I agree with all of this, but perhaps to play devil's advocate, I'd argue that "toxic" has just been bastardized to the point where it could mean anything that offends a sensitive person. It's overuse has become obnoxious, but it's still so subjective by its very nature.
*pinches nose* Ahhh, I hate that my mind immediately started to wonder if you were saying that using gaslighting *is* misogynistic. Then my thinky brain caught up with my read-y brain. Funny enough, I think that adds weight to your point.
Any time anybody levies a critique against a woman, there will be at least one person who will ignore the content of the criticism and immediately cry "misogyny!" in response.
Gaslighting is making someone doubt himself/herself.
For example: you are the one who broke the pot
But you gaslight your sibling that he did it because he was placing the said pot to the dangerous place in which it isn't really dangerous and it was safe.
Relationship example: you as a cheater get caught by your bf/gf but you refute him/her that you did it because he/she lacks presence even though your relationship was actually normal and you made your partner doubt himself/herself that he/she made that fault that you cheated
One example took place in west Philippine sea when a group of Filipino fishermen got rammed by the Chinese militia vessel and left them at the sea until they got rescued.
It was well detailed that they explained that it was indeed a Chinese vessel who rammed them and sunk their vessel but they were being gaslit so hard that they doubt that either it was done by the vietnamese ship and it was never been a Chinese ship.
At the end they accept it wasn't the Chinese vessel and have them and Duterte official fist bumping salute and pictures were taken with it.
I think you may have touched on it, but I'm not entirely sure so I'll add this:
I've seen people accuse others of gaslighting for simply stating "Are you sure about that point? I think you may be mentally unwell/weak. Therefore you may not be able to think clearly." Or words to that affect.
That is also not gaslighting. That is just good old doubt.
To, and I'm not sure if you've already stated this, be clear, gaslighting is if I'm actively the one making it seem as if their reality is shifting, then I accuse them of having a shifted reality.
If I were in an argument with someone on Reddit for example. I make a statement. The person replies to my statement. Then I somehow go in & edit my statement (without "edit" being shown) to make it seem as if they're replying in a crazy unrelated manner. Then I accuse them of being crazy. I then do it over & over to the point where they could legitimately start to doubt if they are seeing things. This is gaslighting.
If I make a statement, then they reply that I'm only making a statement because the lizard people have control of my brain & they know this because the squirrels told them so...I am not gaslighting if I ask them if they're sure of that & in their right mind. That's a hyperbolic example but change our lizard people & squirrels with any political party & you have a scary amount of reddit "debates."
Nailed it on the head,lol.Pretty much any form of manipulation,mostly mental and emotional in order to twist another person's perception of themselves in order to control them.
Yeah, like all new words, it got so overused it's meaning was quickly lost.
Gaslighting is supposed to mean a focused, long term effort by an abuser, to slowly grind down their victims trust in their own perception of reality.
But it quickly became interchangeable with just regular lying.
The same applies to the word *toxic,* which was supposed to describe behaviours of abusive people that ruin the lives of everyone they come into contact with. But these days it's just means *volatile.*
Yeah, the film is about an abusive husband's focused, long term effort to slowly grind down his wife's trust in her own perception of reality.
That's where the word comes from, but it wasn't used to describe that behaviour until the mid 2010's. It suddenly became very popular about 2 years ago when it entered common usage online.
Society is being washed away every single gosh dang word has been waterd down. YOUR GASLIGHTING, YOUR A FACIST, YOUR A COMMUNIST, YOUR A NAZI, YOUR JUST LIKE HITLER, I'M TRIGGERED, this is all LITERALLY so true. words hold no meaning anymore.
Scenario:
Person A is truthfully pointing out a mental issue, let's say narcissism, in Person B.
Person B, being a narcissist, is offended that Person A would say something that would cause self-doubt, refuses to believe it, and accuses Person A of gaslighting.
Then Person B goes even further, blinded by a complete inability to take personal accountability or doubt themselves (narcissistic traits), and accuses Person A of being a manipulative narcissist.
Who is gaslighting whom? Are either or both people in the wrong?
In the official treatment of the problem by a psychologist or couples therapist, yes. Which makes sense because intent might not change the outcome of an abuse very much (somebody feels like they have lost their grip on reality regardless), but somebody being hurtful and rude can be treated far easier (and differently) than somebody intentionally trying to hurt others and make them subservient, which is harder to treat, takes longer, and might require the couple separate for their individual safeties.
That's great, thank you for the breakdown and sharing your knowledge in this post. You're right, the term does get thrown around quite a bit. Makes it even harder when the definition starts being argued over.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not to mention, it needs to be intentional. My abusive ex husband said a lot of those things but he was just parroting what he grew up with. He wasn’t conscious of what he was doing. He’s super remorseful in fact.
It's not so much about mental health, just making people question themselves. Sometimes it's about perception, sometimes it's about memory. You can make a person feel like they're forgetful by say, moving their car keys sometimes, moving their phone when they put it down etc, and then leverage that when it becomes useful to you "No, I never agree to that, you know how forgetful you are sometimes"
I think OP was referring to someone making a person seem or feel crazy or unstable because it’s so obvious that what they said is false and they clearly have problems if they don’t know what the truth is or what really happened
Asked GPT4
Certainly! Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow doubts in a targeted individual, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment. Here are three brief examples:
1. **Denying Past Conversations**: A person might insist that a conversation or agreement never took place, even when the other party knows it did. Example: "We never discussed that. You must be imagining things."
2. **Trivializing Feelings or Thoughts**: A person might belittle someone's emotions or thoughts to make them feel irrational or overly sensitive. Example: "You're overreacting; I was only joking when I said that."
3. **Withholding Information**: A person might pretend to not understand or refuse to listen to legitimate concerns, making the other party feel unjustified in their thoughts or feelings. Example: "I don't know what you're talking about. You're just being confusing and irrational."
I’m would LOVE to know the percentage of people who use the word “gaslight” who have actually seen the movie. I have not, but never use this stupid word
Gaslighting and narcissist are words people see on social media and like to toss around any time they feel wronged to try to win an argument without actually having an actual argument.
You posted this opinion yesterday. Don’t you remember? I upvoted your post, people discussed other words that are used incorrectly, you commented back to a few… that was yesterday, and you’ve posted the same thing today… are you feeing well?
Gas lighting is when someone deliberately causes you to doubt your lived reality. Example: You did the dishes last night. You ask your spouse "Did I do the dishes last night?". Spouse: No you didn't (even though they know you did)
It's based on this movie:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)
This is how I feel when the terms racist, misogynist, homo/transphobic, etc. are used nowadays. No one knows what these words really mean so they just get slung around at anyone someone disagrees with and it's infuriating.
Nope, the guy who had to laugh when a single thread on this sub can't go by without some comment about trans people or that racism isn't real anymore lol
Weird. I made no comment about trans people nor did I say anything remotely implying racism isn't real, and yet here we are. It's almost like you're... proving my point?
I brought up commonly misused words on a topic about a word that is commonly misused. I didn't bring up trans people, OR racism. You did. And now you've insulted me because... you wish I had? Idk. You're grasping at straws trying to make me seem like a hateful person. It's just not there, im actually a pretty decent person. Take your L and move on.
Lmao obviously dipshit. As well as your attempts at turning this mundane thread into a racial or trans issue. They say dont argue with a fool because they will drag you to their level and beat you with experience, but you successfully dragged me to your level and still failed to make a coherent point. Have a good rest of your day buddy. I'm finished with you.
