Armchair Psych discussion of Jodi Arias

[shelley921]

an article I read recently and found interesting:
[ Dr Ablow is a psychiatrist ]

Overcoming Pain From Imperfect Parents
Keith Ablow, MD

One of the most difficult psychological hurdles for many of my patients to clear is assessing whether or not they were well-loved as children, adolescents and young adults.

Looking back at your life in order to answer this question is not self-indulgent and doesn't represent blaming anyone for your problems. It's a responsible step in assessing whether your adult decisions are being unduly influenced by bad instincts rooted in the past.

People tend to repeat patterns in their lives, whether good or bad. It's a cliché, but it's also true, that many of us reproduce in our adult relationships-including our marriages-what we experienced growing up, in our relationships with our parents and siblings. We do this because we were so exquisitely open, sensitive and vulnerable during our developmental years. We needed warmth and security to survive, and would have traded away anything (if need be) to get it-including our self-esteem. And here's the really important point: If we traded away self-esteem back then and fail to realize we did so out of desperation (rather than out of love), we might do it again as adults.

Experiments with animals show that when baby monkeys (for instance) receive electric shocks whenever they cuddle with their moms, they don't flee their mothers, they cling more tightly to them. The experiments are a good metaphor for the way human beings react to cruelty or indifference or manipulation from their parents; they tend to try to get closer to them, not to flee them. That kind of reaction-getting closer to painful situations or disappointing people-can stay with a person for a lifetime.

A clear view of exactly how you were treated as a child allows you to choose relationships more wisely as an adult. Did a parent prefer alcohol to you? Did a parent put romantic adventures ahead of you? Were you made to fear a parent, rather than respect him or her? Were your dreams ridiculed? Whatever toxic dynamic you identify (if there is one) when you look back at the early chapters in your life story, be careful not to accept it as an adult.

If you do find yourself seemingly locked in a relationship (whether in romance or at work or anywhere else) that requires you to "willingly" suffer emotionally (or physically), think about which early relationship in your life you're reproducing. Maybe if you find that you are recreating a familiar, but toxic drama you survived at home, you can finally decide you are worth more.

Again, none of this is meant to encourage folks ducking responsibility for their choices. It is meant to allow them to make more informed choices, fueled by real free will. It is meant to allow them to escape the gravity of the flawed orbits we tend to travel again and again and again in life, because we too often keep our eyes closed during the whole trip.

 

[shelley921]

<bolded by me>


I know far more about art than I do about psychology.

One of my favorite artists is Caravaggio. Fortunately in many psych 101 books a painting of his titled 'Narcissus' is often included in the section describing this particular mental disorder.

If you simply look at the painting without even reading the text you can get a firm grasp on the true understanding of a narcissist.

Look at how his arms meet the reflection of his arms in the water. This creates a complete circle. Look at his gaze, his body language and his facial expressions.

Narcissus was in love with his perceived reflection in the water. He was not covering up anything. This is not a product of poor self-esteem and a subsequent learned ability to mask that poor self-esteem. Narcissus TRULY AND DEEPLY believed that he WAS superior and above all else.


If you are not a brain surgeon but go around thinking and telling people you are this is a different type of personality disorder and operates on delusion.


As far as teenage behavior goes, the teen brain is not even completely developed yet and that alone is such a complex topic I think it's best served on a completely different thread.

--Narcissus by Caravaggio depicts Narcissus gazing at his own reflection--

thanks-yes i am familiar with that painting and the myth of Narcissus.

"Many versions of this myth have survived from ancient sources. The classic version is by Ovid, found in book 3 of his Metamorphoses (completed 8 AD). This is the story ofNarcissus and Echo. There was a day when Narcissus was walking in the woods. Echo, an Oread (mountain nymph) caught sight of him and fell deeply in love with him. She commenced to follow him. Narcissus sensed that someone was following him and shouted "Who's there?". Echo repeated "Who's there?". She eventually revealed her identity. She made an attempt to embrace the boy. He stepped away from her and told her to leave him alone. She was heartbroken and spent the rest of her life in lonely glens until nothing but an echo sound remained of her. Nemesis, the goddess of revenge, learned of this story and decided to punish Narcissus. She lured him to a pool where he saw his own reflection. He was amazed at the beauty of his reflection. He didn't realize his reflection was only an image and fell in love with it. He eventually figured out that his love could not be addressed and died..."

so if you THINK you are wonderful you have NOT got low self esteem even though your BEHAVIOR indicates otherwise ?

