This is a fantastic read for everybody. Really worth a few minutes of your time.

[www.huffingtonpost.com]

In Water for Elephants, gaslighting means throwing someone off a train to their death by their boss. (The book.)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2012 02:08AM by rawalice.

Good article. And that movie is still creepy all these years later.

I read the book, thought they just made that movie recently. No?

I realize I do this gaslighting myself (not the tossing employees from trains at the midnight hour, obviously. I hope obviously!) when I tell my parent friends that I consider wimpy disciplinarians that they are "way nicer than I am". I don't mean nicer, I really mean pushovers. Good to see my behavior written up in print like this, I'll take it more seriously from now on. If I really feel the need to criticize I should just do it if I can't swallow it, you know? Put up or shut up.

I didn't watch the movie. I think they did a terrible job at the very beginning. Feeling okay coco? I liked the book though.

What a strange article. I wouldn't call that gaslighting. I'd call it trickery. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but that article, what I read of it, sounds really chauvinistic. I've never seen that movie.

It's certainly a behavioral tactic I recognize from experience with a certain type of man. It's good to have a name to put to it, a definition. I felt like this when someone defined "strawman argument" to me too.

coco,

[www.imdb.com]

The plot is an extremely incisive depiction of manipulation. It goes beyond what rawalice calls "trickery," into actual breaking down of a person's will by demeaning deceit, which is what the HuffPo article writer is getting at. The more you demean someone's concerns and opinions, the more you convince them that their subjective responses aren't just abnormal, but insupportible, the less internal direction they have and the more vulnerable to external direction they become. The classic bad boy verbally abusive boyfriend is such a case. He doesn't necessarily yell or taunt; he dismisses and belittles, and bit by bit, dismantles the self image of his girlfriend and creates a void he can fill with whatever he wants. Or makes her crazy, as in the film.

Offering substantive criticism, by the way, is not the same thing, unless you are really trying to sow doubt about their own competence in the minds of the people you are criticizing, turning the screws of their own distrust of their judgment on them until they have no faith in themselves at all. I am having hard time imagining you doing that, coconuts

Men or women use slights, jabs, put downs as a way for the abuser to control their person of choice. No matter how you look at it or what you call it if one puts up with it all that happens it will escalate at some point. Recently happened to me and the best thing to do is to extricate yourself from that person and then take some time to evaluate oneself.

Something else I learned too, is that insincere flattery (this is very difficult to detect due to most of us having some ego) is another con by the abuser.

Tamukha has it right. And as for someone criticizing another I think that's a slippery slope also, and even if we are requested to be 'honest' by someone that could still be the wrong thing to do for them.

Love,
Prism

Oh, I know him well Tam. I dated him all through my 20's. Escalating madness.
What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger though so thank you, Universe, for that necessary lesson .

Insidious. [www.pagebypagebooks.com]

I totally recognize the inherent violence of that passive-aggressive and demeaning underhanded compliment of "You're so much nicer than me". I totally do. I won't say that sort of thing again, I'll be aware of the rising level of frustration in myself and the attempt to control and redirect my environment by bullying another parent into my idea of discipline. It's not my business and I don't have to have a hand in every situation I come across. Acceptance. Also letting go of the arrogant belief that I know what's best. My sort of parenting isn't the only way, it's just One way, maybe not even the best way. I could learn a thing or two from those more gentle parents, I'm sure.

Tam <3

Wow Tamukha, that assessment of that movie sounds just like my ex-husband.

Men and women will be much happier with each other if and when they stop placing so many expectations on each other.

interesting

an excellent opportunity for the individual that feels they are being undermined to take hold of the reins and decide that they won't gaslight themselves by pretending they are in a healthy normal relationship

I don't think that I fully understand what gaslighting is. What I mainly don't understand is why don't the victims just tell the gaslighter to shove off when they start gaslighting? Also, is the assumption that the gaslighter deliberately gaslights the gaslightee in a pre-meditated manner, or is it something that just happens? Are there actually people out there who are so deprived of better things to do that they plot to gaslight others simply for the sport of it? Also, if you date a bad boy, why be surprised when he's...bad? I've dated some bad girls in my time. After they proved to be as bad as advertised, I blamed myself for having bad (no pun intended) taste in women. Is it possible to gaslight someone by accusing them of gaslighting?