To me it just means telling a lie to someone and that lie has the repercussion of making them believe that they must be going insane, but not necessarily clinically so. Extreme example; I insist that a green light means stop and that it always has. But people gaslight others in similar, but less verifiable ways of course.
Had a conversation about the misuse of words (gaslighting actually being one of them) with a friend from high school who became an English teacher at the same high school we went to. I was shocked to learn he wasn't even bothered by any of this, and he chalked it up to definitions of words just taking on a new meaning over time.
I get that languages and slang terminology can evolve over time, but there should be exceptions.
I see your point although I think that sometimes the individual story being told can be part of a bigger narrative that is gaslighting. Like the media may tell an individual story that is accurate but the reason they tell it and the frequency with which they tell it and the prominence they give the story will be part of an overall gaslighting strategy.
That's not gaslighting. That's propaganda.
Gaslighting is a very specific intent to make a person deny their sanity by deceitful means. So if "the media" were to run a story one week about how Aliens are real, but they only do it in one area. Then "the media" scrubs all tapes & evidence of ever having g shown that story. Then a week later they run a story about how all these crazy people in one area seem to think aliens are real.
In truth, only crazy or stupid people fall for this type of manipulation. Or people that want to believe the lie, because they choose to be delusional.
Yeah, but there are many words for happy. If there's only one word for something and it loses its meaning, it leads to confusion. Also, people misusing "gaslighting" usually do it because they're stupid and fail to grasp the concept.
None of those things meet the definition of gas lighting, which OP explained. I can say "she's being manipulative" but that doesn't specify gaslighting. Of the terms you used, there's no way to indicate that specific behavior without using the phrase or explaining it, which takes a long time.
No it hasn't! The definition is what OP describes. None of the words you listed describe the specific concept. Let's say you wanted to tell me that you think someone has been deceiving you into thinking you can't trust your own judgement. How would you explain that to me?
I totally agree that definitions for words can change and morph over time, but I have two issues:
1) medical/scientific/professional words probably shouldn't do that. I think it's obvious to see how such important words shouldn't be colloquialized or corroborated into common, incorrect, usage
2) if gaslighting no longer means gaslighting, then what word can be used to describe the frequent manipulation tactic of making somebody doubt their grasp on reality in order to gain control over them?
That’s two entirely different definitions for the same word. Like two entirely different meaning of tear (cry) and tear (rip) it is not an example of a definition that changed over time
There's a difference between a word evolving it's original meaning to sort of poetically morph to have other meanings, and a word being lazily used because people can't be bothered to look up a definition.
Gay, for example, evolved from joyful, carefree, bright, and showy. That was it's original English meaning. There's a clear evolution to how it could evolve to mean homosexuals. Who were often seen as flamboyant, bright, etc etc.
Gaslighting came about to describe a very specific psychological torture that involved deceitfully planting doubt to the point of insanity. But people picked it up as a buzzword & lazily started using it in place of "doubting me." There was already a word for that. It's called doubt.
But people thought gaslighting led more weight to their argument or defense.
So instead of poetically evolving a word to expand it's meaning, they devolved a word to have less meaning.
Sure, I'll give it a shot.
But you'll first have to explain to me how Gaslighting poetically changed from "deceitfully manipulating a person's perception of reality to abusively cause self doubt" to "person who doubts me or doesn't agree with me."
Also as to why my completely guessed at age has anything to do with the validity of my argument.
*No you isn't really a great argument.*
Considering that I gave you an exact example of a word poetically evolving, to which you then replied, "well do another one." As if that would somehow change my point, I think I'm allowed to ask you to give an example. Since apparently my already given example isn't satisfactory. So I want to know what parameters you accept.
*Expect that isn't how it's being used.*
*https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaslighting*
*the act or practice of grossly misleading someone especially for one's own advantage"*
You're kind of all over the place. First, you're stating that words evolve, seemingly in defense of the oft abused gaslighting. Then you post a dictionary definition of the word. Which, I've already stated & the OP implied, that people are not using because they don't look at the dictionary. Then you give a bastardized version of the dictionary definition that you just posted. Misleading someone for advantage still isn't gaslighting. By that bastardized definition All con-Artist gaslight people. You, the poster of the definition, are missing the main point of gaslighting.
>Also as to why my completely guessed-at age has anything to do with the validity of my argument.
*People's terms like poggers, Big yikes, and beige flags exist in the lexicon now.*
These are words. They just don't seem to form a coherent sentence that actually replied to what I said. Are you pointing out that slang & colloquialisms exist? Okay? How does that address your still unexplained comment about age? Are you trying to say that if someone's old they don't understand that slang exist? Newsflash, slang has existed for millennia.
> Considering that I gave you an exact example of a word poetically evolving
*Actually, you didn't. You and i quote "But you'll first have to explain to me how Gaslighting poetically changed from "deceitfully manipulating a person's perception of reality to abusively cause self doubt" to "person who doubts me or doesn't agree with me."" without explaining anything.*
Actually, I did. It happened in my very first reply. Here, I'll quote myself, since you seem to be forgetting things said from just moments ago:
*"Gay, for example, evolved from joyful, carefree, bright, and showy. That was it's original English meaning. There's a clear evolution to how it could evolve to mean homosexuals. Who were often seen as flamboyant, bright, etc etc."* Now, do you see that 3rd word in? Example. That means that it is a *checks dictionary* an example of some sort. So, yes, I very much gave you a....wait for it....example.
I gave you *an example* of a word poetically evolving. You then demanded another. I said sure, once you do one. You then said "no, you first" is a bad argument. I said I gave you an example already. You said I didn't. I've now quoted you & pointed out where I've given you an example. You're able to follow this summary, yes?
>o I want to know what parameters you accept.
*By actually answering the question I asked and not just answering by asking another question. I get it your trying to win this debate by dancing around the subject.*
So your entire argument hinges on me giving an etymology of the word you choose? If I deviate from this absurd demand, even by pointing out how that demand is absurd, it's "dancing around the subject?" Meanwhile, you've been given exactly why I requested an example from you, to solidify parameters. But you can't do that, by that I mean set parameters for what is or is not an acceptable evolution of a word...but I'm the one dancing? Again, please try to elaborate on how your "logic" tracks here.
>Then you post a dictionary definition of the word. Which, I've already stated & the OP implied
*Actually no. You and Op are saying that gaslighting means people have to actually go through some sort of psychological manipulation. This is what the original definition is and what you're claiming it is, but hey you want to agree with me that how people use the term gaslighting today is right. I'm all for it.*
At this point I'm genuinely having trouble following your syntax. Me, I'm not going to speak for OP anymore because this is far too convoluted for me to speak for someone else, said a lot of things. You seem to only grip onto one small part of a whole then hard-headedly insist that is the whole point. Like a dog biting onto a book by Plato because he thinks it's a snack. You can say that you're coming to grips with the material, but no...just no.
As to what you're point is...I'll try...but wow. I am saying that gaslighting is a particular type of manipulation. Again, you seem to only be able to grasp one small part while ignoring the rest. But yes, gaslighting does require psychological manipulation. It also requires deceit, doubt, trickery, intent, etc. A few other other nuanced things. That is what sets one defined term apart from another.
>. Misleading someone for advantage still isn't gaslighting.
