A Napoleon complex, as I understand it, is when a high achiever feels insecure due to a reasonably insignificant, but noticeable, flaw, and gets so bitter and defensive about it that it draws attention from their achievements to the flaw and their bitterness.
Eg, man rises to the top of his country, conquers others, spreads and empire that, for all its flaws, revolutionised global concepts and uptake of democracy, human rights etc. English critics mainly focus whether he’s a few inches shorter than average.
Whereas Elon: did not do any of that, and the ‘minor flaws’ are his remarkable personal anti-magnetism.
It’s absolutely unbelievable that the richest man in the world still can’t get any friends, let alone partners, who can stick around longer than a year or so. He was brought up with the finest education money could buy and every opportunity, and has not managed to invent, discover, or excel at anything other than buying things.
Not only has he not conquered a multitude of countries or spread anything other than anger and personal dissatisfaction, he couldn’t even rise to the top of his own country.
And, not being funny, his own country was not the stiffest competition in the field of ‘really respectable, well liked, competent people’. White South Africans do not dominate the league tables of Cool Chill Folk Who Fairly Earned Their Worldwide Respect, and all he had to do was keep buying companies and collecting money and not being such a raging wanker as to be a threat to multiple countries’ national security. That is such an achingly low bar, and I truly do not believe anyone except Musk could have failed to clear it.
TLDR: Napoleon ruled his country and many others, leaving a new global standard for law, human rights, freedom, and democracy (which is even more impressive considering he was a kinda imperialist knob).
Musk’s talents are being astronomically rich, and against all odds, setting a new global standard for ‘that white South African pro-apartheid guy who turned out to be unusually racist and anti-meritocracy’. How bad do you have to be before billions of people would recognise you from that description? The man was born on a golden throne and has managed to make a name as the most distasteful turd in the open sewer miles away.
I agree with the principle (and the general vibe) but I think an awful lot of awful people are already looking for an excuse to claim that trans people are just regular people who spontaneously claim to be trans to make a political point. I don’t think it would help to have concrete evidence of Bob MacMan, who looks and dresses like a man and has been living exclusively as a man and showed clear desire to use men’s facilities and men’s prisons when arrested, has claimed to be a trans woman, or vice versa.
For it to not be counter productive, you would have to commit to proving that trans people are very much not just ‘one gender pretending to be the other’, and that would be difficult.
What might be more effective (and honestly, kinda fun) would be like, 8 people all insisting on being arrested at once, or an entire class, or the whole household including ‘granddad’ Dorothy. With everyone committed to doing the conically low/ high voices and playing up the silliest exaggerated charecature (I thought autocorrect was gonna have my back with that word but hey ho) of the opposite gender. You’d get to have some fun, a much lower risk of being placed alone into an opposite gender space, and could really demonstrate the ‘no, this is what it looks like when people just pretend to be the opposite gender’ difference between claiming trans as an act of political defiance - proving their point- and just happening to be a trans person trying to get on with their lives.
Disclaimer - I am not the Joke Police and do not speak for trans people, so pinch of salt required. Also I haven’t seen Spartacus, but I’ve seen the Life of Brain ‘Im the Messiah and so is my wife’ scene, so I feel like I’ve pretty much watched the important bits of Spartacus