Our partner

Gaslighting

Borderline Personality Disorder message board, open discussion, and online support group.

Moderator: lilyfairy

Re: Gaslighting

Postby MotherRussia » Sun Jun 12, 2016 5:05 pm

I think of Gaslighting as part of a grander, Machiavellian scheme to sabotoge someone.

Its usually planned out and orchestrated, occurs over a long period of time. The goal is usually to gain control and power over the victim, make them doubt their own perceptions, so they can then be easily controlled and manipulated, sabotoged, or influenced to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do.
MotherRussia
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2016 1:33 am
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 11:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


ADVERTISEMENT

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Philonoe » Sun Jun 12, 2016 6:07 pm

I don't know if i'm in denial, but in the cases where i experienced (very destabilising) gaslighting, I'm still not sure it was consciously on purpose.

I mean : yes, it was sort of plan. But was the person aware? I was probably, for some reason, a threat for them. I guess, they probably considered themselves victim, not abuser.

MotherRussia : the person in the car, was it a plan? If they were so convinced of what they said, to the point that they could convince you, isn't it because they truly believed it, in a way?




But maybe it doesn't matter. What matters is to protect onself.



(sorry for the mistakes in english)
Philonoe
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:32 pm
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 7:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby MotherRussia » Sun Jun 12, 2016 6:22 pm

Philonoe wrote:I don't know if i'm in denial, but in the cases where i experienced (very destabilising) gaslighting, I'm still not sure it was consciously on purpose.

I mean : yes, it was sort of plan. But was the person aware? I was probably, for some reason, a threat for them. I guess, they probably considered themselves victim, not abuser.

MotherRussia : the person in the car, was it a plan? If they were so convinced of what they said, to the point that they could convince you, isn't it because they truly believed it, in a way?



(sorry for the mistakes in english)


Very good points and good questions. :)

With the person in the car, of course I can't read their mind or know for sure what they were thinking. I can only guess at their intentions. But within the context of our relationship, it was an abusive relationship and they definitely wanted to get control and domination over me.

So putting the pieces of the puzzle together, I think they were playing some mind game with me, and there were other similar things that happened in the relationship that were confusing and disorienting.

Its hard to know for sure when its happening and when we just think its happening, though. That's why its so damaging.
MotherRussia
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2016 1:33 am
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 11:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Philonoe » Sun Jun 12, 2016 6:25 pm

MotherRussia wrote:Its hard to know for sure when its happening and when we just think its happening, though. That's why its so damaging.


Yes.
Philonoe
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:32 pm
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 7:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Purple 8 » Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Jasmer wrote:This is where I don't know if what I do qualifies as gaslighting. My memory of events is typically fine, but I will still deny the reality of those events, insist something else happened, to try to make myself right and the other person wrong.

You try to twist their reality. That's gaslighting.
Purple 8
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:50 pm
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 2:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Purple 8 » Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:53 pm

MotherRussia wrote:I think of Gaslighting as part of a grander, Machiavellian scheme to sabotoge someone.

Gaslighting is simply the intent of trying to twist the truth to your own advantage and attempting to make another person doubt their own perception of the events. Motives don't define gaslighting; intent does.

Its usually planned out and orchestrated, occurs over a long period of time. The goal is usually to gain control and power over the victim, make them doubt their own perceptions, so they can then be easily controlled and manipulated, sabotoged, or influenced to do things they wouldn't ordinarily do.

No, not usually. Usually it's only sociopaths that are that diabolical, or someone who feels that they're in a very desperate situation.

-- Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:57 am --

Philonoe wrote:I don't know if i'm in denial, but in the cases where i experienced (very destabilising) gaslighting, I'm still not sure it was consciously on purpose.

That's what makes gaslighting so dangerous. Most people don't want to think that the person they're dealing with is trying to harm them, so they look for any other explanation.
Purple 8
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:50 pm
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 2:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Jasmer » Tue Jun 14, 2016 4:04 pm

Purple 8 wrote:That's what makes gaslighting so dangerous. Most people don't want to think that the person they're dealing with is trying to harm them, so they look for any other explanation.