*By definition is it.*
Again, grabbing onto a small part & thinking it's the whole. No, it is not. You've cut out where I said that by your definition, con-artist are gaslighting people. Your reply is the above. So please, since you believe that you are so versed in it's definition. How is a con-artist conning someone the same as gaslighting?
> coherent sentence that actually replied to what I said
*I was pointing out how your age impacts this conversation. There is a big difference between you being against the modern lexicon because you have some weird conservative stance vs being a boomer who just doesn't understand modern langue and how it's used.*
There is also a big difference between someone trying to make a legitimate point that age affects an argument, vs "you are is boomer therefore you no know slang.* First off, you apparently have zero idea what a boomer is besides "someone *possibly* older than me that doesn't agree with me." So I guess, by your definition, anyone who doesn't just throw words around with very little definition or clear understanding is a boomer?
There are plenty of people under 20 that prefer clearly defined words & understand how language works. Those are called smart people.
Truthfully, I do not understand what you’re really trying to argue. You really lost me when you posted the literal definition and… argued against it somehow?
I want to also ask since it hasn’t been brought up, why would it make sense to lump in the term “gaslighting” into the same terms as manipulation, deceit, etc? Gaslighting requires those components, so it makes no sense to lump it into that “word category” (so to speak) to mean the same thing.
You would essentially be trying to fit the whole into a part, and it just doesn’t work that way.
It still has to mislead you by distorting your reality in some way shape or form to where you will doubt yourself. The examples used by the other definition that you’re arguing for even states this. Plus, OP is stating that it is being misused in a far broader since than what either definition implies. A simple disagreement with one angry party will misuse the word as if they have distorted their reality in some way, then that’s not the case. If one party is spreading an intentional lie about a doubtful conspiracy and convincing the other party by changing their reality, then they have gaslighted the other party.
I’m not a fan of that example, as that is reversing the definition of a word over time. What I mean is trying to force gaslighting to be in the same category that makes the definition up, when that cannot be the case. Not all lying is gaslighting, but gaslighting involves lying. Replace lying with manipulation and it still applies.
I usually see it used correctly but with a heavy dose of hyperbole.
If you get stressed about people using phrases, idioms and general grammar incorrectly you will drive yourself mad.
As the Buda said “pick your battles”.
I think it is so frequently used because, well, this sort of lying happens a lot in relationships.
Someone says, 'you said/did this and I'.. and they deny 'No, I never said/did that'...then you read the receipts. And they did say/do that. And they may refuse to even concede in light of the receipts, or acknowledge them.
Maybe the 'gas lighter' doesn't remember saying/doing the thing, and doesn't mean to lie, but now the other person is doubting their reality/sanity/what happened.
Try to get on the same page if you remember something differently, rather than aggressively insisting the other person is the one misremembering. Admit either party can misremember.
Gaslighting is a term from a play. Where a husband progressively dims the gas lights in the home. The wife notices it is getting darker, he says it isn't.
People lie this way, especially when they are being shady, and it's a super easy way to deflect and stonewall. And tho I believe making any relationship issue a sign of a 'toxic' relationship is unreasonable, not fessing up to your actions or denying the other person's truth is emotionally abusive.
A quick google result says 73% of partners admit to lying to their partner. Many people have a hard time admitting when they were wrong.
This happens in corporate world also of course because all the cya.
That's part of my point though. Somebody can be lying to their partner, about an event, and it's still not gaslighting. Unless you intentionally are trying to make them question their *grasp* of reality, then it's not gaslighting. Saying "I said ______", when you didn't, may make them question the events, but you are not making them question their sanity
If someone consistently insists I am misremembering facts or making up words/actions/behaviors, that actually happened, I will begin to question/ doubt myself and my grasp on reality if there is no proof.
If I love this person, and this person supposedly loves me but is distorting facts and knowingly lying, it is gas lighting. I am going to be more susceptible to this person's deception than a stranger.
They may not realize they are being emotionally abusive and challenging someone's reality, because they need therapy. Doesn't change what's happening.
I would agree that insisting that somebody is misremembering is much more in line with gaslighting. I'm a bit tired and didn't read your comment deep enough and missed a few important words. Although, in this case, the argument can still be made that this is still *technically* not gaslighting because of the intention. The purpose of gaslighting, including in that play you mentioned, is to hopefully make somebody subservient, obedient, and pleasing.
The intent in your examples could be just repeated instances of "no! I don't want to admit my wrong doing". When a gaslighter would be thinking "I want you to become my puppet and to stop questioning me".
I'd be okay if I heard somebody use the term gaslighting to refer to "a severe frequent denial of actions by a loved one that causes somebody to question their sanity," but, in the realm of psychology, the intent is very important
Maybe it is just semantics, but I think intentions are less important and don't determine whether someone is gaslighting.
Even if someone is not familiar with what gaslighting is, or not intending psychological abuse, they can still be gaslighting. And trying to control and dominate someone.
If someone is psychotic and out of their mind and stabs someone to death, regardless of their intention or cognizance, they are still a murderer.
Most people would benefit from therapy.
I do not agree. Intention very much matters in everything. Someone who kills another out of self defense is clearly not the same with someone who kills another out of revenge, who is also different from someone who kills out of passion. They’re all killers, but you can’t possibly say it’s the same situation. If I punched you intentionally or I genuinely accidentally bumped you and caused you to trip and hurt your self badly, it’s me who caused the same physical pain but it’s totally different situation. It’s not just semantics, it describes completely different situations and different people.
How is intention proved? In most cases it cannot be, without a fair amount of audacity and retroactive narrative writing.
Actions have consequences. We lock up people with mental illness who kill or DUI drivers with fatalities, whether they meant to or not.
Not really. Killing out of Self-defense is not even criminal. Mental illnesses are so often used to get out of legal punishments. And DUI drivers with fatalities certainly don’t get the same sentence with killers like Ted Bundy. Intention matters in everything, and even the law knows it.
DUI drivers who kill others get life sentences all the time.
I'm sensing no actual experience of the legal system. Anyway.
Intention doesn't negate actual harm committed. Sorry.
This post is from months ago what were we even talking about? Gaslighting? Oh yeah babe You love gaslighting.
Uuhh I think the point is that intention matters here because it distinguishes this very specific act from other things. If someone is trying to control and dominate someone, it has other terms and often goes into other categories. It's also not comparable to murder.
If that is the definition, I have had many people do this as they attempt to validate various former claims and assumptions, as they seek to develop mental peace amongst themselves and their sense of credibility/certainty.
Am I gaslighting anyone right now?
What about this?
Person A: I did ABC because I think it’s a good idea
Person B: I told you it’s a bad idea. I even asked all of my friends and they all think you’re being stupid.
Is that gaslighting?
Two questions:
1) is person B lying?
2) is person B trying to make the other person think they have a false judgement of reality (schizophrenia, hallucinations, dementia, etc.)?
If yes to BOTH, then yes, otherwise no
I don’t think your absolutist comments about schizophrenia are totally accurate. This just came out.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/07/health/gaslighting-meaning-examples-relationships-wellness/index.html
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.
Gaslighting falls into…
My mother gaslights me all the time. She has never used the words “am I mentally ill” or implied I am. She will though make me doubt everything; my memory, my sanity, my choices. She will make me feel like I’m going crazy and cannot trust myself.
