me but then did a very public bone marrow donation that she posted constantly about on Facebook. So I was very primed to dislike Dawn in the NYT piece because it paralleled my own experience.

However, I also felt conflicted and confused upon my first reading. There’s just never any explanation of Dawn’s supposed narcissism beyond her posts about her donation. If all is experienced with this acquaintance was her bone marrow posts, I’d have zero bad feelings about her. The whole reason I found it annoying was that I’d had these very negative experience with her where she’d done some very hurtful, selfish things. So it absolutely felt like she was getting cover for being an ahole.

And then when I found out these posts were mostly in the private group, I lost my sympathy for Larson. I unfriended my acquaintance not long after all this because I could feel myself being annoyed and frustrated and just needed distance from this person. The idea of joining a private group, getting mad at the posts, and then staying in the group so I could mock them with my friends is so foreign to me. It makes me icky thinking about it.

Honestly, it’s the kind of thing sn actual narcissist might do.

[Anonymous]

I am visiting my parents right now and enthusiastically, passionately tried to explain the Bad Art Friend story to them - how Dawn is a hero and the nasty CMs, and all of it - and they were like: wait, why should I care about any of this?

It was pretty funny.

[Anonymous]

Oof. This is exactly what the NYT wanted by republishing the Bad Art Friend story on The Daily: a new audience that doesn't have any of the additional context and information unearthed in the days since the article was first published.

Some of the responses in this Reddit thread are mind-bogglingly unaware.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Thedaily/comments/qepb0b/the_sunday_read_who_is_the_bad_art_friend/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oof. This is exactly what the NYT wanted by republishing the Bad Art Friend story on The Daily: a new audience that doesn't have any of the additional context and information unearthed in the days since the article was first published.

Some of the responses in this Reddit thread are mind-bogglingly unaware.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Thedaily/comments/qepb0b/the_sunday_read_who_is_the_bad_art_friend/

Reddit will handle them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oof. This is exactly what the NYT wanted by republishing the Bad Art Friend story on The Daily: a new audience that doesn't have any of the additional context and information unearthed in the days since the article was first published.

Some of the responses in this Reddit thread are mind-bogglingly unaware.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Thedaily/comments/qepb0b/the_sunday_read_who_is_the_bad_art_friend/

Reddit will handle them.

+1 a brand new batch of thousands of readers will learn the actual story and end up deeply disillusioned by the misleading NYT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oof. This is exactly what the NYT wanted by republishing the Bad Art Friend story on The Daily: a new audience that doesn't have any of the additional context and information unearthed in the days since the article was first published.

Some of the responses in this Reddit thread are mind-bogglingly unaware.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Thedaily/comments/qepb0b/the_sunday_read_who_is_the_bad_art_friend/

Trust the process - signed, poster who started this madness yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oof. This is exactly what the NYT wanted by republishing the Bad Art Friend story on The Daily: a new audience that doesn't have any of the additional context and information unearthed in the days since the article was first published.

Some of the responses in this Reddit thread are mind-bogglingly unaware.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Thedaily/comments/qepb0b/the_sunday_read_who_is_the_bad_art_friend/

Trust the process - signed, poster who started this madness yesterday.

Haha yes.

[Anonymous]

I wonder just how long Summer Brennan will continue to passively aggressively whine.

[Anonymous]

Taking vaguetweeting to a new level!