The experience of invidia, as Robert A. Kaster notes, is invariably an unpleasant one, whether feeling invidia or finding oneself its object. Invidia at the thought of another’s good may be merely begrudging, Kaster observes, or begrudging and covetous at the same time: “I can feel dolor [“pain, sorrow, heartache”] at seeing your good, just because it is your good, period, or I can feel that way because the good is yours and not mine.” Such invidia is morally indefensible: compare theAesop fable “The Dog in the Manger“. But by far the most common usage in Latin of invidia occurs in contexts where the sense of justice has been offended, and pain is experienced at the sight of undeserved wealth, prestige or authority, exercised without shame (pudor); this is the close parallel with Greek nemesis(νέμεσις) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invidia
The psychopath prides themselves on whatever they think makes them special. They have a conceit that they are the best at something, they are the sexiest, they are the smartest, they are the fastest, the strongest, whatever it is they think makes them special and unique and dominant.
This is usually not stated overtly, it is concealed and it is tied to the form of their conquest.
“When a person wants to win the copy whatever behavior they believe is dominant.” Fritz Perls, paraphrased and probably butchered. . .
When and event, action, or statement occurs that falsifies the conceit/closeted narrative of the psychopath it stimulates their need recognition to attack or retaliate. It is as though they have been attacked by the existence of the other person. Who attacked them by being who and what they are. The concealed narrative now declares war on the offending party, this is also not stated overtly. The psychopath must appear to be reasonable, if they said what they thought overtly then people would know they are unstable, and insane, this would marginalize their reputation and authority and psychopaths are social climbers. They are in relationship with their authority and they are intent on increasing and expanding their authority.
The psychopath opportunistically lies in wait for an opportunity when they can’t lose and the other person can’t win. In their mind, they are repairing the damage for the perceived slight. You don’t really know a person until you know who they are when they are at war. And when you see a person fight, and you know what they fight for you might realize that you don’t want to know that person, that friendship was never an option.
“If relationship is an approaching, then how you approach relationship is how you approach approaching.”
It has always been a mystery to me that people think they know people when they have first meet them. You don’t know somebody when you first meet them, you get to know them over the course of the relationship. My ex-gf used to use this tactic on me. She would say, “Where is the sweet man that I first met.” The hidden subject is she was in relationship with the past. I wasn’t allowed to be myself or express myself in the relationship. She wanted a superficial relationship that benefited her and didn’t benefit me, not a profound relationship in which we intimately understood one another and each other’s needs, desires and aspirations. She felt attacked by the person I was and that gave her the right to attack and punish and change me to suit her desires. Women often accuse men of being egotistical because men don’t cater to every whim of women. But who is more egotistical? The person who feels they are the judge of the state of the relationship, who feels they have the right to punish the other person for not being what they want them to be or the person expected to stay in an emotionally abusive relationship and not allowed to be happy, live their dream, do their will, or be themselves?