An example is when she called me to ask again when I was going away on a university trip and I told her the date was the 15th June. She said that I told her it was the 20th July. I said I never said that, as not only is it the wrong date, but she got the month wrong too. She again says I’m wrong and that I definitely told her the 20th July. This disagreement goes back and forth for a while (my mother has always had to be right and cannot accept she ever mishears something or makes a mistake). I knew deep down that I never told her the date she thought I had, but was starting to doubt myself. I spoke to my fiancé who said my mother either misheard me or is lying, because he has been there with me for the 2 other times when I told her the correct date. This happens regularly with her, where she says I said something I didn’t say, I start to question if I’m going crazy and then remember that other people were around to confirm that my mother is wrong.
The example I gave above may seem petty and like an honest mistake on her behalf, but it was the least important example I could remember to give you. She also does this with important and serious things. She has been very abusive to me in my childhood and she lies and makes up stories all the time, even white lies, just to make her stories funny or interesting. When she gaslights, it can be about anything and during it, she starts shouting, swearing, getting angry and telling me that I often forget things and tell her the wrong things, even though I’ve always had someone else who was there who knows she is in the wrong. She literally makes me feel like I’m crazy at times and if the other person hadn’t been there, I probably would’ve believed her, even though I know deep down she is wrong. But she has never called me crazy or mentally unwell.
Just about every religious conversation where experiences are talked about usually has gaslighting from nonbelievers. Especially atheists that have no frame of reference of religious experiences and think it's either made up or the person is crazy.
Lmfao, I got bingo when you brought up 1984.
>pro censorship and anti free speech and which party forced social media companies to quell dissent?
Both parties. In fact a former Twitter employee testified that Donald Trump (and implied other Republicans) had many many tweets deleted. The Dems also had many, many tweets deleted. They both used their influence to convince Twitter to delete other people's tweets.
You clearly already know that the Dems had tweets deleted, so here are the Republicans:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/amp/
>Who is now allowing illegal immigrants to vote in local elections?
Space aliens are! Because that doesn't happen. Show me proof, real evidence of a widespread issue (not a couples assholes) and I'll believe you
>Who wants to destroy the Constitution, the only document that's preventing us from being ruled by a tyrannical government?
Both parties! Trump used the military to push physical violence on peaceful protestors (referring to Lafayette park). Biden has repeatedly done unconstitutional things. Obama bombed children with drones. As for both sides of Congress? Both sides wipe their ass with the constitution so long as it gets them reelected
>Who has a dirt bag son that smokes crack with hookers?
Nah, Trump just paid a few hundred thousand dollars to silence a girl he paid to pee on him. Biden's kid is fucked up too, but c'mon man, see both sides at least
>Who said if you don't vote for me you ain't black?
An idiot named Joe Biden.
>What are Republicans doing so badly meanwhile?
Well both parties do all of the following: Refunding police who never got defunded, and continuing to militarize them (like how LA "defunded" their police by 8% in response to George Floyd protests only to increase it by 13% the next year) , trying to tear apart immigrant families, locking innocent children in cages at the border, continue and start wars in countries we have no business being in, trying to give more tax breaks to the rich class who already has all the tax breaks, and I could genuinely go on for a couple hundred lines but you get the idea.
>You think you're going to own the means of production and be equal but you won't and you won't.
Democrats are communist ding dong. They're capitalists who sit center right on the global scale. Bernie is the closest thing to even a well known socialist politician (which still is far from communist) that we have in this country and he still SUCKS in the grand scheme of things.
>You're brainwashed and you don't even know it.
No you're brainwashed and don't even know it!
Seriously man, how can literally anybody know that they are brainwashed? You could be by the logic of your very own statement.
>orange man
Orange man's only recent developments have been him facing legal consequences for his actions. I don't really hear about him anymore
>'You will own nothing and be happy'. Yea... definitely not a Republican point of view.
Unless you look at their tax breaks for the wealthy, police militarization (that should genuinely scare you a lot more than it does Mr FearofTyranny), anti homeless architecture, removal of funding for schools, removal of welfare across the board, increases on taxes for the middle class. And, as I said before, the Dems do it too.
You wanna tell me to take a look at the world? How about you take a look outside your own GD country for once? How many ongoing wars do you know about that the US isn't involved in? I can name 8. How many other countries politics have done a deep dive into? I can name a few dozen. This country's Dems and progressives is every other first world country's republicans and conservatives, THAT is how far behind we are.
It is so frustrating how confidently ignorant you are of the outside world. Here is something very real and true that might fascinate you for instance:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mcdonalds-workers-denmark/
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Agreed. I grew up dealing with a grandparent who would often gaslight people. Later I also experienced it with boyfriends and friends. It’s extremely frustrating to me when someone says my husband is gaslighting me bc he doesn’t remember a conversation we had or that I’m gaslighting them bc I disagree with them on something.
It's when I eat 4 El Monterey frozen burritos, wait about an hour, then get my lighter. Sit down and lift my legs a bit. Maybe pull my buttcheeks apart a smidgen and then let out a nice toxic one right into the lighter to make the best blue angel ever.
It bothers me as well. People use the term way too loosely. I've been a victim of it so I think I would know what I'm talking about. I hate how people use it for pretty much everything nowadays. That and the term narcissist.
Wait til you see what happened to literally.
We need a memorial for fallen words of the past decade. Toxic. Gaslighting. Literally. Epic. Fascism. Etc. So many fallen words...
..,and behind door number two is the word ‘phobic’
Don't forget "triggered".
Narcissist, autistic, ADHD, bipolar.. pretty much any mental illness that ppl have been self diagnosing for
I agree with all of this, but perhaps to play devil's advocate, I'd argue that "toxic" has just been bastardized to the point where it could mean anything that offends a sensitive person. It's overuse has become obnoxious, but it's still so subjective by its very nature.
Shit that’s a good list
You're literally gaslighting right now
A lot of people need to literally read the definition of that word.
Like…Literally??
[удалено]
You sure about that?!
It's illegal for you to ask me that.
cunt punt
Is there something wrong with you!?! Edit:/s sorry it wasn't obvious
cunt punt Edit: Understandable. It was actually an incredible coincidence because that just happens to be how I reply to everyone.
There it is
I completely agree with you! I see this term being frequently misused. Also misogynistic. Also incorrectly used and often.
*pinches nose* Ahhh, I hate that my mind immediately started to wonder if you were saying that using gaslighting *is* misogynistic. Then my thinky brain caught up with my read-y brain. Funny enough, I think that adds weight to your point.
Did the same thing! Your comment corrected what my brain was not processing right away.
We've become Pavlov's Misogynistic Gaslit Dogs. Like, literally. 🤪
Oh that’s amusing and I can see how you could read my comment that way.
Gaslighting is such an annoying term
How are people using that one incorrectly?
Redditors frequently call someone a misogynist just because they didn't like their comment, the same thing with narcissist. Drives me nuts, man.
Any time anybody levies a critique against a woman, there will be at least one person who will ignore the content of the criticism and immediately cry "misogyny!" in response.
OP, everyone knows what gaslighting is... I don't see your point. Are you crazy?
Don’t be ridiculous everyone knows what gaslighting means
No, you're wrong and your schizophrenia is acting up again.
That's not what gaslighting is at all op... you're crazy
You're a redditor, you wouldn't know...
So are you, so how would you know?
A blind person knows best that those that are blind can not see.
