Folks often ask me if Covert-Aggressive personalities (manipulators) and other disturbed characters really understand themselves or know what they’re doing.  I always reply that most of the time, such personalities know exactly who they are and what they’re up to.  This is something others find very hard to believe.  But to illustrate the point, I thought I’d reproduce a portion of an article I wrote about a year ago on a popular international blog:

Covert-Aggressive Personalities are the archetypal wolves in sheep’s clothing that I introduced in my first book, In Sheep’s Clothing . These individuals are not openly aggressive in manner in which they relate to others.  In fact, they do their best to keep their aggressive intentions and behaviors carefully masked. They can often appear quite charming and amiable, but underneath their civil facade they are just as ruthless as any other aggressive personality. They are devious, underhanded, and subtle in the ways they abuse and exploit others. They have generally cultivated an arsenal of interpersonal maneuvers and tactics that enable them to effectively manipulate and control those in relationships with them. The tactics they use are effective because they simultaneously accomplish two objectives very effectively:

• The tactics conceal obvious aggressive intent. When the covert-aggressive is using the tactics, the other person has little objective reason to suspect that he is simply attempting to gain advantage over them.
• The tactics covert-aggressive personalities use effectively play on the sensitivity, conscientiousness, and other vulnerabilities of most persons — especially neurotic individuals — and therefore effectively quash any resistance another person might have to giving-in to the demands of the aggressor.

So, it’s this one-two punch of the tactics: never really seeing what’s coming, and being vulnerable to succumbing to them, that’s at the heart of why most people get manipulated by them.

About a week after I posted the article referenced above, the blog site received one of the most interesting comments to date:

It’s very disturbing, but true… I am one of these personality types.  It is quite an issue for me since I only started really looking at this pattern and why I do it over the last few weeks. (I am 35).  You make the point that this personality type has an underdeveloped conscience and that some of these individuals have more conscience impairment than others.  This may be a harsh assessment, but I know this is true, also.  I actually have some degree of conscience.  I would never think of actually hurting another person physically for personal gain, ever.  Still, I do seem to “attack” when I perceive my own interests or safety to be under assault in any way, be it physical, emotional, spiritual, and I justify my behavior by telling myself it’s necessary.

I have tried to limit my covert-aggressive actions to those situations when I feel it’s absolutely necessary for survival and the last resort.  However, it’s very difficult for me not to “act-out” (I know you say this is an incorrect use of the term) whenever I see a chance to gain a victory over others.

I dont know where this all got started.  I just know that my behavior has a name, and that I really need to try harder (it seems to become a bit easier all the time) to be less manipulative and more straightforward. To face this issue is not an easy one, because it means I have to adapt my way of thinking and acting to more “normal” trains.

My wife knows all this about me and still loves me.

“Jacob”

The above comment validates points that I’ve made in prior posts about this personality type.  Some of these folks are more neurotic than they are character-disordered.  Some have more of a conscience than others.  But in the end, such personalities have impairments in conscience and character that allow them to exploit the vulnerabilities of others and to justify their actions by claiming their behavior was necessary.  And, as the testimonial above attests to, these folks know what they’re doing.

Perhaps the most hopeful aspects of Jacob’s testimonial is that people can and do change, but they have to be the ones to decide it’s in their best interest.  And over the years, I have dealt with literally hundreds of folks just like Jacob who acquired enough integrity of character and motivation to put an end to their covert-aggressive ways.

I read your book In Sheep’s Clothing for the first time and really liked it.  I am also happy to say that I have found your website and other blogs that feature your work and have read many of your articles.

I recognize myself as a kind of “neurotic” person like you describe and the man I’m dating as a disturbed character.  Unfortunately, it wasn’t until I started knowing him better that I realized something wasn’t quite right. But, as I hadn’t been in a similar situation before and with him being a very smart person, it was hard for me to see things clearly.

Now after reading your book and postings I have finally understood what the source of trouble was - his irresponsible, narcissistic, hedonistic self - all expressions of his underdeveloped character. I was just wondering what the treatment is if any? I’ve read here that such people (I think they are categorized as Cluster B) don’t usually change.  Is there any hope for these types of people?

