Gaslighting

This post may seem too long but it takes only a few minutes to read:

Without a doubt, gaslighting is a form of abuse – it abuses a person’s trust and vulnerability. Although they do not necessarily have to be present, verbal and physical abuse may occasionally accompany the gaslighting experience. The term ‘gaslighting’ originates from a 1938 play called Gaslight, which became a popular film in 1944. In it, a husband makes numerous attempts to convince his wife that she is making up stories, hearing voices, misremembering events, and losing her mind. It is a very oppressive relationship. The dimming of gas lights represents an important clue in the story, hence the title of the play/film. It is also a powerful metaphor.

Here is a brief verbal exchange by the couple that illustrates the husband’s abuse:

Wife: It's so humiliating for me. That girl laughs at me enough as it is. (this is in response to a verbal threat her husband just made)

Husband: Oh nonsense, my dear. (i.e. immediately dismissing her feelings about the situation) You know perfectly well how you imagine things. (i.e. further adding fuel to the fire by bullying)

As the days go by, items in the house begin to disappear and the husband accuses his wife of stealing them or misplacing them. It soon becomes clear to the audience it is the husband who does that, not the wife, but she doesn’t know. Understandably she becomes defensive, at which point he calmly states that if she is not mad, then she must be mentally ill, and he shames her for it. There are many other examples in the storyline portraying manipulative tactics in this ‘marriage’ (it is actually not even a legal marriage but she doesn’t know that either).

To be sure, seen out of context, some of the husband’s actions can be interpreted as pro-social, relationship-strengthening. For example, he tells her she looks beautiful or asks her out to a live music event. He also uses terms of endearment, thereby seemingly displaying verbal affection. Yes, this is not uncommon for abusers. Gaslighters do have their good days too – they can indeed make pro-social choices at times, which only further confuses the receiver of the abuse.

In the film, these seemingly pro-social choices cover up the husband’s sinister intentions. For instance, when he asks his wife to attend a live music event, he actually masterminds a situation that humiliates her in public and further plummets her already-low self-esteem. Similarly, his terms of endearment (e.g. my dear) are not genuine expressions of verbal affection; they are well-calculated maneuvers to “soften the blow” and/or to cement his superiority over her.

Examples of gaslighting in everyday life:

#1: You are out with your friends and see a cute guy you like. You start thinking of how to go talk to him or invite him to come talk to you. All of a sudden, one of your friends interrupts your train of thought:

“Hey, we are leaving right now, going to [this other place]. Come on! The Uber is outside.”

“But I want to stay and talk to that cute guy over there.”

“That one?! OMG, he’s not even tall. Not worth it, come on!”

#2: You got accepted into a PhD program and you feel excited about it. You can’t wait to start the semester! However, your parent reacts with:

“Honey, I love you, but you can do so much better than that. You can be a real doctor! Why don’t you become a brain surgeon, sweetie?”

#3: You are dating a guy who dismisses your thoughts, feelings, and opinions. Allegedly, he has been working on these bad habits with his therapist (or you and him attend couples therapy jointly). One evening, you are out on date together and you are enjoying your time with him. You finally start to “see the light”. But then he looks at his phone:
“Oh! This is Nick and Joe. Look, they are at [this cool place] just a few blocks away from here. Come on, let’s go! It’s so much better than being here. You’ll love it. Let’s go!”

#4: You are dating a guy who dismisses your thoughts, feelings, and opinions. Allegedly, he has been working on these bad habits with his therapist (or you and him attend couples therapy jointly). One time, you and him are hanging out with your friends. Finally! You are starting to “see the light”. Maybe therapy is helpful, after all. Then he looks at his phone:

“Look! Nick and Joe are at [this cool place] just a few blocks away. Let’s go meet them.”

“But, we are here with my friends. We agreed tonight will be my turn to hang out with my friends. They were excited to meet you.”

“Well, they met me. We’ve already been here for an hour. There’s nothing to do here. It’s boring. Nick and Joe are at [this cool place] that’s so much better. You’re gonna love it! I promise.”