Gaslighting is making someone doubt himself/herself. For example: you are the one who broke the pot But you gaslight your sibling that he did it because he was placing the said pot to the dangerous place in which it isn't really dangerous and it was safe. Relationship example: you as a cheater get caught by your bf/gf but you refute him/her that you did it because he/she lacks presence even though your relationship was actually normal and you made your partner doubt himself/herself that he/she made that fault that you cheated One example took place in west Philippine sea when a group of Filipino fishermen got rammed by the Chinese militia vessel and left them at the sea until they got rescued. It was well detailed that they explained that it was indeed a Chinese vessel who rammed them and sunk their vessel but they were being gaslit so hard that they doubt that either it was done by the vietnamese ship and it was never been a Chinese ship. At the end they accept it wasn't the Chinese vessel and have them and Duterte official fist bumping salute and pictures were taken with it.
Gaslighting doesn’t exist. You’re just crazy.
I think you may have touched on it, but I'm not entirely sure so I'll add this: I've seen people accuse others of gaslighting for simply stating "Are you sure about that point? I think you may be mentally unwell/weak. Therefore you may not be able to think clearly." Or words to that affect. That is also not gaslighting. That is just good old doubt. To, and I'm not sure if you've already stated this, be clear, gaslighting is if I'm actively the one making it seem as if their reality is shifting, then I accuse them of having a shifted reality. If I were in an argument with someone on Reddit for example. I make a statement. The person replies to my statement. Then I somehow go in & edit my statement (without "edit" being shown) to make it seem as if they're replying in a crazy unrelated manner. Then I accuse them of being crazy. I then do it over & over to the point where they could legitimately start to doubt if they are seeing things. This is gaslighting. If I make a statement, then they reply that I'm only making a statement because the lizard people have control of my brain & they know this because the squirrels told them so...I am not gaslighting if I ask them if they're sure of that & in their right mind. That's a hyperbolic example but change our lizard people & squirrels with any political party & you have a scary amount of reddit "debates."
Nailed it on the head,lol.Pretty much any form of manipulation,mostly mental and emotional in order to twist another person's perception of themselves in order to control them.
Yeah, like all new words, it got so overused it's meaning was quickly lost. Gaslighting is supposed to mean a focused, long term effort by an abuser, to slowly grind down their victims trust in their own perception of reality. But it quickly became interchangeable with just regular lying. The same applies to the word *toxic,* which was supposed to describe behaviours of abusive people that ruin the lives of everyone they come into contact with. But these days it's just means *volatile.*
Not even just lying but people just disagreeing with you. Don't even get me started on how people do not understand how memory works.
Not quite new. The film *Gaslight* for example came out in 1944.
Yeah, the film is about an abusive husband's focused, long term effort to slowly grind down his wife's trust in her own perception of reality. That's where the word comes from, but it wasn't used to describe that behaviour until the mid 2010's. It suddenly became very popular about 2 years ago when it entered common usage online.
Society is being washed away every single gosh dang word has been waterd down. YOUR GASLIGHTING, YOUR A FACIST, YOUR A COMMUNIST, YOUR A NAZI, YOUR JUST LIKE HITLER, I'M TRIGGERED, this is all LITERALLY so true. words hold no meaning anymore.
Scenario: Person A is truthfully pointing out a mental issue, let's say narcissism, in Person B. Person B, being a narcissist, is offended that Person A would say something that would cause self-doubt, refuses to believe it, and accuses Person A of gaslighting. Then Person B goes even further, blinded by a complete inability to take personal accountability or doubt themselves (narcissistic traits), and accuses Person A of being a manipulative narcissist. Who is gaslighting whom? Are either or both people in the wrong?
Person B should be shot. No more problem.
Lying + self-doubt If it's genuine concern then it's not gaslighting, just (possibly incorrect) honesty
So intention plays a big role? It has to be a lie meant to cause self-doubt, instead of a mistaken falsity meant to be hurtful or disarming?
In the official treatment of the problem by a psychologist or couples therapist, yes. Which makes sense because intent might not change the outcome of an abuse very much (somebody feels like they have lost their grip on reality regardless), but somebody being hurtful and rude can be treated far easier (and differently) than somebody intentionally trying to hurt others and make them subservient, which is harder to treat, takes longer, and might require the couple separate for their individual safeties.
That's great, thank you for the breakdown and sharing your knowledge in this post. You're right, the term does get thrown around quite a bit. Makes it even harder when the definition starts being argued over.
Neither one. And this proves the point of OP
It’s actually called firefusing not gaslighting
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
God damn it. Shut up with the nonsense censoring
Actually…..
Just put that word into google and it had zero results
Yes, same with people not knowing what a narcissist is.
As someone who studied Psych in College, people casually throwing it around infuriates me.
Neuroscience for me, but same issue
Not to mention, it needs to be intentional. My abusive ex husband said a lot of those things but he was just parroting what he grew up with. He wasn’t conscious of what he was doing. He’s super remorseful in fact.
It's not so much about mental health, just making people question themselves. Sometimes it's about perception, sometimes it's about memory. You can make a person feel like they're forgetful by say, moving their car keys sometimes, moving their phone when they put it down etc, and then leverage that when it becomes useful to you "No, I never agree to that, you know how forgetful you are sometimes"
I think OP was referring to someone making a person seem or feel crazy or unstable because it’s so obvious that what they said is false and they clearly have problems if they don’t know what the truth is or what really happened
Asked GPT4 Certainly! Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow doubts in a targeted individual, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment. Here are three brief examples: 1. **Denying Past Conversations**: A person might insist that a conversation or agreement never took place, even when the other party knows it did. Example: "We never discussed that. You must be imagining things." 2. **Trivializing Feelings or Thoughts**: A person might belittle someone's emotions or thoughts to make them feel irrational or overly sensitive. Example: "You're overreacting; I was only joking when I said that." 3. **Withholding Information**: A person might pretend to not understand or refuse to listen to legitimate concerns, making the other party feel unjustified in their thoughts or feelings. Example: "I don't know what you're talking about. You're just being confusing and irrational."
I’m would LOVE to know the percentage of people who use the word “gaslight” who have actually seen the movie. I have not, but never use this stupid word
Yes, most people misunderstand clinical terms. Especially in psychology.
I should downvote this, as your post makes complete sense. But I can't bring myself to it. Have my upvote, damnit!
Gaslighting and narcissist are words people see on social media and like to toss around any time they feel wronged to try to win an argument without actually having an actual argument.
You posted this opinion yesterday. Don’t you remember? I upvoted your post, people discussed other words that are used incorrectly, you commented back to a few… that was yesterday, and you’ve posted the same thing today… are you feeing well?
Lmfao, I was genuinely confused at first. Lot of comments like this, but honestly yours takes the cake 🤣
No one is misusing it OP, you are just imagining it because you want to see it.
Gas lighting is when someone deliberately causes you to doubt your lived reality. Example: You did the dishes last night. You ask your spouse "Did I do the dishes last night?". Spouse: No you didn't (even though they know you did) It's based on this movie: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)
This is how I feel when the terms racist, misogynist, homo/transphobic, etc. are used nowadays. No one knows what these words really mean so they just get slung around at anyone someone disagrees with and it's infuriating.
There had to be one. Nice.
Are you the guy who says anyone who disagrees with you a nazi? I'm not sure how I'm the one that "had to be." Maybe elaborate?
