Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Siquo]

The fact that I live in the Netherlands has become a Nikov's wife.

[G-Flex]

So that means that the Netherlands doesn't exist!?

[Siquo]

You now mistake Nikov for Pathos, methinks.

[G-Flex]

I don't know. Considering how many loaded guns Nikov claims to keep around the house, I wouldn't count on her existing for long, at any rate.

[SalmonGod]

A Male Feminist's Lesson in Gaslighting.

I learned some things.

And this quote in the comments really struck me.  It describes so elegantly the biggest reason I regret only having one romantic relationship in my life, and why I wouldn't recommend doing that for anybody else.  Not that I want to get into a bunch of discussion about my personal life, but I think it's an important point for the many people out there who have an unrealistic, over-romanticized concept of relationships, as I did to some extent way back when.

"If too people are in a close relationship, and one of them is crazy, how do you know which one it is? Given you are each others only points of reference."

[Siquo]

You didn't miss much, they're all crazy.

*deleted a big rant I had here about that BS article for not being constructive*


Edit:
Okay here's a less ranty example (cue sexist generalisations here):
F:"You never clean the bathroom!"
M:"Untrue, I did it once, 5 years ago. You're overreacting"

This is what a "man" (aka: me) does not understand. Never means never, and if you mean almost never, be specific. The "overreaction" that I hear is about conveying emotion, whereas I am listening as if she was conveying information. Emotionally, she's right, information-technically, I'm right. So I have to adjust my way of listening to her, and respond not to the accusation of "I never clean the bathroom", but instead listen to what she's saying: "I'm pretty mad that the balance of our housechores is schewed, and I want you to acknowledge that I'm mad and have every reason to be, and, on the side, some acknowledgement or 'thank you' that I usually do the bathroom would be nice". She doesn't even want me to clean the bathroom, it's totally irrelevant at that point, she just wants to be heard, and share what frustration she feels. This whole way of communicating is completely alien to me and I'm still learning.

Overuse of the words "Always" and "Never", and reacting emotionally to what a man thought was an informational exchange is quickly deemed as "overreaction". That the woman in her turn thinks there's something wrong with her because she is misunderstood, is actually a good thing. Most men (well, and quite a lot of women, too) are too thick to even contemplate that they could be at fault at all.[1]

[/sexist generalisations]

[1] That last part isn't to insinuate the woman is at fault at all, but more that I encourage self-reflection in every person. Thinking that you're at fault if you aren't is just as bad as thinking you're not at fault if you are, but thinking about it/reflecting on your actions is always a good thing.

[scriver]

So there's some pretty cool Afghan women out there.

Orthodox Judaism.

The Talmud indicates that the reason a man should not walk between two women has to do with the superstition that it may impair the man’s ability to remember the Torah he learned.

It’s like a couple of magnets and a floppy disk! Poof! Memory erased! He is powerless before those sexy women clad modestly in several yards of fabric and some wigs! All will be lost!!

Hehehe...

[KaelGotDwarves]

@Siquo: That's not a sexist generalisation, that's people overlooking their own faults and seeking faults in others. Both females and males do it.

[Siquo]

@Siquo: That's not a sexist generalisation, that's people overlooking their own faults and seeking faults in others. Both females and males do it.

Yeah, the sexist part was the piece above that, although I noticed I kept it largely anecdotal, merely implying that it's a common gender thing.

"Gaslighting" can only occur if you have a tendency to find fault in yourself (or at least even consider it to be a possibility), it's pretty hard to convince someone that she's crazy if she thinks she's always right.

[scriver]

Find me a person who's 100% sure of themselves, and I'll show you a person with a very polished mask.

And yeah, it doesn't matter if a person "thinks she's always right" (which is a completely hypothetical state of being, no person does that). Continual gaslighting will wear that certainty down and make her doubt herself.

[Siquo]

Hard, not impossible.

On the other hand, and this is what made me rage about the article, people who are sensitive to gaslighting can interpret almost any criticism on their actions as such, and putting the sender of the misinterpreted message at fault is unfair, in that case.

[GlyphGryph]

Isn't this the second time that article was posted? Yes, it definitely was. I remember posting the bits I agreed with and the bit I had a problem with. And then telling a story and a perhaps irrelevant anecdote. But that was mostly on the manipulation bits, so I'll change the focus a bit this time:

This may be more of a problem for women, it most certainly happens to everybody by everybody. I've seen women do this to women and women do this to men just as effectively. It's a power play, obviously, and its one women are, culturally, not prepared for. They are in many ways almost groomed to be victims for this sort of stuff.

This is beyond the fact that, culturally, we DO encourage women to act more "crazy" than men (in this sort of situation). Like any stereotype, there's a shard of truth behind it. Like most feminist stereotype, its also enforced almost as strongly by women as men. I don't think the problem is that most women get accused of acting crazy when they aren't (they are), but that most men get a free pass for similarly "crazy" activity (they are too, after all).

And here's the clincher - any given response may, in fact, BE overreacting. That doesn't make it any less emotional manipulation when someone responds to it by dismissing them, or extrapolating the response out to a factor of their innate nature, or acting as if the overreaction makes the core claim any less valid - gaslighting, like any lie, is all the more effective when the bulk of it is true, after all. Yes, you ARE overreacting - but what he's really saying is "I don't want to deal with your concerns, no matter how you put them forward, but this gives me a good excuse to ignore them"

[SalmonGod]

Isn't this the second time that article was posted? Yes, it definitely was. I remember posting the bits I agreed with and the bit I had a problem with. And then telling a story and a perhaps irrelevant anecdote.

I wouldn't be surprised.  I was inactive on the forum for a while, and missed a very large chunk of this thread.

[Virex]

Articles like that, and the whole site attached to it, make me wonder why women insist on romantic relations (or social contact for that matter) with men in the first place. Then again we've probably conditioned them to put up with all the crap we sling at them 24/7 and not even think about it...

[Duke 2.0]

Articles like that, and the whole site attached to it, make me wonder why women insist on romantic relations (or social contact for that matter) with men in the first place...

Because this notion is about as sexist as the opposite?

No disrespect to you, but this comment seems supremely silly.