Despite damning evidence contained in a report by the US Anti-Doping Agency, the loss of all seven Tour de France medals and the cancellation of lucrative product endorsement deals, Lance Armstrong remains in denial, refusing to admit that he relied on an illegal performance. – Taking drugs to win. But damning evidence presented by his teammates has now revealed a systematic effort, backed by intimidation, bribes and threats, to hide the truth and fabricate a public image of the man as a hero.
A brave cancer survivor.
A model of perseverance and integrity.
Humanity.
When you consider that Lance Armstrong is worth $125 million, it’s easy to attribute this massive PR effort to greed. You might also think that a man who spent a great deal of time, money, and energy hiding his use of performance-enhancing drugs, and who repeatedly lied about it under oath, must be so competitive that he would stop at nothing to win. Both explanations must be true, but Lance Armstrong’s careful care for his public role as hero and the adulation he inspired says a lot about what motivates him.
Related : Impaired Trust in the Narcissistic Family
Since the term appears regularly in the media these days, most of us have a passing familiarity with narcissism and what it looks like: vanity, grandiosity, and arrogance; Preoccupation with power and prestige. Desire to stay in the center of attention. Lance Armstrong seems to fit the profile. But what drives the narcissist? What lies behind that need for admiration? What made Lance Armstrong in the past into the man he is today, one who seems to do anything to protect his public image as a hero?
People with unbearable shyness often construct a persona in denial, or an idealized false self to cover up feelings of inner dysfunction. They devote large amounts of psychological energy to maintaining and protecting that image. Although they are known to be sensitive to criticism, they know to some extent that the image they present to the world is a lie. Organizing resources to support this lie consumes them.
We know enough about Lance Armstrong’s life to recognize his features. His mother was only 17 when he was born, and his father left them when Armstrong was two. The fact that Armstrong refers to his biological father as his “sperm donor” and refuses to meet him to this day suggests that this abandonment was painful. His mother’s second marriage a few years later did not last, and Armstrong never related to his stepfather. This is the kind of chaotic early childhood that instills a basic sense of shame and unworthiness.
Armstrong seems to have spent his life perfecting the perfect self-image to cover up a feeling of inner dysfunction. He worked hard to enhance his image as a courageous cancer survivor, a heroic and tireless competitor, and a crusader on behalf of other cancer victims. While all of these descriptions contain an element of truth, Armstrong’s character turns out to be essentially a lie. Like all narcissists, he spent enormous resources maintaining that lie. He threatened friends and colleagues, committed perjury under oath and paid bribes to doctors, all in order to promote his false, idealistic persona.
Now the lies have been exposed. His character had collapsed, leaving Armstrong under the glare of agonizing public humiliation. It remains to be seen whether he will be able to live a more honest life now, by facing his shame. Narcissism tends to be a stubborn and largely intractable condition. Armstrong’s continued insistence that he is telling the truth – another colossal lie in the face of undeniable evidence – does not bode well. I think that this shame, even today, has become unbearable.