 

[ISeeSociopaths]

Regarding what I bolded---this has recently been debunked by research but I don't have the link handy. A recent study has found that Narcissists actually and truly believe they are superior. This counters the old theory that the Narcissist is suffering from low self esteem.
By the way, I believer firmly that JA is a BPD, Cluster B, Axis II with comorbidity.
Just my :twocents:

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition (DSM-IV-TR) has criteria for borderline personality disorder in Axis II Cluster B[2] that can be found on behavenet. Five or more criteria must be present for diagnosis

Just read up on these personality disorders-on wikipedia-a good overview-
my opinion: Jodi Arias does not have Borderline Personality Disorder as described by DSM because

1.Emotions-BPD experienced heightened emotions, deep emotions, very sensitive and intense-positively and negitively
does not fit this- she is flat-

2.Impulsive behaviors-substance aduse, unprotective sex, eating disorders
but these behaviors develop to gain relief from their extreme emotional pain
JA has some of these behaviors but not becasue she's BPD

3.Self-Harm, Suicidal this is common behavior in BPD-
JA does not fit this- she threatens suicide but only to manipulate-

4.Interpersonal Relationships suffering from Black and white thinking-over emotional expressions positive and negitive and attachment disorders(this is abreviated)
She fits this in a factual way- but I think JA really has no emotions- she is dead inside-JA is acting like she thinks she should behave-
BPD emotions come from an extremely sensitive understanding of themselves and others

BUT JA could be diagnosed withTHIS because she has many of these traits-(Copied from WIkipedia-)
International Classification of Disease
The World Health Organization's ICD-10 defines a conceptually similar disorder to borderline personality disorder, called (F60.3) Emotionally unstable personality disorder. Its two subtypes are described below.[35]
F60.30 Impulsive type
At least three of the following must be present, one of which must be (2):
marked tendency to act unexpectedly and without consideration of the consequences;
marked tendency to engage in quarrelsome behavior and to have conflicts with others, especially when impulsive acts are thwarted or criticized;
liability to outbursts of anger or violence, with inability to control the resulting behavioral explosions;
difficulty in maintaining any course of action that offers no immediate reward;
unstable and capricious (impulsive, whimsical) mood.
F60.31 Borderline type
At least three of the symptoms mentioned in F60.30 Impulsive type must be present [see above], with at least two of the following in addition:
disturbances in and uncertainty about self-image, aims, and internal preferences;
liability to become involved in intense and unstable relationships, often leading to emotional crisis;
excessive efforts to avoid abandonment;
recurrent threats or acts of self-harm;
chronic feelings of emptiness.
demonstrates impulsive behavior, e.g., speeding, substance abuse[36]
The ICD-10 also describes some general criteria that define what is considered a personality disorder.

This might be a bore-so I appologize-I just have a gut feeling she is not BPD and not a Narcissist even if she exhibits traits from each Disorder.

Totally agree with Comorbidity!! This is why it is so difficult to diagnose her. She is a Unique Monster unto herself- She exhibits many traits from all these Anti-social disorders and may not share exactly with a Ted Bundy or a Charles Manson....but comes close.

She is a Monster. Pg 954 in DSM (just kidding, it's not a technically recognized personality disorder!)

P.S. Dear Taste of Honey, Thank you for having this interaction on armchair psych- figuring out her psychosis is fascinating!

 

[IBsleuthin]

--Narcissus by Caravaggio depicts Narcissus gazing at his own reflection--

thanks-yes i am familiar with that painting and the myth of Narcissus.

"Many versions of this myth have survived from ancient sources. The classic version is by Ovid, found in book 3 of his Metamorphoses (completed 8 AD). This is the story ofNarcissus and Echo. There was a day when Narcissus was walking in the woods. Echo, an Oread (mountain nymph) caught sight of him and fell deeply in love with him. She commenced to follow him. Narcissus sensed that someone was following him and shouted "Who's there?". Echo repeated "Who's there?". She eventually revealed her identity. She made an attempt to embrace the boy. He stepped away from her and told her to leave him alone. She was heartbroken and spent the rest of her life in lonely glens until nothing but an echo sound remained of her. Nemesis, the goddess of revenge, learned of this story and decided to punish Narcissus. She lured him to a pool where he saw his own reflection. He was amazed at the beauty of his reflection. He didn't realize his reflection was only an image and fell in love with it. He eventually figured out that his love could not be addressed and died..."

so if you THINK you are wonderful you have NOT got low self esteem even though your BEHAVIOR indicates otherwise ?[/QUOTE]


(bolded by me)...