Letters like this one and comments over the years from folks at workshops prompted me to write my latest book, Character Disturbance, which is set for wide release by Parkhurst Brothers at the end of July.  In this book, I address what it takes to make changes in persons with underdeveloped character.  Contrary to popular belief, the situation with disturbed characters is not hopeless.  What is hopeless as well as pointless is trying to relate to or intervene with such folks through traditional techniques and methods.  Traditional methods focus on feelings, unresolved emotional conflicts, and most especially, things hidden from consciousness.  Traditional methods also also try to give a person insight they don’t have into problems as the principal way of solving them.  But disturbed characters are already aware of the bad things they do.  They’re aware but don’t care.  They like the way they do things, even if others don’t.  And their feelings are not at the root of problems.  Instead, their distorted way of thinking about things and their irresponsible habitual behaviors are the culprits.  So, dealing with disturbed characters effectively requires a completely different strategy from traditional methods.  In Character Disturbance, I present some vignettes that clearly illustrate the different approach that needs to be taken.

NOTE:  WEB LINKS TO THE ONLINE SELLERS FOR BOTH IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING AND CHARACTER DISTURBANCE MIGHT BE A BIT PROBLEMATIC DURING THE “CHANGEOVER” TO THE MOST RECENT EDITION AND PUBLISHER.  ALWAYS LOOK FOR THE LATEST EDITION FROM THE CURRENT PUBLISHER, PARKHURST BROTHERS.

Around 16 years ago, I published my first book, In Sheep’s Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People. I did so because I was working with many people who had been victimized in some way by a manipulator.  Knowing how many people had been subjected to various control tactics, back-stabbing, underhanded maneuvers, subtle abuse, etc., and the host of problems (e.g., depression, internal turmoil, relationship confusion, etc.) was eye-opening.  I also came to appreciate that several of the notions about human behavior the victims held - many promoted by traditional psychological paradigms - were actually making it harder for them to understand and deal with the behavior of their manipulators.  After working closely with manipulators, various other disturbed characters, and relatively healthy individuals victimized by the responsibility-challenged people in their lives, I decided a radical new approach could help people protect themselves from the harmful things disturbed characters are prone to do.  In Sheep’s Clothing was the result of utilizing this new approach to help people understand and deal with the disturbed characters in their lives, especially manipulators.  For the first time, it allowed people to understand what was really going on with their abuser, how they managed to get hoodwinked, blindsided, and manipulated, and what they could do to keep such things from happening again.

In Sheep’s Clothing started out as a small, independent publication, targeted toward a relatively small market.  Yet it was received by the public in a manner I could barely have imagined.  After several revisions, numerous online reviews and testimonials, and unprecedented word-of-mouth, it became a bestseller and has been translated into several foreign languages.  It has been revised a few times, but its basic content has remained as stable and as timely as its subject matter.

Just a few weeks ago (March 31, 2010) a brand new edition of In Sheep’s Clothing was released by Parkhurst Brothers Publishers.  This edition contains some new content and provides a suitable introduction to my new book, Character Disturbance, which takes an in-depth look at the disturbing phenomenon of our age.  Character Disturbance is also published by Parkhurst Brothers and is scheduled for wide release on July 31, 2010.  It is my sincere hope that both of these works cast a needed new light on a societal problem that appears to be becoming ever more prevalent in our age of permissiveness, entitlement, and irresponsibility.

I don’t know what I should do.  I’m in love with a married man.  He has  kids from both in and outside of his marriage. My mom can’t accept even the thought of him being with me. I do realize the problems we’d face as a couple, and do my best to control myself. He does, also, and both of us know that we don’t really have a future together because he’s made it clear he’ll never get a divorce and my parents won’t ever accept him as my life partner. Still, I really want him and I think we really love each other.

Please, tell me what I should do.  I really need some advice!

My response to this woman is also illustrative of the shift in philosophy necessary these days to help people of immature, disturbed, or fractured character change:

Giving you direct advice in such a situation is fraught with both danger and impropriety.  But it seems that you already have abundant insight.  These are the things you clearly indicate that you already know:

The man is married.

He will never divorce.

He has fathered children within and outside of his marriage.

Your parents couldn’t possibly accept him.

You know that your relationship with him is fraught with “problems” and full of risk.

Your turmoil stems from the fact that despite knowing how foolish this involvement might be, you still really want this man.