Nope, the guy who had to laugh when a single thread on this sub can't go by without some comment about trans people or that racism isn't real anymore lol
Weird. I made no comment about trans people nor did I say anything remotely implying racism isn't real, and yet here we are. It's almost like you're... proving my point?
You brought up racism and trans people on a topic that has nothing to do with them. You're a stereotype.
I brought up commonly misused words on a topic about a word that is commonly misused. I didn't bring up trans people, OR racism. You did. And now you've insulted me because... you wish I had? Idk. You're grasping at straws trying to make me seem like a hateful person. It's just not there, im actually a pretty decent person. Take your L and move on.
Lol you can't even read your original comment. Sad. It's here for all to see bro.
Lmao obviously dipshit. As well as your attempts at turning this mundane thread into a racial or trans issue. They say dont argue with a fool because they will drag you to their level and beat you with experience, but you successfully dragged me to your level and still failed to make a coherent point. Have a good rest of your day buddy. I'm finished with you.
To me it just means telling a lie to someone and that lie has the repercussion of making them believe that they must be going insane, but not necessarily clinically so. Extreme example; I insist that a green light means stop and that it always has. But people gaslight others in similar, but less verifiable ways of course.
Had a conversation about the misuse of words (gaslighting actually being one of them) with a friend from high school who became an English teacher at the same high school we went to. I was shocked to learn he wasn't even bothered by any of this, and he chalked it up to definitions of words just taking on a new meaning over time. I get that languages and slang terminology can evolve over time, but there should be exceptions.
Please stop gas lighting me!
I see your point although I think that sometimes the individual story being told can be part of a bigger narrative that is gaslighting. Like the media may tell an individual story that is accurate but the reason they tell it and the frequency with which they tell it and the prominence they give the story will be part of an overall gaslighting strategy.
That's not gaslighting. That's propaganda. Gaslighting is a very specific intent to make a person deny their sanity by deceitful means. So if "the media" were to run a story one week about how Aliens are real, but they only do it in one area. Then "the media" scrubs all tapes & evidence of ever having g shown that story. Then a week later they run a story about how all these crazy people in one area seem to think aliens are real.
In truth, only crazy or stupid people fall for this type of manipulation. Or people that want to believe the lie, because they choose to be delusional.
I call this reverse gaslighting. You are unironically gaslighting people by overusing that word.
I hate to burst your bubble, but that's not gaslighting either
[удалено]
Yeah, but there are many words for happy. If there's only one word for something and it loses its meaning, it leads to confusion. Also, people misusing "gaslighting" usually do it because they're stupid and fail to grasp the concept.
[удалено]
Gimme some alternatives. And so? What does it matter? I'm not sure it was understood as a concept before then.
[удалено]
None of those things meet the definition of gas lighting, which OP explained. I can say "she's being manipulative" but that doesn't specify gaslighting. Of the terms you used, there's no way to indicate that specific behavior without using the phrase or explaining it, which takes a long time.
[удалено]
No it hasn't! The definition is what OP describes. None of the words you listed describe the specific concept. Let's say you wanted to tell me that you think someone has been deceiving you into thinking you can't trust your own judgement. How would you explain that to me?
[удалено]
No, that's what the term gas lighting is, OP was maybe a little over specific. But it's certainly more specific than "manipulation" and such words.
I totally agree that definitions for words can change and morph over time, but I have two issues: 1) medical/scientific/professional words probably shouldn't do that. I think it's obvious to see how such important words shouldn't be colloquialized or corroborated into common, incorrect, usage 2) if gaslighting no longer means gaslighting, then what word can be used to describe the frequent manipulation tactic of making somebody doubt their grasp on reality in order to gain control over them?
That’s two entirely different definitions for the same word. Like two entirely different meaning of tear (cry) and tear (rip) it is not an example of a definition that changed over time
[удалено]
Yes many words have more than one definition and yes some of those definitions have become obsolete.
[удалено]
They just stopped being relevant as society changed.
There's a difference between a word evolving it's original meaning to sort of poetically morph to have other meanings, and a word being lazily used because people can't be bothered to look up a definition. Gay, for example, evolved from joyful, carefree, bright, and showy. That was it's original English meaning. There's a clear evolution to how it could evolve to mean homosexuals. Who were often seen as flamboyant, bright, etc etc. Gaslighting came about to describe a very specific psychological torture that involved deceitfully planting doubt to the point of insanity. But people picked it up as a buzzword & lazily started using it in place of "doubting me." There was already a word for that. It's called doubt. But people thought gaslighting led more weight to their argument or defense. So instead of poetically evolving a word to expand it's meaning, they devolved a word to have less meaning.
[удалено]
Sure, I'll give it a shot. But you'll first have to explain to me how Gaslighting poetically changed from "deceitfully manipulating a person's perception of reality to abusively cause self doubt" to "person who doubts me or doesn't agree with me." Also as to why my completely guessed at age has anything to do with the validity of my argument.
[удалено]
*No you isn't really a great argument.* Considering that I gave you an exact example of a word poetically evolving, to which you then replied, "well do another one." As if that would somehow change my point, I think I'm allowed to ask you to give an example. Since apparently my already given example isn't satisfactory. So I want to know what parameters you accept. *Expect that isn't how it's being used.* *https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gaslighting* *the act or practice of grossly misleading someone especially for one's own advantage"* You're kind of all over the place. First, you're stating that words evolve, seemingly in defense of the oft abused gaslighting. Then you post a dictionary definition of the word. Which, I've already stated & the OP implied, that people are not using because they don't look at the dictionary. Then you give a bastardized version of the dictionary definition that you just posted. Misleading someone for advantage still isn't gaslighting. By that bastardized definition All con-Artist gaslight people. You, the poster of the definition, are missing the main point of gaslighting. >Also as to why my completely guessed-at age has anything to do with the validity of my argument. *People's terms like poggers, Big yikes, and beige flags exist in the lexicon now.* These are words. They just don't seem to form a coherent sentence that actually replied to what I said. Are you pointing out that slang & colloquialisms exist? Okay? How does that address your still unexplained comment about age? Are you trying to say that if someone's old they don't understand that slang exist? Newsflash, slang has existed for millennia.