Quick caveat here - the boyfriend in these examples does not have to be yelling or using verbal threats for the gaslighting to occur. The abuse can still happen even if terms of endearment are used (which may become an example of patronizing).

#5: You just got offered a summer job and feel excited that you will save a good chunk of money for your backpacking trip abroad (Europe, South America, Asia, etc.). You can’t wait for the next 6 weeks to go by and you already see yourself hiking the trails after your summer job. However, your parent reacts with:
“Sweetie, this is not a good decision. You need to start thinking like an adult! Why don’t you save this money and invest it or pay for college?”

“But it’s only a couple of thousand dollars. I can take a student loan for that or work on campus during the semester to make up for it. The trip abroad is so much better because...”

“Yeah, yeah, yeah...I’ve heard it already. See, that’s what I’m saying. You’re not listening! You need to listen! You still think like a child. You can’t handle responsibilities like an adult. I can’t believe you are in college already and you still think like this...”

#6: You have a crush on this guy and feel excited that he asked you out. You share your excitement and feelings of love with your friends. They say,

“Ugh, he’s definitely a player! You can see that from a mile away. How can you not see that?! He won’t even remember your name next week. Trust me, you don’t know, you’re blinded.”

At this point, some readers might wonder, “Well, is everyone supposed to agree with me all the time then?! Are people supposed to make every wish of mine come true?!” No, not really. Disagreement, by itself, is not abusive. It is ok to be different. What creates the problems in the aforementioned examples is not the disagreement as much as it is the dismissiveness, manipulation, shaming, guilt-tripping, humiliation, exclusion, and omission of truth.

More specifically, in the examples with the romantic couple, they had an agreement on what to do together. First, the boyfriend sharply changed the agreement to suit his own wishes without consulting with his partner. Secondly, he was dismissive of the feelings and wishes of his partner even after she expressed herself. No matter what, he was going to actualize his agenda. The initial agreement to go hang out with the girlfriend’s friends was probably just a smokescreen or a disingenuous attempt to repair the relationship. His true colors were quickly exposed. Such an approach most likely threw the girlfriend off into a series of self-doubts, passivity, and compliance. In fact, if she had reacted with annoyance or frustration in those scenarios, that would have been a healthier reaction (because it would have symbolized a refusal to accept the abusive circumstance).

Similarly, in the example with the college student and their parent — the parent was dismissive of the wishes and feelings of the child. There was no affirmation or validation of the college student’s viewpoint. “And why would there be – that is not important, right!”

The same explanation holds true for the examples with the friends. Our protagonist developed feelings for another person but was instantly shut down, told they didn’t know what they were feeling, and had to comply with the agenda of others. Whoever requested the Uber ride did not consult with our protagonist; they were ignored and excluded from the decision-making process. If our protagonist was an important part of the group, why were they not reckoned with?!

Therefore, potential conclusions the gaslit person might reach in all of these examples, whether consciously or not, include “My feelings are not important”, “I am not important”, “What I think I feel is not what I actually feel or should feel”, or “I don’t know what is good for me.” If gaslighting experiences happen rarely, the consequences may be less impactful. However, if they become more frequent and cemented, the receiver of the gaslighting tactics will begin to doubt themselves on a regular basis and assume what they think, wish, or feel is not important (or not real). Then they are one step closer to feelings of worthlessness, self-doubt, uncertainty, and insecurity. At that point, because they rarely trust their own inner world, the gaslit person might develop a tendency to look up to the external world regarding what to feel, think, or wish for (e.g. social media) and may fully embrace those external standards at the detriment of their own inner self. If, God forbid, they make a mistake, underperform, or fail (which all humans do anyway), our protagonist might use this mishap as evidence that their partners, caregivers, friends, parents, etc. were indeed right about them. Hence when gaslighting is chronic, the receiver of it begins to abuse themselves even in the absence of external abuse. Unfortunately, even though Gaslight is a fictional literary work, these interpersonal dynamics represent the everyday reality for many, many people in real life.