So, it’s not really clear what your question is.  The fact that you have feelings for this man is certainly not the issue.  You can’t help your feelings.  But whether you allow your feelings to completely overrun your better judgment is quite another matter.  Mature, adult life is all about being guided in your actions by values and sound judgment as opposed to letting your urges and impulses run the show.  No one can do your growing up for you and there’s danger in relying on someone else’s “advice” to guide your every step.

Best advice:  Acknowledge your feelings and desires but don’t let them drive your decisions in life.

Back in the “good old days” of psychotherapy, counselors of one type or another would help individuals who were riddled with insecurities and fears gain “insight” about the underlying reasons for their unhappiness.  These were the days in which “neurosis” was still the primary ailment therapists treated.  But as I have written about many times, truly pathological levels of neurosis have all but disappeared from the landscape. Neurosis is still with us, of course, but most neurotics are highly functioning, responsible people.  The bigger problem these days is the gross immaturity disturbance of character so many individuals possess.  And instead of fears and insecurities being at the root of their problems, the real culprits are their distorted ways of thinking about things and the impulsive, undisciplined, and irresponsible ways they allow themselves to behave.

In the brand new revision of my first book In Sheep’s Clothing, I address many of these issues.  And in my new book Character Disturbance, set for wide release June 30 from Parkhurst Brothers, I explore these issues in great depth as well as give helpful guidelines about how to deal with such issues professionally as well as interpersonally.

Dear Dr. Simon,

I just finished reading your book, In Sheep’s Clothing. No words can express the gratitude that I have for this obvious manifestation of your love and hard work.  From your introduction onward, I sensed that you were, not only enlightened about this subject, but that you had a sound, moral and ethical motive for writing the book.  That’s what drew me to you.

I’ll spare you the details of my life, but as you have probably heard thousands of times, I am a victim of a covert-aggressive, manipulating person.  And to make matters worse, I now realize that I am a very neurotic individual.  I didn’t know that before seeing myself in your book.  And I’m not ashamed of it, but I see how it made me vulnerable all my life.  Now, I think I am on the way to reclaiming my life, and finding self-respect and confidence.  Your book has equipped me to do that and to take on the challenges that still lie ahead.

The person who manipulated me for years was incarcerated last year for a serious crime that came to light 2 years ago.  At first, I played my typical role of the sympathizer/empathizer, and offered to get this person “help” him and to support him.  But I finally realized that I’d been enabling him to be irresponsible all his life and to get away with all the things he’d done to cause me pain throughout my life!  When I finally drew the line, he used all the tactics you explained in your book.  In the past these tactics have left me completely depressed and my family and business suffered.   But now I am aware of the tactics and also aware of myself enough to know that I need to be more assertive and rid myself of the burden of his irresponsibility.

To the point:  Your book helped me understand why I am such an “approval junkie,” how I got manipulated, why I always hated confrontation, and why I had so little confidence and self-respect - even though I have done so many good things in my life and achieved a measure of success in my pursuits.  I intend to spend many days meditating on the new perspectives your book offers and connecting them to my life experiences with people of all different characters.  And I will strive to no longer sabotage myself by allowing the disturbed characters I encounter to manipulate me.

You may not ever fully know the overwhelming feelings your work is helping people like me to experience.  But I wanted to let you know how much your work has meant.  I wish you the best, and thank you again.

M.K.  Virginia

I have only recently realized that my elderly father is a covert-aggressive personality.  I spent so many years hating myself and feeling that others didn’t like me, including family members.  Knowing how I’d been duped has been a really hard realization to come to.  I always thought I had the “Leave it to Beaver life” yet I was never happy.  But I thought it was me, or my mother, or anyone but my Dad who was the problem.  Somehow, he always came out “smelling like a rose”.  I almost divorced my husband because of him and his manipulations.   When my Mom died, my Dad wanted me and wanted my husband gone from his life.  I spent many sleepless nights trying to figure all this out and I’m not sure I understand it completely even now.  I have to read and re-read Dr. Simon’s book to remind me what has happened to me and how it happened.  I know the truth about him now, yet I find it easy to blame myself.  My question is, if I confront a my Dad, covert aggressive personality that he is, with the facts as outlined in Dr. Simon’s book, would he see himself?  Would he know that I’ve “got it” with respect to what he’s really like or would he look at me like I’m crazy?