But that's the thing, I'm not trying to harm somebody, I'm just avoiding taking responsibility for something I said or did. Often because it makes me look bad.

...Yeah, it does sound kind of bad when I actually read it :lol:
Dx: NPD, PTSD
Jasmer
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1227
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 1:28 am
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 11:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Purple 8 » Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:08 pm

To further illustrate the difference between gaslighting and behaviors that aren't gaslighting...

In an argument or conflict, there are absolutely situations where someone’s sensitivity can be at issue. And expecting someone to “address the issue” or otherwise be guilty of abuse is absurd, because “addressing the issue” is something distinctly in the realm of the collegiate; the educated. It relies on at least some implicit understanding of informal logic to understand what “the issue” is. Most people don’t know the precise distinctions between premise, conclusion, and proposition; most people don’t understand how to attack the main point of an argument, in fact. This is true with or without emotions. Most people focus on motive at expense of the point. This is something typical of the general population, not an abusive relationship.

Don’t get me wrong: it would be great if most people understood logic so well that avoiding the point qualified as abuse, but unfortunately that is not the case. A simple instance of ad hominem circumstantial, more easily understood as “motive fallacy”, is not psychological abuse. Nor is it psychological abuse to tell them that they don’t get a joke, or that they’re crazy, or that they’re being too sensitive.

If you wish to apply gaslighting to a set of behaviors, simply discrediting someone’s emotions doesn’t qualify as gaslighting. The litmus test for gaslighting by all authoritative definitions has been a dishonest and manipulative attempt to deny reality to the person on the receiving end of gaslighting. So, for example, an attempt to make that person believe that actions which most certainly happened haven’t actually happened. You can understand how some people would get the impression that calling someone crazy qualifies as this, because someone could say “you’re crazy, that never happened” — but merely telling someone they are being dramatic does not qualify as abuse, in any way, nor does telling someone they are being too sensitive qualify as abuse on its own.

Some examples:

Actual gaslighting: A wife witnesses her husband cheating on her. He starts an ongoing campaign to make her believe this event was false and that her perception of reality is incorrect. “No, you’re crazy.” When she insists that she saw what she saw, he retorts with “why are you being so emotional?”

Not gaslighting: A husband repeatedly tells jokes that offend his wife. “Why are you being so sensitive?”, he asks. “You take offense to things way too easily.” She starts to doubt her own judgment — but not because of any abusive reason.

Actual gaslighting: A boyfriend and girlfriend are having an intense argument when he hits her repeatedly. Several days later, she calls the police, but there is no proof. He insists that she is delusional to the police. When she confronts him about this in private, he insists that she imagined it, and repeatedly calls her crazy for recalling the event. She begins to doubt her own memory.

Not gaslighting: James is dating Rebecca, whose political ideology he opposes. James frequently comments on Rebecca’s articles with dramatic and overblown emotional language. Rebecca insists that he’s being overly emotional, and that he should stop doing that. He says she’s trying to diminish the importance of his point by gaslighting him.

Actual gaslighting: A son witnesses his mom snorting meth in the pantry, when he previously did not know his mom did drugs at all. Since this event is so anomalous, he has a hard time believing it. She insists that he imagined it — she was just dusting the pantry. But since this image was so vivid, he insists he believed it. She starts to discredit his statement, saying that he is delusional, that he is too emotional, and that he doesn’t have a grip on reality. He begins to doubt his own sense of reality and she uses this as a basis for additional lies.
Purple 8
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 8:50 pm
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 2:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby MotherRussia » Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:47 pm

Purple 8 wrote:To further illustrate the difference between gaslighting and behaviors that aren't gaslighting...

In an argument or conflict, there are absolutely situations where someone’s sensitivity can be at issue. And expecting someone to “address the issue” or otherwise be guilty of abuse is absurd, because “addressing the issue” is something distinctly in the realm of the collegiate; the educated. It relies on at least some implicit understanding of informal logic to understand what “the issue” is. Most people don’t know the precise distinctions between premise, conclusion, and proposition; most people don’t understand how to attack the main point of an argument, in fact. This is true with or without emotions. Most people focus on motive at expense of the point. This is something typical of the general population, not an abusive relationship.