Self-esteem is a subjective data condition. In the same way pain is a subjective data condition.

You can see behaviors of pain and interpret them yourself but this then becomes YOUR PERCEPTION of how much pain that other person is in.

Follow with me now, self esteem is the same. You can see behaviors and perceived these behaviors as low self esteem but they are your own perception of that person's self-esteem.

Until the person actually gives you subjective data, (tells you) what is going on you don't know.

The behavior portion of the personality could be a manifestation of many, many things. You as the observer have to distance yourself from interpreting these behaviors internally. This is exactly why in studies there is a control group to try to minimize the observers own internalization or projection of their own feelings.

Complicated I know.


I agree with several posters on here who point out that JA is a cluster or mosaic of behaviors.

Does her behavior indicate low-self esteem? How would you know? Without subjective data you wouldn't. At that point you wouldn't know WHAT her behaviors welled from.


Here's an example...you are with a good friend at a coffee shop enjoying a conversation. One cup into it and the conversation turns to a personal matter you have been wanting to bring up with her.

She begins to tense up, her shoulders tighten, she fidgets in her chair, looks around the room. She appears in all her behaviors to be very uncomfortable.

YOU ASSUME that it's because of the conversation you have started with her.

The reality is that the coffee has made her need to go to the bathroom.



Objective vs. subjective data.

 

[IBsleuthin]

Always remember and never forget when it comes to psychological disorders;

"It's never a problem until it causes you trouble." ~IBsleuthin


~

Don't get lost in the maze of trying to clear the overlapping behaviors. Stand back and look at the behaviors that caused the problem and therein lies the psychological disorder.


We ALLLLLL have moments of delusion, anxiety, fear, paranoia, impulsiveness, obsession, depression and the list goes on and on and on. It's not until it causes a problem that it becomes a psychological disorder.

Even in that context there are social 'norms' that dictate what a PROBLEM is! Some societies practice different behaviors that are considered within the social norm.

Here's an example:

I know of a real life situation where long, long ago of a wife who was cheating on her husband. (1960's). The two lovers where caught by the husband. The husband was ENCOURAGED to SHOOT THEM BOTH. (Thankfully he didn't).

At that time, in that area of the country this was an ACCEPTED behavior. Of course, now it's not. Times change, behaviors change with the accepted social norm.

This is also why the DSM is routinely revised.

 

[Hopeful One]

Has Pensfan commented here? I looked but didn't see it, maybe I missed it. I'm really curious to read her opinion.

 

[pip]

If Jodi was a high end escort, she would have more money. Jodi used sex as favors.
She got a helio from Gus and she probably received a well deserved facial.

Gus...facial... Think i'm gonna be sick now.

 

[molly333]

Sorry if this article has been shared before, I think it is really interesting.

http://kristinarandle.com/blog/jodi-arias-essays/

<<The Diagnostic Significance of Jodi’s Unique Ability to Lie

Ms. Arias, compared to the normal individual, has a unique ability to lie. She lies, not always but always when it benefits her. It is the manner in which she lies which is the most revealing. A review of her video interviews will clearly demonstrate this. We first must recognize as we watch those videos, that she knows that she is lying. We don’t have to judge whether or not what she is saying is true because she has admitted that everything she said, in those interviews, was a lie. In the interviews she appears to be calm, serene, witty and charming. Wit and charm are characteristics of an individual with antisocial personality disorder. Both the wit and charm are used to manipulate others. Manipulating others is also characteristic of the antisocial.>>

That is an excellent article. I hope the Prosecution has an expert like this on rebuttal. I can feel the fog of this trial lifting under her clear analysis.

 

[IBsleuthin]

Sorry if this article has been shared before, I think it is really interesting.

http://kristinarandle.com/blog/jodi-arias-essays/

<<The Diagnostic Significance of Jodi&#8217;s Unique Ability to Lie

Ms. Arias, compared to the normal individual, has a unique ability to lie.

She lies, not always but always when it benefits her.

It is the manner in which she lies which is the most revealing. A review of her video interviews will clearly demonstrate this. We first must recognize as we watch those videos,

that she knows that she is lying.

We don&#8217;t have to judge whether or not what she is saying is true because she has admitted that everything she said, in those interviews, was a lie. In the interviews she appears to be calm, serene, witty and charming.