Perhaps this woman did not read or possibly didn’t understand some points I made in my book In Sheep’s Clothing about covert-aggressive personalities generally being much more character-disturbed than neurotic and how different disturbed characters are from neurotics with respect to the level of insight they have about themselves.  So, in part I replied this way:

If your dad is the kind of personality I describe in my book, the likelihood is that he already sees himself just fine.  And, if he looks at you like you’re crazy when you confront him, it’s more than likely a tactic to keep you under control.  So, it’s far more important that resist trying to get him to see things and simply take charge of your own life by setting firm limits with respect to his involvement in your affairs.

On March 31st, Parkhurst Brothers will release a brand new edition of In Sheep’s Clothing, already a 15-year international bestseller.  On June 30th, Parkhurst will also release Character Disturbance, my new book on all of the problem characters that can make your life difficult.  Both books point out that when it comes to covert-aggressive personalities or any other disturbed character, “they already see, they just disagree.”  That is, they know what they’re doing and why they’re doing it and they know how other people want them to behave. They simply refuse to do things differently and use various tactics to manipulate others into backing down or backing off.  My new book goes into much greater depth about this and explains how not to get caught up in the trap of trying to get them “to see.”

I am a 21-year-old female, and I have a 19-year-old boyfriend. We have been together a little over 7 months. We are also in a long-distance relationship at the moment until he can get his financial situation sorted out and come to be with me. I love my boyfriend, but I have noticed some things about him and the way he acts that are little red flags to me about possible problems. These are things that I want to help him overcome, but I’m not sure how to do that. The biggest problem I see in our relationship is my boyfriend’s extreme jealousy and insecurity. When we first began dating, he wasn’t showing these signs as strongly, but he would tell other guys who tried talking to me that I was his girl, and he felt jealous if they spoke to me.  My boyfriend has told me the reason why he is so protective is because he’s afraid that if other guys talk to me or if I even speak to them just to say “Hello” that he will lose me to the other guy because he thinks they are better than he is. I’ve told him numerous times that I’m not interested in other guys and I only want him, but the same issue repeatedly comes up. I have a close guy friend that I have been the best of friends with for over 6 years, and he and I have absolutely no sexual past or relationship. Yet whenever my friend and I hang out, my boyfriend gets extremely jealous, argumentative, insecure, and picks a fight with me. I don’t think it’s fair that I can’t hang out with one of my close friends without my boyfriend getting as wound up as he does. He hangs out with a lot of his own friends, some of whom are girls, and I have no problem with it because I’m not a jealous or insecure person. When he gets angry and argumentative, I feel he doesn’t necessarily trust me when I want to hang out with my friends. I wish there was something I could do to help him, but I feel like no matter how many times I reassure him that I want him and only him, it will never fully sink in. I love him, but I cannot continue our relationship the way it is because we constantly fight, and there appears no solution to this issue. When I try and speak to him about it, he only shrugs it off and is only worried about apologizing and making things better, rather than figuring out why we were fighting in the first place and how to fix it. I am hoping that I can find something to help with his insecurities and jealousy because with all the fighting I am beginning to be lose my attraction towards him.

My answer:

You say that you have no problem with your boyfriend hanging out with others because you are “not a jealous or insecure person.” So, you would naturally buy into the idea (as expressed by your boyfriend) that insecurity and jealousy must be the underlying reason for his possessiveness. But this does not have to be the case at all, and your gut is telling you there is a “red flag” for something else potentially more destructive in this relationship.  Most of the time, it’s best not to rationalize but to heed your gut instincts. There are many, many reasons for the possessiveness your boyfriend displays, not all of which are rooted in insecurity and low self-esteem. I have posted other articles on this and written about it extensively both in my book In Sheep’s Clothing [Amazon-US] and my soon to be released book Character Disturbance. And even if that were the issue, it’s your boyfriend’s responsibility — not yours — to resolve it.  You want to understand and help. That’s honorable, but such a willingness also makes you vulnerable to someone who wants to play on your sympathies in order to manipulate and control you. You should set some firm limits with your boyfriend before getting any deeper in this relationship.

In the coming weeks, I’ll be posting more articles like this one, featuring questions from people all over the world who have sought out my expertise and some of whom have found new hope and understanding after reading my book and other writings.