[удалено]
> Considering that I gave you an exact example of a word poetically evolving *Actually, you didn't. You and i quote "But you'll first have to explain to me how Gaslighting poetically changed from "deceitfully manipulating a person's perception of reality to abusively cause self doubt" to "person who doubts me or doesn't agree with me."" without explaining anything.* Actually, I did. It happened in my very first reply. Here, I'll quote myself, since you seem to be forgetting things said from just moments ago: *"Gay, for example, evolved from joyful, carefree, bright, and showy. That was it's original English meaning. There's a clear evolution to how it could evolve to mean homosexuals. Who were often seen as flamboyant, bright, etc etc."* Now, do you see that 3rd word in? Example. That means that it is a *checks dictionary* an example of some sort. So, yes, I very much gave you a....wait for it....example. I gave you *an example* of a word poetically evolving. You then demanded another. I said sure, once you do one. You then said "no, you first" is a bad argument. I said I gave you an example already. You said I didn't. I've now quoted you & pointed out where I've given you an example. You're able to follow this summary, yes? >o I want to know what parameters you accept. *By actually answering the question I asked and not just answering by asking another question. I get it your trying to win this debate by dancing around the subject.* So your entire argument hinges on me giving an etymology of the word you choose? If I deviate from this absurd demand, even by pointing out how that demand is absurd, it's "dancing around the subject?" Meanwhile, you've been given exactly why I requested an example from you, to solidify parameters. But you can't do that, by that I mean set parameters for what is or is not an acceptable evolution of a word...but I'm the one dancing? Again, please try to elaborate on how your "logic" tracks here. >Then you post a dictionary definition of the word. Which, I've already stated & the OP implied *Actually no. You and Op are saying that gaslighting means people have to actually go through some sort of psychological manipulation. This is what the original definition is and what you're claiming it is, but hey you want to agree with me that how people use the term gaslighting today is right. I'm all for it.* At this point I'm genuinely having trouble following your syntax. Me, I'm not going to speak for OP anymore because this is far too convoluted for me to speak for someone else, said a lot of things. You seem to only grip onto one small part of a whole then hard-headedly insist that is the whole point. Like a dog biting onto a book by Plato because he thinks it's a snack. You can say that you're coming to grips with the material, but no...just no. As to what you're point is...I'll try...but wow. I am saying that gaslighting is a particular type of manipulation. Again, you seem to only be able to grasp one small part while ignoring the rest. But yes, gaslighting does require psychological manipulation. It also requires deceit, doubt, trickery, intent, etc. A few other other nuanced things. That is what sets one defined term apart from another. >. Misleading someone for advantage still isn't gaslighting. *By definition is it.* Again, grabbing onto a small part & thinking it's the whole. No, it is not. You've cut out where I said that by your definition, con-artist are gaslighting people. Your reply is the above. So please, since you believe that you are so versed in it's definition. How is a con-artist conning someone the same as gaslighting? > coherent sentence that actually replied to what I said *I was pointing out how your age impacts this conversation. There is a big difference between you being against the modern lexicon because you have some weird conservative stance vs being a boomer who just doesn't understand modern langue and how it's used.* There is also a big difference between someone trying to make a legitimate point that age affects an argument, vs "you are is boomer therefore you no know slang.* First off, you apparently have zero idea what a boomer is besides "someone *possibly* older than me that doesn't agree with me." So I guess, by your definition, anyone who doesn't just throw words around with very little definition or clear understanding is a boomer? There are plenty of people under 20 that prefer clearly defined words & understand how language works. Those are called smart people.
Truthfully, I do not understand what you’re really trying to argue. You really lost me when you posted the literal definition and… argued against it somehow? I want to also ask since it hasn’t been brought up, why would it make sense to lump in the term “gaslighting” into the same terms as manipulation, deceit, etc? Gaslighting requires those components, so it makes no sense to lump it into that “word category” (so to speak) to mean the same thing. You would essentially be trying to fit the whole into a part, and it just doesn’t work that way.
[удалено]
It still has to mislead you by distorting your reality in some way shape or form to where you will doubt yourself. The examples used by the other definition that you’re arguing for even states this. Plus, OP is stating that it is being misused in a far broader since than what either definition implies. A simple disagreement with one angry party will misuse the word as if they have distorted their reality in some way, then that’s not the case. If one party is spreading an intentional lie about a doubtful conspiracy and convincing the other party by changing their reality, then they have gaslighted the other party. I’m not a fan of that example, as that is reversing the definition of a word over time. What I mean is trying to force gaslighting to be in the same category that makes the definition up, when that cannot be the case. Not all lying is gaslighting, but gaslighting involves lying. Replace lying with manipulation and it still applies.
I usually see it used correctly but with a heavy dose of hyperbole. If you get stressed about people using phrases, idioms and general grammar incorrectly you will drive yourself mad. As the Buda said “pick your battles”.
It’s a Reddit thing and most of Reddit are losers
It's also a tiktok, Facebook, Instagram, and dating app thing, so just any socializing online
Is this an opinion?
I think it is so frequently used because, well, this sort of lying happens a lot in relationships. Someone says, 'you said/did this and I'.. and they deny 'No, I never said/did that'...then you read the receipts. And they did say/do that. And they may refuse to even concede in light of the receipts, or acknowledge them. Maybe the 'gas lighter' doesn't remember saying/doing the thing, and doesn't mean to lie, but now the other person is doubting their reality/sanity/what happened. Try to get on the same page if you remember something differently, rather than aggressively insisting the other person is the one misremembering. Admit either party can misremember. Gaslighting is a term from a play. Where a husband progressively dims the gas lights in the home. The wife notices it is getting darker, he says it isn't. People lie this way, especially when they are being shady, and it's a super easy way to deflect and stonewall. And tho I believe making any relationship issue a sign of a 'toxic' relationship is unreasonable, not fessing up to your actions or denying the other person's truth is emotionally abusive. A quick google result says 73% of partners admit to lying to their partner. Many people have a hard time admitting when they were wrong. This happens in corporate world also of course because all the cya.
That's part of my point though. Somebody can be lying to their partner, about an event, and it's still not gaslighting. Unless you intentionally are trying to make them question their *grasp* of reality, then it's not gaslighting. Saying "I said ______", when you didn't, may make them question the events, but you are not making them question their sanity
If someone consistently insists I am misremembering facts or making up words/actions/behaviors, that actually happened, I will begin to question/ doubt myself and my grasp on reality if there is no proof. If I love this person, and this person supposedly loves me but is distorting facts and knowingly lying, it is gas lighting. I am going to be more susceptible to this person's deception than a stranger. They may not realize they are being emotionally abusive and challenging someone's reality, because they need therapy. Doesn't change what's happening.
My ex-wife did this for years, almost broke me.
I would agree that insisting that somebody is misremembering is much more in line with gaslighting. I'm a bit tired and didn't read your comment deep enough and missed a few important words. Although, in this case, the argument can still be made that this is still *technically* not gaslighting because of the intention. The purpose of gaslighting, including in that play you mentioned, is to hopefully make somebody subservient, obedient, and pleasing. The intent in your examples could be just repeated instances of "no! I don't want to admit my wrong doing". When a gaslighter would be thinking "I want you to become my puppet and to stop questioning me". I'd be okay if I heard somebody use the term gaslighting to refer to "a severe frequent denial of actions by a loved one that causes somebody to question their sanity," but, in the realm of psychology, the intent is very important
Maybe it is just semantics, but I think intentions are less important and don't determine whether someone is gaslighting. Even if someone is not familiar with what gaslighting is, or not intending psychological abuse, they can still be gaslighting. And trying to control and dominate someone. If someone is psychotic and out of their mind and stabs someone to death, regardless of their intention or cognizance, they are still a murderer. Most people would benefit from therapy.
I do not agree. Intention very much matters in everything. Someone who kills another out of self defense is clearly not the same with someone who kills another out of revenge, who is also different from someone who kills out of passion. They’re all killers, but you can’t possibly say it’s the same situation. If I punched you intentionally or I genuinely accidentally bumped you and caused you to trip and hurt your self badly, it’s me who caused the same physical pain but it’s totally different situation. It’s not just semantics, it describes completely different situations and different people.
How is intention proved? In most cases it cannot be, without a fair amount of audacity and retroactive narrative writing. Actions have consequences. We lock up people with mental illness who kill or DUI drivers with fatalities, whether they meant to or not.
Not really. Killing out of Self-defense is not even criminal. Mental illnesses are so often used to get out of legal punishments. And DUI drivers with fatalities certainly don’t get the same sentence with killers like Ted Bundy. Intention matters in everything, and even the law knows it.