Wit and charm are characteristics of an individual with antisocial personality disorder.

Both the wit and charm are used to manipulate others. Manipulating others is also characteristic of the antisocial.>>

(color bolded by me)

With respect I disagree with this entire written piece as it is written to suggest the following are diagnostic red flags:

1). 99.99999% of lies are done so to benefit the person lying. 'Normal' people lie.

2).99.999999999999% of people who lie, know that they are lying. Otherwise it wouldn't be a LIE it would be a delusion.

3). Wit and charm are also personality characteristics of witty and charming people. These characteristics are not a diagnosis nor a criteria of the diagnosis in of themselves.

4). Manipulation is a form of everyday survival. Every single one of us alive at this moment and going back to the birth of human existence has manipulated their environment and those around them in order to get what they want. When you go ask your boss for a raise do you stomp in the office and pound on the desk? Or do you go in and present yourself in a favorable light with the hopes that this will please the boss and you will get your raise? Manipulation.



Again, and I cannot emphasize this enough, it's not a problem until it causes you trouble.


Wit and charm are not a problem until they are used to manipulate another individual at the the expense of that individuals health, safety and/or well being.

 

[IBsleuthin]

That is an excellent article. I hope the Prosecution has an expert like this on rebuttal. I can feel the fog of this trial lifting under her clear analysis.

I respectfully disagree. I do not feel this is an excellent article in context. I think it's written in a way that causes the reader to believe it's all true.

:moo:

 

[crimesnooper]

thanks for this...interesting. ok they THINK they are always right and they are superior. but that doesn't mean that they ARE. i can think i'm a brain surgeon or a movie star but that doesn't mean I actually am one of those does it? so narcissists are fooling themselves. that to me isn't indicative of high self esteem. it's being foolish. it's not acting in your own best interests.

a teenager can think they know it all and act like a smart *advertiser censored* and a jerk. we've all been there and we've all known teens who are like this at some point in time. acting smart and superior doesn't mean that you ARE that way.

I think the key difference is when you are dealing with someone with true low self esteem, there is most likely a point where you will get the underlying issues out in the open. They can begin to see that, as you say, they are not acting in their own best interests. And that thier actions can cause hurt or are destructive. When you break through all the defenses, you can work on the issues. That does not work with Narcissits.It's not that narcissistst are delusional in the sense that they think they are a brain surgeon when they are not. But they believe so highly in their superiority there is no second, deeper level. It does not matter that in reality they are not what they think, in thier reality, they are. You can't ever establish a cuase and effect situation with a Narc. becuase they , in their eyes, never caused the problem to begin with.And they are always controlling or trying to. JA thinks she is brillant, despite her lack of accomplishment.
I am reminded of the Betty Broderick case where she was diagnosed as having every one of the characteritics of a narcissist. She claimed that she had planned to kill herself and not her ex hubby and wife. The shrink said most narcissists value themselves too much to commit suicide. They are wired differenlty and getting through to them is like chipping at concrete with a butter knife. No impact.

 

[Gecko100]

thanks..that is interesting...so narcissists actually believe they are superior. hmmmm..well o.k. but is that GENUINE self esteem? because to me real self esteem is "showing up" for yourself, taking responsibility, and acting in your own best interests. none of what jodi did - being promiscuous, dropping out of school, living a parasitic lifestyle, stalking, murder etc., was acting in her own best interests. the conduct she allowed herself to have was VERY counterproductive to HER. look where her behavior got her! her life is ruined.

Narcissistic people have a very fragile self esteem, all the 'superiority' and grandiosity emanates from that and is all a 'false self' none of it is real. Any major challenge to that fragile esteem can result in narcissistic rage. They hate being challenged. They are basically 3 year old temper tantrums, in the body of an adult.
I don't think they know what their 'best interest' is, because it comes from early damage in which 'trauma' is all they know. They miss out in the crucial development of empathy.
They use it to good effect to control manipulate and deny. They adore the vulnerable, so they can have a bit of exploitative fun at their victims expense. The 'fun' is them trying to fill in that massive big hole of emptiness they have by being charming, funny, seductive with very blurred boundaries, they engage in these behaviours to gather together people who will feed the need for narcissistic supply and admiration. Blech...

 

[crimesnooper]

an article I read recently and found interesting:
[ Dr Ablow is a psychiatrist ]

Overcoming Pain From Imperfect Parents
Keith Ablow, MD

One of the most difficult psychological hurdles for many of my patients to clear is assessing whether or not they were well-loved as children, adolescents and young adults.