Persons with disturbed characters are unique individuals who are often quite difficult to live or work with. Some prior posts have explored just what a disturbed character is and how these folks differ from most, especially those commonly thought of as “neurotic” to some degree.  Knowing how such individuals tend to think can help anyone understand them better because how we think about things in large measure determines how we will act, and disturbed characters often act in ways that create big problems for relationships and for society in general.

Because an immature or impaired conscience is a hallmark feature of the disturbed character, such characters have a diminished capacity to experience genuine guilt over actions or intended actions that injure others. So when they’re thinking about doing something, disordered characters rarely think about how their actions might affect others or possibly transgress ethical or moral boundaries. To the degree that they might have at least some rudimentary conscience, they’re able to quickly and effectively block out thoughts of right and wrong when they’re seriously contemplating how to get something they want. Not caring enough about how their behavior might impact someone else, they simply give the rightness or wrongness of their plans no serious consideration. They might very well know that others would view their behavior as wrong, but they can still make excuses and “justify” their wrongful acts with ease. Over time, this guiltless way of thinking promotes a pervasive attitude of irresponsibility.

Disordered characters also have a deficient sense of shame.  They almost never think of how some action of theirs might negatively reflect the kind of person they are. This is such an important point because it could easily be said that a key feature of the most disordered individuals is that they neither care enough nor think enough about how their patterns of behavior reflect on their character.  What’s more, when disturbed characters do perceive that someone is judging them in a negative manner, they easily think that it’s the other person who has the problem. Some of the most severely disturbed characters might even count it as a badge of honor that they are not affected by the opinions of others and hold onto their grandiose and unrealistic self-images despite a track record of wreaking havoc in the lives of those they work or live with. Over time, their shameless thinking fosters the development of quite a brazen attitude.

Guilt is the bad feeling most of us have when we think we’ve done something wrong.  Shame is all about our feelings about ourselves as persons of worth.  When our patterns of behavior habitually cause problems and pain for others, most of us reflect upon or think about those behaviors with a sense of both shame and guilt.  We feel bad for doing wrong and strive not to do similar things again.  And, we feel ashamed of ourselves and vow to be better persons.  Disturbed and disordered characters don’t engage in this kind of thinking.  Lacking an appropriate sense of guilt, and without a sufficient sense of shame, they don’t engage in the same kind of reflective thinking that enables most of us to grow, change, and improve ourselves.

Disordered characters also often think far too much of themselves. They might even think that they’re so smart, so clever, or so “special” that they can do what most others wouldn’t dream of trying and somehow get away with it. They tend to think of themselves as so important or superior that they deserve things others don’t deserve. Their tendency to over-rate their abilities and their value led Stanton Samenow to describe them as “legends in their own minds.” In prior posts, I’ve written about the inflated self-image of disordered characters and how it contrasts with the self-esteem problems usually experienced by neurotics.  And, I’ve also pointed out that whereas a neurotic individual might “compensate” for feelings of inadequacy by putting on a boastful front, disordered characters actually think of themselves as superior.  It’s not a pretense, it’s a dysfunctional but actual core belief.  Disturbed characters also often regard it a testament to their greatness if they can use their wits or manipulative skill to take things as opposed to really earning them. In those cases, their egomaniacal thinking combines with other erroneous thinking patterns and attitudes that predispose them to behaviors that exploit and victimize others.

Their habitually erroneous ways of thinking about themselves and their pathologically grandiose sense of self-importance inevitably leads disturbed characters to develop attitudes of arrogance, superiority, and most especially, entitlement.  In all my years working with character-disordered individuals, by far the most challenging issue needing focus in therapy involves their sense of entitlement. But this sense of entitlement cannot develop in the first place without a consistent, pervasive sense of superiority to “justify” such an attitude.  Some disordered characters think they’re above the rules, and “deserve” special consideration.  So, when they want something, they feel entititle to have it or to take it without reservation and with complete indifference about whether their actions might negatively affect someone else.