That's a bit simplistic though, no one is purely bad or purely good and assessing someone's badness/goodness when there are emotions involved is quite difficult. Also, take into account how women and men have been socialized to behave, the things we grow up expecting to do, to see in our partners, the image of behavior that's propagated by popular media. Men are a-holes, women hysterical shrews.
There is a certain level of expectation that keeps people from seeing something as truly unacceptable, it's considered "normal" and being sensitive to it (though of course we ARE because it feels rotten for all it's supposed normalcy) is unacceptable.
I know that when I was younger experience was all theory to me, the only living model I had was my parent's relationship (not good), what I saw on tv (not good), what my girlfriends were doing with their partners (not good). I had to muddle through relationships on my own and it was just that, a muddle. I was involved with someone who was often tender and kind, who valued certain things about me, who made me feel wanted and loved in many ways BUT he was also very undermining of my self-confidence, controlling, temperamental, volatile, very gradually and subtly alienated me from friends and family until I was so isolated that he was it and the idea of leaving him was nearly inconceivable. I was miserable a lot of the time and terrified of making it worse. I was afraid and didn't know how to handle it, it was easier and less terrifying to mentally sweep things under the carpet than fully acknowledge the danger and unpleasantness of the situation.

Anyhow, I went for counselling and amazingly enough, every single woman in that room described my relationship as her own. All the tricky little abusive things were nearly identical, we were "classic text-book". How does that happen? It's not like dudes take classes on how to crush a woman's self-esteem or women take classes on being victims. Either that behavior is inherent or it's entirely socially learned. I don't know which, I only know that it's rotten and until you've lived it yourself it's nearly impossible to understand. How could otherwise intelligent, compassionate, self-respecting women end up in situations like that? I sneaks up on you, at first it's just little things, easily dismissed, subtle so you think you're being too sensitive, over-reacting, and there is language directed at you to that effect helping to solidify that belief. And things escalate but slowly or interspersed with wonderful times (a "honeymoon period" so you think things are better. It always falls apart again, worse than the last time until it reaches crisis point and a woman leaves or she becomes seriously endangered. I'm not too proud to admit that police were involved in my case and even then I accepted apologies, promises, hearts and flowers and went back. I don't know where the strength to finally leave for good came from but thank goodness I didn't have children with him or I might still be there. Women in that situation have all my sympathy, I get it.

My thoughts on this are way too complex to articulate in the space of one message board comment, but here are a couple things:

I don't believe in marriage for free-spirited people. I believe that it threatens to strip us of our goodness and dignity. When you're young, it usually succeeds in doing that. I've been married and divorced and it was pretty ugly. I'm sure that she could say that I gaslighted her and I know that I could say that she tried the same on me. Neither of us intended to do anything like that. We were just young and had enough problems without trying to negotiate marriage. It led to mutual bad behavior. I'll also say that the cops came knocking on our door once too. They weren't in the least bit surprised to find that it was me with the black eye. I remember how humiliated I felt about a neighbor calling the cops because my wife was physically abusing me, a man. I told the cops this and they told me that a large percentage of their domestic abuse calls are in fact female to male. I then realized that female to male abuse never gets talked about because men are too embarrassed to talk about it. It goes against our macho training.

Real gaslighting, the deliberate, pre-meditated screwing of someone's mind, is a classic symptom of psychopathy. It's estimated that anywhere between 1 in 25 and 1 in 100 people are psychopaths. I believe that gaslighting often gets confused with the perfectly understandable results of bad relationships. If I disagree with someone and disagree with them a lot, even sometimes trying to convince them that I'm right and they're wrong, that doesn't mean that I'm gaslighting them. It just means that we have nothing in common and should tone down our relationship if not end it altogether. I am definitely guilty in my younger years of not knowing when to say goodbye. At a certain point you have to admit to yourself that the early magic is never coming back. The sooner the better. Then again, even if you become good at that, will they let you go?