Looking back at your life in order to answer this question is not self-indulgent and doesn't represent blaming anyone for your problems. It's a responsible step in assessing whether your adult decisions are being unduly influenced by bad instincts rooted in the past.

People tend to repeat patterns in their lives, whether good or bad. It's a cliché, but it's also true, that many of us reproduce in our adult relationships-including our marriages-what we experienced growing up, in our relationships with our parents and siblings. We do this because we were so exquisitely open, sensitive and vulnerable during our developmental years. We needed warmth and security to survive, and would have traded away anything (if need be) to get it-including our self-esteem. And here's the really important point: If we traded away self-esteem back then and fail to realize we did so out of desperation (rather than out of love), we might do it again as adults.

Experiments with animals show that when baby monkeys (for instance) receive electric shocks whenever they cuddle with their moms, they don't flee their mothers, they cling more tightly to them. The experiments are a good metaphor for the way human beings react to cruelty or indifference or manipulation from their parents; they tend to try to get closer to them, not to flee them. That kind of reaction-getting closer to painful situations or disappointing people-can stay with a person for a lifetime.

A clear view of exactly how you were treated as a child allows you to choose relationships more wisely as an adult. Did a parent prefer alcohol to you? Did a parent put romantic adventures ahead of you? Were you made to fear a parent, rather than respect him or her? Were your dreams ridiculed? Whatever toxic dynamic you identify (if there is one) when you look back at the early chapters in your life story, be careful not to accept it as an adult.

If you do find yourself seemingly locked in a relationship (whether in romance or at work or anywhere else) that requires you to "willingly" suffer emotionally (or physically), think about which early relationship in your life you're reproducing. Maybe if you find that you are recreating a familiar, but toxic drama you survived at home, you can finally decide you are worth more.

Again, none of this is meant to encourage folks ducking responsibility for their choices. It is meant to allow them to make more informed choices, fueled by real free will. It is meant to allow them to escape the gravity of the flawed orbits we tend to travel again and again and again in life, because we too often keep our eyes closed during the whole trip.

The below link will explain why I would never give Dr. Ablow the time of day or take seriously anthing that he says or writes. JMO.

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.co...-column-twice/discrimination/2011/09/08/26643

 

[slanda]

I respectfully disagree. I do not feel this is an excellent article in context. I think it's written in a way that causes the reader to believe it's all true.

:moo:

I'm confused. Why didn't you not appreciate this article? For me, it answered a lot of questions regarding the theory of JA personality disorders.

I also think the author offered many facts about why JA isn't Borderline, but in fact, Anit-social.

After reading the article, did the author also link JA with Narcissistic PD? It was talked about a lot, but is that the co morbidity with ASPD diagnosis? Or do ASPD's just reflect narcissism in general?

This article helped me so much in understanding her psychopathy.

 

[IBsleuthin]

I'm confused. Why didn't you not appreciate this article? For me, it answered a lot of questions regarding the theory of JA personality disorders.

I also think the author offered many facts about why JA isn't Borderline, but in fact, Anit-social.

After reading the article, did the author also link JA with Narcissistic PD? It was talked about a lot, but is that the co morbidity with ASPD diagnosis? Or do ASPD's just reflect narcissism in general?

This article helped me so much in understanding her psychopathy.

Please refer to page the previous page, #54 and my post at the bottom of the page, post #1350. I went item by item to explain it.


As always it's....:moo:

 

[SMK]

(color bolded by me)

With respect I disagree with this entire written piece as it is written to suggest the following are diagnostic red flags:

1). 99.99999% of lies are done so to benefit the person lying. 'Normal' people lie.

2).99.999999999999% of people who lie, know that they are lying. Otherwise it wouldn't be a LIE it would be a delusion.

3). Wit and charm are also personality characteristics of witty and charming people. These characteristics are not a diagnosis nor a criteria of the diagnosis in of themselves.

4). Manipulation is a form of everyday survival. Every single one of us alive at this moment and going back to the birth of human existence has manipulated their environment and those around them in order to get what they want. When you go ask your boss for a raise do you stomp in the office and pound on the desk? Or do you go in and present yourself in a favorable light with the hopes that this will please the boss and you will get your raise? Manipulation.



Again, and I cannot emphasize this enough, it's not a problem until it causes you trouble.