A big change in cultural norms has contributed in recent years to the reinforcement of egomaniacal thinking. It’s not uncommon for young persons to be bombarded with messages that they’re “special” simply because they have a heartbeat. That’s because well-meaning individuals, steeped in old-school psychology, thought it wasn’t possible for a person to have too much self-esteem and that everyone would be emotionally healthier if they got frequent messages of validation. But what these well-intentioned folks probably haven’t considered is that when we heap praises upon people for what they are as opposed to what they do, we do them a great disservice insofar as developing a healthy sense of self-worth is concerned.  The quickest way to set a young person on the wrong path as far as self-appraisal is concerned is to overly recognize, praise, or otherwise reinforce the fact that he has talents, abilities, or other natural, appealing, endowments (e.g., good looks, intelligence, charm, etc.) and to fail to afford a higher degree of recognition for how he might have used those natural gifts for the betterment of all.

One comment I was particularly struck by was from Sarah: “Freud’s was the dominant form of thinking and understanding of the day and today’s dominant thinking may be something [much different].”  She also noted that all of our scientific metaphors about the nature of the human condition tend to be inadequate and that “the reality [of the situations we try to describe] always escapes the categories.”

Ultimate realities are most often fairly incomprehensible and equally hard to describe. In the end, scientific “truths” are really metaphors. They can seem almost poetically correct in a particular era or circumstance and then completely inadequate or archaic in another. A great example is the differing explanations two true geniuses gave for the phenomenon of gravity. Newton explained it as a “force” between two objects, and Einstein explained it as distortion or curvature in the fabric of “space-time.” It seems that while Einstein’s explanation better accounts for almost all of the latest findings of physics, Newton’s equations will do just fine when you’re trying to navigate from the earth to the moon. Every metaphor has its strengths and weaknesses. Problems arise when we get so married to our metaphors that we don’t accept their limitations to adequately explain or deal with certain phenomena. Such is the case with Freudian and similar classical metaphors about human nature and individuals best described as having significant disturbances of character.  When it comes to really understanding these folks, the schools of thought that were really developed to understand and treat “neurosis” are inadequate.  

Sarah also rightfully cautions that whatever metaphors and labels we employ, we should be careful not to merely “demonize” people. I do think that some could be tempted to view character disturbance as more an indictment of a person as opposed to a more accurate description of their affliction. But my intention in the series of articles I’ve been writing on character disturbance is not to cast a negative light, but rather an illuminating light on a very real and pressing psychological reality primarily affecting the advanced, industrialized, free world. Even Freud’s theories were prone to cruel demonizing, though they were not seen as doing so at the time. “Cold,” detached and indifferent mothers were soundly blamed for creating autistic babies. Mothers who gave conflicting messages to their children were blamed for fostering schizophrenia. Even young girls who were probably molestation victims were blamed for making up some of their memories out of their unconscious “lust” for their fathers. I could go on. It’s only because most of the most demonizing and abominable tenets of Freudian theory have been soundly rejected and abandoned (though most of its tenets are still accepted) that it appears a much more a benign and humanistic paradigm than the paradigms that have emerged in recent years to address the phenomenon of character disturbance.

Evan interestingly commented: “Manipulation and so forth are usually our best efforts to survive, I think.”

I make it a major point in all my workshops and writings that even though traditional psychology tends to view most of us as fearful runners, human beings are mostly fighters, spending infinitely more time and energy in their daily lives fighting for the things they want or think they need. Fighting is a fundamental instinctual instrument of survival. And fighting underhandedly and stealthily, which is what manipulation is all about, is just one of the ways we learn early on to advance our interests. As I note in my book, In Sheep’s Clothing, the problem is not so much that we fight in so many different ways, but that if we’re to function in non-abusive ways and to maintain a healthy social order, how we fight really matters. In the end, fair, principled, constructive, and respectful assertion is more adaptive than manipulation.

Gabriella asked if the categorization of character disorders doesn’t in fact parallel the DSM categorization of the “Cluster B” personality disorders. There is some very real overlap there, but there are some key differences also. Ultimately, the neurosis vs. character disorder distinction is a continuum that represents a dimension of personality. And some personality types (including some Cluster B personalities) tend to lie further toward the character disordered end of the spectrum. I’ll be addressing this further in future posts.

Several comments made it clear that many still seem to equate the concepts of personality and character.  As I have written in prior posts, I think it’s important to keep a distinction between these two terms and to use the term character to apply to those aspects of an individual’s personality that reflect their degree of moral, and ethical integrity (i.e commitment to virtuous social conduct).  So, it’s important not to confuse a character disorder and a personality disorder.  There are some personalities, however, that tend to be far more disturbed in character than others.  They will be the subject of future posts.