The most recent incident of potentially real gaslighting behavior that I've seen occurred in raw foods. It happened when a female "guru" tried to belittle a former (also female) raw foodist and guru on her youtube channel by writing in the comments that she's become fat since she dropped veganism. The woman is not fat at all. Her tormentor deliberately tried to falsely alter her perspective on reality in order to persuade her to do something. It was an obvious attempt to belittle, humiliate, and control through sheer cruelty and dishonesty. She then tried to pass off her manipulation as concern. That's pure gaslighting right there.

Psychologists have been crying for years that Wall St. and Washington have been taken over by psychopaths. [www.bloomberg.com] It seems to be everywhere these days, raw included.

In the film, an unusually menacing[typically he's a tad effete, ha!] Charles Boyer gaslights Ingrid Bergman by limiting the deceit to one thing initially--"Oh, you are imagining the lights flickering, darling." The object, because it's a 40s period piece melodrama, is to drive her mad enough to have her committed so he can have his own way with their money, etc. It is premediated and the male character is definitely a sociopath, if not a psycopath. I think what the HuffPo guy is getting at is that, if you be psychologically normal, you must be aware that the remarks that you are making that you partner's anxieties or fears are imaginary is morally wrong if they're intended to undermine rather than soothe. And if you sense this, continuing this isn't necessarily proof of psychopathy, but unjust and destructive all the same, so cut it out.

I am thankful to have never found the bad boy attractive beyond about two hours time--true Scorpio, me! I am grateful to have that radar which engages upon meeting someone and says, this person is good and will treat you well, but this one, stay clear of. One of the benefits of born cynicism, I guess.

I think what the article suggests, and what you, HeavenHands are hinting at, is that clinical sociopathy is becoming normative--look at the wicked things certain political candidates stumping currently are saying--outrageous! Yet, no outrage meets them. And it is because something in our water or food or air or media is subtly but certainly hobbling the brain center responsible for empathy more and more. I have a very active anterior cingulate, but the guy standing next to me at CVS? Who knows? This goes beyond psychological gamesmanship between the sexes: It suggests that we are, almost all of us, one bad day away from creeping into our Bosnian neighbor's house and murdering them all . . .

Sorry about that, Prana, I know such thoughts bother you!

,,,,,,,,,,,



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2012 01:45AM by pborst.

Just curious. What do you consider to be the differences between socio and psychopaths. I've always understood that there are differences in the finer details but that they're typically used interchangeably to describe someone who has no empathy for others and who will do whatever it takes to attain self-gratification. There's little to no understanding or fear of consequences. A good example would be someone who dumps toxic waste in a water source with no concern for the environment or poisoning other people. As long as he or she gets paid, it's all good.

I don't understand the Bosnian neighbor comment either.

Tamukha Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the film, an unusually menacing Charles Boyer
> gaslights Ingrid Bergman by limiting the deceit to
> one thing initially--"Oh, you are imagining the
> lights flickering, darling." The object, because
> it's a 40s period piece melodrama, is to drive her
> mad enough to have her committed so he can have
> his own way with their money, etc. It is
> premediated and the male character is definitely a
> sociopath, if not a psycopath. I think what the
> HuffPo guy is getting at is that, if you be
> psychologically normal, you must be aware that the
> remarks that you are making that you partner's
> anxieties or fears are imaginary is morally wrong
> if they're intended to undermine rather than
> soothe. And if you sense this, continuing this
> isn't necessarily proof of psychopathy, but unjust
> and destructive all the same, so cut it out.
>
> I am thankful to have never found the bad boy
> attractive beyond about two hours time--true
> Scorpio, me! I am grateful to have that radar
> which engages upon meeting someone and says, this
> person is good and will treat you well, but this
> one, stay clear of. One of the benefits of born
> cynicism, I guess.
>
> I think what the article suggests, and what you,
> HeavenHands are hinting at, is that clinical
> sociopathy is becoming normative--look at the
> wicked things certain political candidates
> stumping currently are saying--outrageous! Yet,
> no outrage meets them. And it is because
> something in our water or food or air or media is
> subtly but certainly hobbling the brain center
> responsible for empathy more and more. I have a
> very active anterior cingulate, but the guy
> standing next to me at CVS? Who knows? This goes
> beyond psychological gamesmanship between the
> sexes: It suggests that we are, almost all of us,
> one bad day away from creeping into our Bosnian
> neighbor's house and murdering them all . . .
>
> Sorry about that, Prana, I know such thoughts
> bother you!

or think about the gaslighted. perhaps they're told they're crazy so many times they begin to believe it. jailed, experimented on, drugged, tormented. what would you suggest? done that already?