Wit and charm are not a problem until they are used to manipulate another individual at the the expense of that individuals health, safety and/or well being.

I sort of feel the same way. To my thinking, she killed TA and it was not in self defense, so she must be punished. Whatever she is or is not in terms of personality is irrelevant to the law. I am interested in the psychology of why she did it, but not in the labels.

 

[ktgirl]

For a long time I was sure she had low self-esteem, H.S. drop out, no real job skills except waitressing, promiscuous, string of failed relationships, etc. And then one of our WS posters gave us a link to an article showing the differences between ppl with low self-esteem and narcissists. Jodi fit nearly EVERY category of a NARCISSIST! I had to do an immediate about-face in my opinion of her. She definitely has no self-esteem problems. In fact, she thinks she is the sharpest knife in the block. Watch her hold her own with JM. Nothing fazes her.

Just like Casey Anthony.

 

[ktgirl]

I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion, but...

A family member of mine was diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. She was awful to live with but everyone who didn't live with her loved her & couldn't understand when the family decided not to have anything else to do with her. She eventually married another narcissist. When a narcissist gets involved with another narcissist, things get nasty...the hurt each other over & over again for kicks & to one up another. One of them is gonna "win" by hurting the other immensely. When two narcissists get together, it almost always ends up in the death or extreme excuse of one by the other (the "more" narcissistic of the two will "win).

I think Travis may also have had some narcissistic qualities based on the business he was in (pyramid scheme - he apparently felt no guilt about that as he made thousands of dollars off of the people below him?), thought very highly of himself (at least to the outside world), lied constantly as far as the whole not-having-sex/good Mormon thing (essentially much of his life was a lie...my Mormon friends take that much more seriously than friends of any other religion do), and the ways he used (notice I didn't say abused) Jodi. It seems to me like had "a touch" of narcissism but she was the bigger narcissist....and she ended up "winning" the battle between the two of them in her eyes (a battle that included attempting to control & manipulate one another) by killing him.

I am NOT saying Travis deserved to be killed. I'm not saying he had NPD. I'm saying he seems to have some qualities of a narcissist. Jodi couldn't control/manipulate him how she was used to because he could play the game she was playing. But in the end, the "stronger" narcissist (or truer narcissist?) couldn't take it. She couldn't be beat at her own game and had to exert ultimate control over him by killing him.

 

[AlwaysOnTheCase]

Gus...facial... Think i'm gonna be sick now.

Or maybe she opted for a spanking. She was short on time, she had to go kill Travis.

 

[lil_buddy]

I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion, but...

A family member of mine was diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. She was awful to live with but everyone who didn't live with her loved her & couldn't understand when the family decided not to have anything else to do with her. She eventually married another narcissist. When a narcissist gets involved with another narcissist, things get nasty...the hurt each other over & over again for kicks & to one up another. One of them is gonna "win" by hurting the other immensely. When two narcissists get together, it almost always ends up in the death or extreme excuse of one by the other (the "more" narcissistic of the two will "win).

I think Travis may also have had some narcissistic qualities based on the business he was in (pyramid scheme - he apparently felt no guilt about that as he made thousands of dollars off of the people below him?), thought very highly of himself (at least to the outside world), lied constantly as far as the whole not-having-sex/good Mormon thing (essentially much of his life was a lie...my Mormon friends take that much more seriously than friends of any other religion do), and the ways he used (notice I didn't say abused) Jodi. It seems to me like had "a touch" of narcissism but she was the bigger narcissist....and she ended up "winning" the battle between the two of them in her eyes (a battle that included attempting to control & manipulate one another) by killing him.

I am NOT saying Travis deserved to be killed. I'm not saying he had NPD. I'm saying he seems to have some qualities of a narcissist. Jodi couldn't control/manipulate him how she was used to because he could play the game she was playing. But in the end, the "stronger" narcissist (or truer narcissist?) couldn't take it. She couldn't be beat at her own game and had to exert ultimate control over him by killing him.

I am TOTALLY with you on this (insofar as I know we're really speculating because the public has been granted limited info).

I think that JA's attempts to manipulate TA always backfired - like she would offer sex for whatever it was she wanted in return, but was never able to collect. I also kind of get the impression that JA was always trying to get TA's friends to feel sorry for her and alienate TA - which also never worked out.

Also, I think it is possible that she thought if TA could make $ at PPL, she should be able to as well, but it never happened.

She was pi$$ed about being constantly outsmarted and outmaneuvered.