Lastly, besides feelings, thoughts, and wishes; gaslighting can also lead the person to question their own memories:

- What are you talking about? - says the gaslighting person.

Then you proceed to explain the event as you remember it, and the gaslighting person convinces you that (1) this is definitely not how the event occurred, (2) that you have misinterpreted, and (3) you should feel bad about this. It is possible to deliver the first two points in a healthy way, but it is the addition of the third point that breaks the camel’s back. This may be a feeling of embarrassment, shame, guilt, humiliation, ostracization, self-doubt, or oppression. Depending on the frequency and severity, you may stop trusting your own memory or reasoning skills altogether:

- Maybe my memory is indeed failing me. Maybe my conclusion is indeed unreasonable.

It is unnerving to realize that these interpersonal dynamics are actually quite common. In some families, communities, or cultures; they might even be considered the norm! As such, many gaslighters are not even aware of the toxicity they breed. They may even be good people, but at the end of the day, you don’t want to become someone’s eternal punching bag, no matter who they may be.

Truth or Lies

Agatha Christie holds the Guinness World Records for the best-selling fiction writer of all time (having sold over two billion copies) and the most translated author in the world! Hers is also the thickest book ever published, being over 4000 pages long and weighing 17.6 lbs! She was definitely a force to be reckoned with. The following excerpt from one of her books, Elephants Can Remember, reminded me of a very critical aspect of psychotherapy:

- I will bring to light the truth and if it is...truly the truth that you want, then I will deliver that knowledge to you. But it may be that you want reassuring. That is not the same thing as the truth.

- You don’t think I’d care for the truth, is that it?

- I think that the truth might be a shock, a sorrow, and it might be that you would have said, “Why did I ask for knowledge? It is painful knowledge about which I can do nothing helpful.”

People may seek knowledge and understanding on their quest to find the truth about that which bothers them – e.g. anxiety, disrupted relationships, low self-esteem, or an unlived potentiality. Truths that we form of ourselves are called self-concepts; they are an integral part of our self-identity. “Once formed, self-views give people a powerful sense of coherence and a related ability to predict and control their worlds” (North & Swann, 2009, p.131).

But the truth may sometimes be inconvenient, perhaps even more bothersome than not knowing it. And, so, intentionally or unintentionally, people frequently arrange their circumstances in such a way that these self-views are maintained – positive feedback about positive self-concepts and negative feedback about negative self-concepts. Social Psychology has a lot to say on this matter with research in confirmation bias (Moskowitz, 2005), self-verification theory (North & Swann, 2009), and self-enhancement theory (Katz, Arias, & Beach, 2000).

References:

Katz, J., Arias, I. & Beach, S.R.H. (2000). Psychological abuse, self-esteem, and women’s dating relationship outcomes: A comparison of the self-verification and self-enhancement perspectives. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 349-357.

Moskowitz, G.B. (2005). Social cognition: Understanding self and others. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

North, R.J. & Swann Jr., W.B. (2009). Self-verification 360: Illuminating the light and dark sides. Self and Identity, 8, 131-146.

Characteristics of Happy People

Have you ever wondered why some people seem to be happy much more frequently than others despite the similarity of circumstances they both experience? To be sure, there are folks who put up a facade of positivity and fake happiness, but that is disingenuous and only goes so far before the truth is revealed.

Emotions expert, Paul Rasmussen, writes in The Quest to Feel Good that happiness is an emotion indicating enhancement, a state of a subjectively felt plus. This characteristic of happiness differentiates it from most other emotions – those that ensure protection or the avoidance of pain. A second property of happiness is being a conjunctive emotion – one that brings people together, an emotion of affiliation. “Because happiness is a conjunctive emotion – writes Rasmussen – people are drawn to the happy person.” Intriguingly enough, however, happiness comes at a price. “While having people drawn to you might sound like a positive outcome, the fact is that those people often have expectations for the person [they perceive to be happy]. In addition, when one displays happy, conjunctive emotions, that individual is essentially signaling to others that they are available for others to make requests and demands.”