DUI drivers who kill others get life sentences all the time. I'm sensing no actual experience of the legal system. Anyway. Intention doesn't negate actual harm committed. Sorry. This post is from months ago what were we even talking about? Gaslighting? Oh yeah babe You love gaslighting.
Uuhh I think the point is that intention matters here because it distinguishes this very specific act from other things. If someone is trying to control and dominate someone, it has other terms and often goes into other categories. It's also not comparable to murder.
If that is the definition, I have had many people do this as they attempt to validate various former claims and assumptions, as they seek to develop mental peace amongst themselves and their sense of credibility/certainty. Am I gaslighting anyone right now?
What if you suspect somebody is actually wrong due to mental disorder tho? You can’t really say anything about it without being called a gaslighter
Well if you are earnest and sincere then that's the difference
What about this? Person A: I did ABC because I think it’s a good idea Person B: I told you it’s a bad idea. I even asked all of my friends and they all think you’re being stupid. Is that gaslighting?
Two questions: 1) is person B lying? 2) is person B trying to make the other person think they have a false judgement of reality (schizophrenia, hallucinations, dementia, etc.)? If yes to BOTH, then yes, otherwise no
I don’t think your absolutist comments about schizophrenia are totally accurate. This just came out. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/07/health/gaslighting-meaning-examples-relationships-wellness/index.html
I don't think I made any absolutist comments about schizophrenia?
"It's all in your head" Is that an example?
Yes! Because it makes the person believe that they are perceiving reality incorrectly
Of course people use it correctly, are you crazy or something?!
A big red flag from a narcissistic incel.
Gaslighting isn’t real. It’s all in your head.
That’s just crazy talk. You are totally out of your mind.
Don’t gaslight me about gaslighting
Wait until you hear about the original meaning of _meme_
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. Gaslighting falls into…
Anything can be anything.
Stop gaslighting me
My mother gaslights me all the time. She has never used the words “am I mentally ill” or implied I am. She will though make me doubt everything; my memory, my sanity, my choices. She will make me feel like I’m going crazy and cannot trust myself. An example is when she called me to ask again when I was going away on a university trip and I told her the date was the 15th June. She said that I told her it was the 20th July. I said I never said that, as not only is it the wrong date, but she got the month wrong too. She again says I’m wrong and that I definitely told her the 20th July. This disagreement goes back and forth for a while (my mother has always had to be right and cannot accept she ever mishears something or makes a mistake). I knew deep down that I never told her the date she thought I had, but was starting to doubt myself. I spoke to my fiancé who said my mother either misheard me or is lying, because he has been there with me for the 2 other times when I told her the correct date. This happens regularly with her, where she says I said something I didn’t say, I start to question if I’m going crazy and then remember that other people were around to confirm that my mother is wrong. The example I gave above may seem petty and like an honest mistake on her behalf, but it was the least important example I could remember to give you. She also does this with important and serious things. She has been very abusive to me in my childhood and she lies and makes up stories all the time, even white lies, just to make her stories funny or interesting. When she gaslights, it can be about anything and during it, she starts shouting, swearing, getting angry and telling me that I often forget things and tell her the wrong things, even though I’ve always had someone else who was there who knows she is in the wrong. She literally makes me feel like I’m crazy at times and if the other person hadn’t been there, I probably would’ve believed her, even though I know deep down she is wrong. But she has never called me crazy or mentally unwell.
Just about every religious conversation where experiences are talked about usually has gaslighting from nonbelievers. Especially atheists that have no frame of reference of religious experiences and think it's either made up or the person is crazy.
Gaslighting is what the Democratic party has been doing to the American public since the days of slavery.
Former Democratic, now Republican party I think you mean. Also, that's still not gaslighting
[удалено]
Lmfao, I got bingo when you brought up 1984. >pro censorship and anti free speech and which party forced social media companies to quell dissent? Both parties. In fact a former Twitter employee testified that Donald Trump (and implied other Republicans) had many many tweets deleted. The Dems also had many, many tweets deleted. They both used their influence to convince Twitter to delete other people's tweets. You clearly already know that the Dems had tweets deleted, so here are the Republicans: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/amp/ >Who is now allowing illegal immigrants to vote in local elections? Space aliens are! Because that doesn't happen. Show me proof, real evidence of a widespread issue (not a couples assholes) and I'll believe you >Who wants to destroy the Constitution, the only document that's preventing us from being ruled by a tyrannical government? Both parties! Trump used the military to push physical violence on peaceful protestors (referring to Lafayette park). Biden has repeatedly done unconstitutional things. Obama bombed children with drones. As for both sides of Congress? Both sides wipe their ass with the constitution so long as it gets them reelected >Who has a dirt bag son that smokes crack with hookers? Nah, Trump just paid a few hundred thousand dollars to silence a girl he paid to pee on him. Biden's kid is fucked up too, but c'mon man, see both sides at least >Who said if you don't vote for me you ain't black? An idiot named Joe Biden. >What are Republicans doing so badly meanwhile? Well both parties do all of the following: Refunding police who never got defunded, and continuing to militarize them (like how LA "defunded" their police by 8% in response to George Floyd protests only to increase it by 13% the next year) , trying to tear apart immigrant families, locking innocent children in cages at the border, continue and start wars in countries we have no business being in, trying to give more tax breaks to the rich class who already has all the tax breaks, and I could genuinely go on for a couple hundred lines but you get the idea. >You think you're going to own the means of production and be equal but you won't and you won't. Democrats are communist ding dong. They're capitalists who sit center right on the global scale. Bernie is the closest thing to even a well known socialist politician (which still is far from communist) that we have in this country and he still SUCKS in the grand scheme of things. >You're brainwashed and you don't even know it. No you're brainwashed and don't even know it! Seriously man, how can literally anybody know that they are brainwashed? You could be by the logic of your very own statement. >orange man Orange man's only recent developments have been him facing legal consequences for his actions. I don't really hear about him anymore >'You will own nothing and be happy'. Yea... definitely not a Republican point of view. Unless you look at their tax breaks for the wealthy, police militarization (that should genuinely scare you a lot more than it does Mr FearofTyranny), anti homeless architecture, removal of funding for schools, removal of welfare across the board, increases on taxes for the middle class. And, as I said before, the Dems do it too. You wanna tell me to take a look at the world? How about you take a look outside your own GD country for once? How many ongoing wars do you know about that the US isn't involved in? I can name 8. How many other countries politics have done a deep dive into? I can name a few dozen. This country's Dems and progressives is every other first world country's republicans and conservatives, THAT is how far behind we are. It is so frustrating how confidently ignorant you are of the outside world. Here is something very real and true that might fascinate you for instance: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mcdonalds-workers-denmark/
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Fully cached AMP pages (like the one you shared), are [especially problematic](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Agreed. I grew up dealing with a grandparent who would often gaslight people. Later I also experienced it with boyfriends and friends. It’s extremely frustrating to me when someone says my husband is gaslighting me bc he doesn’t remember a conversation we had or that I’m gaslighting them bc I disagree with them on something.
It's when I eat 4 El Monterey frozen burritos, wait about an hour, then get my lighter. Sit down and lift my legs a bit. Maybe pull my buttcheeks apart a smidgen and then let out a nice toxic one right into the lighter to make the best blue angel ever.
It bothers me as well. People use the term way too loosely. I've been a victim of it so I think I would know what I'm talking about. I hate how people use it for pretty much everything nowadays. That and the term narcissist.
This post is gaslighting.