It helps if you can give us a little more context - are you looking for readers for the whole thing, or just comments on this section? Is this the beginning of a story or a novel? What genre will you be working in?

At any rate, I hope your character does something more active than describe his psychology soon. I want to see him do something, not just talk about himself.

Don't take this the wrong way, but when you post your lines you don't have to feel the need to defend anything you write. Just hear the people out and then think about what they're saying. Many of these writers are talented professionals, you could learn a lot from them if you just listen.

"Thank you"

"Please clarify such-and-such."

The specific problems with this narrator are that he a)lacks focus and b) is full of himself. The first makes it very difficult for the reader to feel pulled into the story, because there isn't any real indication that there will actually be a story. The second makes it hard to be sympathetic to the character, because...how do you sympathize with someone who's already so full of himself and his complaints?

With a first person narrator, the first thirteen lines should make it very clear what the story is going to be about, why the narrator is telling/writing the story in the first place. Also, you are under an additional constraint to look at everything and ask yourself "why would my character write that?" Because the reader will do that for sure. If the only apparent reason for the narrator to put a line in is to make an outright bid for pity or proclaim innocence or something like that, then the reader is almost certain to refuse to be "taken in". This is actually one of the strengths of first person fiction, but it is also a grave weakness if you don't exploit it correctly.

In this case, your narrator spends the first half page effectively telling us, "you probably don't like me and won't like my story." That may be accurate or not, the problem is that it is the wrong place in the story to make that point to the reader, unless you give us cause to disbelieve it. For instance, if your narrator were to say, "It's probably pointless for me to write about this, since nobody's going to read it." Then we would be sort of like "well, I'll show him."

It's a bit of a cheap trick, but it works remarkably well. The effectiveness wears off after a couple of pages, so by then you seriously want to have something interesting.

A bit of a related note, never turn to the audience and say, "I'm a talented writer." Don't do it with over-clever "writerisms", don't do it by slighting all non-writers/artists in your story, and certainly don't do it by turning to the audience, outside of the context of the story, and saying it flat out. The first two will affect the quality of your writing directly, writers who do that aren't talented, or at least they aren't using their talent. The last won't necessarily hurt your writing directly, but it will hurt your audience, both by hurting the individual people that like your writing and by shrinking the numbers of your audience as a whole. And even though it doesn't necessarily hurt your writing, taking that attitude does tend to limit a writer.

The first few sentemces are interesting enough, but from then on it seems like the narrator is rambling, talking to himself, and while this would interest me if I already knew the person, as an introduction it sounds slow. Perhaps some action, dialogue, description...just something to take us out of the narrator's soliloquy.

I advise you to rewrite your introduction and either move this fragment (because I think it is important to your story) to another location, or work the gist of it into your narrative in another way.

When you get to the part about women and their games, start right off with that.
Something like - I never understood women and their mind games, but I've learned enough to know that love is a ploy. If I care about a woman, I can never have her. My heart's been broken so many times that I'll never be able to trust any woman again.

And last but most important, I think your opening line is in your last paragraph where you say our lives mold us into the monsters we become. With that statement you make the reader curious to find out what kind of a monster you've become and what in your life caused that to happen to you.

Think about it as if you were building a boat and not a book. Imagine if someone came along and told you, "Say, boatmaker - I see a hole in your hull; you probably didn't even realize it was there." Once you examined the spot and came to the conclusion the observer was right, you would be grateful. It would be sad to take the boat out on the water, only to have it sink from a flaw you hadn't noticed.

The reality is that each and every one of us is myopic - we are emotionally attached to our writing, we are limited by our life experiences and we all have weak spots.

It's crucial to your growth as a writer learn to welcome critique and be grateful for them. You don't have to agree with the opinions, but a well-written critique will help you see your work with new eyes. You want to fix any flaws before launching your story in the shark-infested waters of publishing, don't you? Your critiquers are your best allies. They will help you polish your work to a shine.

You have this wonderful story in your head, but in order to recreate it in your reader's head, you have to try to put it on paper in the clumsy, imperfect words of a manuscript.

No collection of words on paper is going to be the perfect vehicle to convey your story to your readers. Words really are frustrating that way.

Critiquers look at those imperfect words and try to help you turn your manuscript into a less imperfect vehicle to convey your story.

Elan's analog of a boat is a good one, especially since a boat is a vehicle. It isn't the cargo (your story), it's the way you deliver your cargo to the reader.