Yet despite costing a price, happiness does remain a rewarding emotion. Psychology research has revealed some specific differences between individuals who are generally happy and those who usually aren't. In an article published in the American Psychologist, Sonja Lyubomirsky attempts to identify several major habits that single out happy people from the rest of the crowd.

Social comparison: Happy folks are less sensitive to social comparison. They are more likely to feel sympathetic when their peers experience a failure and to be excited when those same peers achieve success. In a sense, then, they do not feel threatened by the happiness of others nor relieved by the misfortunes of those same others. Hence, don't expend time and energy monitoring how and if others are failing so that you can feel reassured that you are doing ok.

Events construal: This is very important – in one experiment, both happy and unhappy participants reported experiencing similar positive and negative events. However, when they were interviewed several weeks later, those who were typically cheerful remembered both the positive and the negative aspects of their events more favorably. They had used those events to learn important lessons, had adapted more successfully, had used humor to cope with minor adversities, and had done something to improve the situation. Happy individuals did not dwell on bad or complicated events as much. Yes, they still acknowledged them but tended to learn a lesson from the experience and move on more quickly as opposed to constantly brooding over the event and feeling stuck. Additionally, those folks were more inclined to like the same stranger that unhappy individuals rejected and to describe that stranger in pleasant ways. As Lyubomirsky sums this up, “When such perceptions and experiences are repeated over a lifetime, happy and unhappy people may be able to preserve their happiness and unhappiness, respectively” and thus make it a permanent feature of their personality.

Postdecisional rationalization: Unhappy individuals were dissatisfied with their options – they evaluated what they chose or received as mediocre and considered what they didn't choose or receive as even worse. In contrast, cheerful individuals were satisfied about all of their presented options, regardless of what they ended up choosing or receiving. The only exception to this finding was options that threatened their sense of worth, such as colleges that rejected them (#foodforthought).

Goals: The goals happy participants chose were realistic, intrinsically meaningful, consistent with their personal values, culturally appropriate, and success-focused (as opposed to failure-focused). Indeed, when goals meet these criteria, they lead to a more intentional, purposeful living; one feels more spiritually and existentially connected and more present in the moment.

Despite the depth and breadth of this research, however, this comparison between happy and unhappy participants may not be all-encompassing. There may be other differences between happy and unhappy folks that do not fit these four categories of mental life. As one person with severe mental illness said, “Sometimes, just having a can of soda in your hand can make you happy.”

So, there you have it – some major differences to be on the lookout for as we go about our everyday life. Merry happying!

References

Lyubomirsky, S. (2001). Why are some people happier than others: The role of cognitive and motivational processes in well-being. American Psychologist, 56, 239-249 DOI 1O.1O37//0OO3-O66X.56.3.239

Rasmussen, P.R. (2010). The quest to feel good. New York: Routledge.

Going beyond the surface

I was just reading “While Mortals Sleep” by Kurt Vonnegut and stumbled upon the following quote:

“It came to me all in a flash that Verne Petrie was what was wrong with the world....Everybody pays attention to pictures of things. Nobody pays attention to things themselves” (p. 44).

Although this quote juxtaposes two extremes (as exemplified by the words “everybody” and “nobody”) illustrating black-and-white thinking, and I don't agree the situation is that severe, it is nevertheless still a very, very good point. Written at a time when smartphones did not exist and the Internet was merely in its infancy, these words speak so much more loudly today. It is true that visuals play a critical role in communicating meaning and in understanding the world around us. After all, the sense of vision provides more information of outside data coming into the brain than all other senses combined. The way I understand this quote, however, is that it cautions us not to get carried away so much that we forget to pay attention to the essence of the things we see. We are talking here not only about visuals of inanimate objects but also, and more importantly, visuals of people – and this is where the quote rings home to me.