HeavenHands Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just curious. What do you consider to be the
> differences between socio and psychopaths.

I think a sociopath harms others where a psychopath harms himself. I know that's a simple way to look at it and may not be all right, but "modern psychology" just gets to the point of overanalysis that there's no understanding. But then you have to define harm, and who is the judge?
Traditionally, isn't psychopath just someone who acts unusually?

HeavenHands,

In psych class in college, we were taught that a sociopath is clinical(made) and a psychopath is organic(born). Because of this, the sociopath can understand what they are doing is wrong but no longer possesses remorse and empathy and thus does not care to alter his/her behavior. The psychopath is not capable of understanding things like ethics or mores for lack of the mechanisms of understanding, and does not therefore recognize their behavior as aberrant.

That was in the 90s, though, so the definitions may have changed. I know that they are used interchangeably now, but I have a hard time with this. I usually just use "sociopath" and modify it with either "clinical" or "organic" to indicate made-that-way or born-that-way.

The Bosnia thing refers to how, before that still elusive something--propaganda, economic scapegoating--occurred to send the Bosnian majority's amygdalas into hyperdrive, common Serb and Croat Christians lived harmoniously with their Serb and Croat Muslim countrymen. It is said that literally overnight, in the villages, a neighbor who had given his Muslim neighbors bread one day would without warning break into their house the next day and kill them all. Click.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2012 06:15PM by Tamukha.

The only place for me to go from here is a place that too closely resembles politics. Time to move on I guess.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2012 08:06PM by HeavenHands.

HeavenHands,

Your response is cryptic, so I'll just say I'm sorry if this caused a problem somehow.

No, not at all. My response would be that of an over-educated mind and it's definitely rooted in politics and that sort of thing. The rule says no politics. I want to respect that. That's it. Thanks for the discussion.

Tamukha Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HeavenHands,
>
> Your response is cryptic, so I'll just say I'm
> sorry if this caused a problem somehow.

Question: If someone never acknowledges the nice things I say but then publicly berates me over saying something negative and doesn't apologize when it comes to light that it was a misunderstanding, are they gaslighting me?

Gaslighting seems to be a confusing term, such like murder perhaps. What is a psychopath. Would you call someone starving so bad they ate their baby a psychopath or a right to lifer? And oh Tamukha, politics!! Even if youre just making stuff up, is a no no on the board, right? I admit, I forget sometimes too.

Anywasy, marriage is a tough one huh. "Let no man tear asunder, what God hath joined together," I don't think applies to horny teeneagers, or people who get married for the wrong reasons, or maybe it's just stupidity. Legal marriage at least.

Heaven Hands, you sound so sensitive. I hope you never let anyone demean or manipulate you in a bad way, and if that happenned (your last post) to you , I'd just say watch out, they sound like a b***h who may have evil intentions, or maybe they are just so busy that they don't know what to say or don't have the right platform. They probably in their heart of hearts have so much love for you, maybe they just forgot to say sorry. I'm sorry if you're going through something like that.

Thanks.

rawalice Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gaslighting seems to be a confusing term, such
> like murder perhaps. What is a psychopath. Would
> you call someone starving so bad they ate their
> baby a psychopath or a right to lifer? And oh
> Tamukha, politics!! Even if youre just making
> stuff up, is a no no on the board, right? I admit,
> I forget sometimes too.
>
> Anywasy, marriage is a tough one huh. "Let no man
> tear asunder, what God hath joined together," I
> don't think applies to horny teeneagers, or people
> who get married for the wrong reasons, or maybe
> it's just stupidity. Legal marriage at least.
>
> Heaven Hands, you sound so sensitive. I hope you
> never let anyone demean or manipulate you in a bad
> way, and if that happenned (your last post) to you
> , I'd just say watch out, they sound like a b***h
> who may have evil intentions, or maybe they are
> just so busy that they don't know what to say or
> don't have the right platform. They probably in
> their heart of hearts have so much love for you,
> maybe they just forgot to say sorry. I'm sorry if
> you're going through something like that.

sad
but there's hope

in awareness