Don’t get me wrong: it would be great if most people understood logic so well that avoiding the point qualified as abuse, but unfortunately that is not the case. A simple instance of ad hominem circumstantial, more easily understood as “motive fallacy”, is not psychological abuse. Nor is it psychological abuse to tell them that they don’t get a joke, or that they’re crazy, or that they’re being too sensitive.

If you wish to apply gaslighting to a set of behaviors, simply discrediting someone’s emotions doesn’t qualify as gaslighting. The litmus test for gaslighting by all authoritative definitions has been a dishonest and manipulative attempt to deny reality to the person on the receiving end of gaslighting. So, for example, an attempt to make that person believe that actions which most certainly happened haven’t actually happened. You can understand how some people would get the impression that calling someone crazy qualifies as this, because someone could say “you’re crazy, that never happened” — but merely telling someone they are being dramatic does not qualify as abuse, in any way, nor does telling someone they are being too sensitive qualify as abuse on its own.

Some examples:

Actual gaslighting: A wife witnesses her husband cheating on her. He starts an ongoing campaign to make her believe this event was false and that her perception of reality is incorrect. “No, you’re crazy.” When she insists that she saw what she saw, he retorts with “why are you being so emotional?”

Not gaslighting: A husband repeatedly tells jokes that offend his wife. “Why are you being so sensitive?”, he asks. “You take offense to things way too easily.” She starts to doubt her own judgment — but not because of any abusive reason.

Actual gaslighting: A boyfriend and girlfriend are having an intense argument when he hits her repeatedly. Several days later, she calls the police, but there is no proof. He insists that she is delusional to the police. When she confronts him about this in private, he insists that she imagined it, and repeatedly calls her crazy for recalling the event. She begins to doubt her own memory.

Not gaslighting: James is dating Rebecca, whose political ideology he opposes. James frequently comments on Rebecca’s articles with dramatic and overblown emotional language. Rebecca insists that he’s being overly emotional, and that he should stop doing that. He says she’s trying to diminish the importance of his point by gaslighting him.

Actual gaslighting: A son witnesses his mom snorting meth in the pantry, when he previously did not know his mom did drugs at all. Since this event is so anomalous, he has a hard time believing it. She insists that he imagined it — she was just dusting the pantry. But since this image was so vivid, he insists he believed it. She starts to discredit his statement, saying that he is delusional, that he is too emotional, and that he doesn’t have a grip on reality. He begins to doubt his own sense of reality and she uses this as a basis for additional lies.


I think this is a good argument, and I think a key point is that gaslighting will work best on people who already doubt their own perceptions. So borderlines would be a good target, since BPD is known to have instability in image and perception, as it is. As well as a susceptiblity to paranoia, which can be capitalised upon by an opportunistic gaslighter.

As Purple said, its about distorting a person's sense of reality. Not necessarily directly invalidating and attacking them or their perceptions, but more a subtle distortion of their perception of reality.

I.e.....I miss an important appointment, and the person insists they told me. If I don't remember, "I must have forgotten....how careless of me," etc. And if I'm a person who easily takes blame for things and doubts myself, I can easily fall into the trap of believing I must have forgotten, etc. Then, that person can capitalize on that in the future...while secretly gaining some sense of power, or even some actual material gain at my benefit, because of my self-doubt and my willingness to believe I'm in the wrong and to doubt my perceptions.

Its a very toxic and damaging thing.
MotherRussia
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2016 1:33 am
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 11:43 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Gaslighting

Postby Philonoe » Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:47 am

It can be about facts. In my mind, it can be about intentions too : "i do it for you" (and the "it" is destructive")

or "i do it because of you" (instead of taking responsibility for their choices)


I don't know if call it gaslighting, or is there an other word?
Philonoe
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:32 pm
Local time: Mon Jul 14, 2025 7:43 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Borderline Personality Disorder Forum




  • Related articles
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests