Quote from B on January 31, 2023, 12:48 am

I was going through the “Power Showdowns” lesson again and I realized something:

Many times power showdowns are “won” by adding gaslighting to the mix.

The thread you referred to here was one such example where gaslighting was added to the mix, but there were even others on this same forum:

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 30, 2023, 3:40 am

This is why BTW in that old post calling out gaslighting I wrote "even a 6-years old would know about this".

It was on purpose, with the goal to show that it was a fake, made-up discussion about nonsense because any reasonable person knows it. It was a "surfacing" approach to the gaslighting effect.

I also remember once during a date a woman getting angry (raging) that I had made her walk without calling a cab, and then soon after she started gaslighting me that I was “thin-skinned” when I started becoming upset at her raging. Which unfortunately was effective, at the time, to bring me back into submission and to extinguish my honest anger.

In other words, power-hungry people not only cause power-showdowns, they also trick the game with emotional manipulation to make sure they win the showdown by any means.

That explains why people susceptible to gaslighting tend to lose showdowns until they patch the “gaslighting” wound.
And now many showdowns I handled badly in the past are starting to make sense: I wasn’t a pushover - heck, I ultimately deliberately went no contact with many horrendous people at a personal price - I was just over-conscientious and susceptible to gaslighting.

That also explains why the topic of gaslighting felt so important to me. Why I needed to fully understand it to avoid being gaslighted again for good.

And it shows the importance of being able to recognize and handle manipulation to level the power playing field.

And finally it makes me understand that me having had to go no contact with bad people was strictly related to not being able to handle gaslighting. It’s going to be different now.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 31, 2023, 4:27 am

BOOM!!

Great great stuff, Bel!

True and a much-needed addition to that lesson -without it, it may sound like it's all and only about power/dominance. Instead, it's also a lot about setting the frame of "right/wrong" and "true/not true", and that can be done with various manipulative and gaslighting approaches-.

I added it now and linked to your post.

Quote from B on January 31, 2023, 11:08 am

Again on gaslighting and how to counter it

Assume certainty of the truth

So my thinking is that the only really effective way to counter gaslighting is to just assume in one's mind that one is certain about facts.

Don't discuss the truth/facts

It is then counterproductive to discuss the facts, with the sole exception where it may be necessary in a public setting to state - not discuss - the truth, to the only aim that everybody can see what the truth is, and not be swayed by the gaslighter.

In all other cases, what happened should not even be discussed, but rather kept in the back of one's mind and assumed true.

That levels the playing field with gaslighters.

Example

As an example, take the Dalia Dippolito case: there, the husband entering into a discussion about her having been filmed was counterproductive.

He should have just gone:

Husband: I'm not going to help you after you tried to have me killed, obviously.

Her: I didn't do that.

Husband: How could you think someone would help a woman who tried to kill him.

Her: I DIDN'T DO THAT!

Husband: So I suggest you talk to someone else.

Not even entertaining the point.

Reason

That cuts gaslighting short and voids the gaslighter of the emotional reward for doing it, so it's the only thing that ultimately works.

Steps

So the steps I'm internalizing are:

• assume the truth is set in stone
• refuse all bids to discuss the truth, just keep it as unconsciously assumed
• only discuss the consequences of the truth
• if necessary to refute lies, state openly the consequences of the truth.

Subcommunicating certainty in the truth is more powerful than defending the truth

The reason for the last step is tied into the same principle behind manipulative thread-expanding and subcommunication.

Manipulative thread-expanding works because people tend to assume the truth of unstated assumptions more than they assume the truth of openly stated facts.

This is also the reason why subcommunicating something is infinitely more powerful than stating it openly.

It follows that, between these two possible courses of action:

1. openly countering the false truth:

Gaslighter: I didn't say that.

Other: You did say that.

2. implicitly countering the false truth by talking about consequences only:

Gaslighter: I didn't say that.

Other: Now how are you going to repair for your broken promise?

The most powerful solution to subcommunicate (to all bystanders and to the gaslighter) that one if firm in his "truth frame", is the second solution (ie assuming the truth and talking about consequences).

Refusing to even entertain a discussion about the truth: reverses the playing field and highlights the gaslighting

This, btw, has the effect of not only leveling, but of reversing the playing field, because:

1. the gaslighter will be seen as defending his lie ("I didn't do that! / that's not what happened!")
2. the truthful person will be seen as not defending the truth, but just discussing consequences.

So the person who defends will be the gaslighter. He tried to provoke the other into defending, but his "provoking move", standing alone, will make him lose by himself.

In some cases: fake going along while keeping the truth in mind

Now the last step, in some circumstances, might also consist of faking going along with the lie, in the context of a longer-term strategy aimed at prevailing in the long-term.

One legal case

I remember doing a company due diligence and having found out that some contracts were not in order.

At the public discussion about results, the company director said:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

Me: Well, we can discuss this.

Instead how more powerful:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

Me: So how are you going to adjust these contracts? (subcommunication being: I'm certain of my good work, don't bullshit me and let's refocus on your mistake)

In this particular case, this may even have been a last step after entertaining a small discussion just to show openness:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

Me: Why would that be?

Him: Because we are friends with the counterparty.

Me: So how are you going to adjust these contracts? (subcommunication being: you pulled a really stupid one, I'm certain of my good work, don't bullshit me and let's refocus on your mistake)

Quote from B on January 31, 2023, 11:52 am

Status-inflating ostracizing power move

I have encountered this both in my professional work and on this forum.

The example above seems relevant:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

I think it has the aim of painting the mark as someone who is so higher-value than the rest of the group, as to be out of the group.

Or, stated in other words, it has the aim of painting a picture of the mark as a stuck-up snob, and make him unpalatable and unrelatable with the group.

One example where I encountered this on this forum was in the context of my "doorman" thread, where someone highlighted the difference in status between the doorman and me, as if it was the issue.

There were other examples as well, and I saw both Lucio and Ali handle it perfectly.

Solution: reframe the situation as not being relative to a status difference

The way to handle it that now comes to mind is a reframing aimed at nullifying the inflated status difference.

It can be done by raising up the power mover:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

Me: No, I think you're perfectly good as well. It's just that everyone can make mistakes.

Or it can be done by implying the perspective of the power mover is too based on status and power:

Him: This is due to you being a super-high-status lawyer and the doorman wishing he had your status.

Me: I see this as just an interaction between two people. Thanks for your perspective though. (subcommunication: that is how you see the world)

In theory, it could be also done by self-lowering one's (inflated) status but this is risky and best done very subtly, ideally by accepting the positive true part of the status inflation and rejecting the implied "separation" message:

Him: Congratulations on your promotion. You are now the all powerful leader who will command us all in our work.

Me: Thanks! But do still treat me as a friend though, I'm always the same Bel. (subcommunication: I am higher-rank and don't refute it, but I refuse to be painted as a dictator)

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 31, 2023, 12:04 pm

Quote from Bel on January 31, 2023, 11:08 am

Again on gaslighting and how to counter it

(...)

Just another BOOM!

Added this "assume the facts are true and focus on the consequences" as a step in PU now.

As a matter of fact, this may be a great technique for frame control that goes beyond gaslighting.
I'm reflecting on this.

As for "assume the truth is set in stone" I'd need to two caveats (especially for general advice):

1. You gotta do the work to make sure you're in the right:
   1. Growing power-awareness
   2. Make sure about this particular instance: self-reflect on it before you assume it. Potentially, ask other people as well, or talk to a therapist in some cases.
2. Look at your life in general: if you're not having at least a few great friends or great relationships but have a history of interpersonal issue, get a mirror

This is important in giving advice to the general public because there are many folks who get into PU (or TPM) with heavy miscalibrations and misunderstandings (there was an egregious case here and then analyzed in the private section of the forum).

Some people see attacks that don't exist, or see themselves as victimized when someone has only given feedback.

Otherwise, for "sensible people', yes, the advice of "trust yourself and your own reality and interpretation more" is great.

It's also possible to display more conviction during the event just for power dynamics reasons, and then better reflect later on.
And generally speaking, fi you're a fair person, you'll often find out that the gaslighter was even worst than you realized at the moment.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 31, 2023, 12:45 pm

About this one:

Quote from Bel on January 31, 2023, 11:52 am

Status-inflating ostracizing power move

(...)

It's possible in some cases.

But I'd be careful in differentiating:

• A statement of facts
• A compliment / fawning (even if miscalibrated or done poorly)
• A power move

Of course, the lines among the 3 can blur, but if it's 90% a statement of fact, then you may not need to address it.

Personally, some of your examples didn't feel like power moves.

I felt that saying that you're far higher status than doorman is a statement of fact -and raises your value, rather than dimish it-.

You were also there and know better, but also this one here:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

Also seems more like a statement of fact.

And if it's a power move, it's still not harming you, so I wouldn't address that.

When you say "everyone can..." you're diminishing your own expertise -and raising them at your level-.
No point in doing that, independently of what they originally meant.

And this response here:

Me: I see this as just an interaction between two people. Thanks for your perspective though. (subcommunication: that is how you see the world)

It's also not ideal, in my opinion.

Caveat here: I don't remember the interaction well and you know better.

But sticking with my gut feeling why it didn't feel right:

One, because it's not true: you are higher status.
Two, because it seems like some sort of a one-upping, virtue-signaling power move (ie. "look at me, I don't look at people's status").
Three, because even if it was a power move, it makes you sound like picking or thread-expanding an issue that it would have been better to ignore.
And finally because it's just plain ineffective: people will be more watchful to give you advice after that, and you want more advice coming.

This one though IS a power move you better check:

Him: Congratulations on your promotion. You are now the all powerful leader who will command us all in our work.

Your answer is good.
Another option would be:

You: Thank you, I AM (then smile: you were joking, but... Also acknowledging you are the boss now and being perfectly comfortable with it, and with wielding that power)

And on this:

Quote from Bel on January 31, 2023, 11:52 am

There were other examples as well, and I saw both Lucio and Ali handle it perfectly.

If you remember where, I'd gladly take a look into it!

Quote from B on January 31, 2023, 12:50 pm

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 31, 2023, 12:45 pm

About this one:

Quote from Bel on January 31, 2023, 11:52 am

Status-inflating ostracizing power move

(...)

It's possible in some cases.

But I'd be careful in differentiating:

• A statement of facts
• A compliment / fawning (even if miscalibrated or done poorly)
• A power move

Of course, the lines among the 3 can blur, but if it's 90% a statement of fact, then you may not need to address it.

Personally, some of your examples didn't feel like power moves.

I felt that saying that you're far higher status than doorman is a statement of fact -and raises your value, rather than dimish it-.

You were also there and know better, but also this one here:

Him: Well, you are for sure better at your work than we are, but have you considered that this may not really be necessary?

Also seems more like a statement of fact.

And if it's a power move, it's still not harming you, so I wouldn't address that.

When you say "everyone can..." you're diminishing your own expertise -and raising them at your level-.
No point in doing that, independently of what they originally meant.

And this response here:

Me: I see this as just an interaction between two people. Thanks for your perspective though. (subcommunication: that is how you see the world)

It's also not ideal, in my opinion.

Caveat here: I don't remember the interaction well and you know better.

But sticking with my gut feeling why it didn't feel right:

One, because it's not true: you are higher status.
Two, because it seems like some sort of a one-upping, virtue-signaling power move (ie. "look at me, I don't look at people's status").
Three, because even if it was a power move, it makes you sound like picking or thread-expanding an issue that it would have been better to ignore.
And finally because it's just plain ineffective: people will be more watchful to give you advice after that, and you want more advice coming.

This one though IS a power move you better check:

Him: Congratulations on your promotion. You are now the all powerful leader who will command us all in our work.

Your answer is good.
Another option would be:

You: Thank you, I AM (then smile: you were joking, but... Also acknowledging you are the boss now and being perfectly comfortable with it, and with wielding that power)

And on this:

Quote from Bel on January 31, 2023, 11:52 am

There were other examples as well, and I saw both Lucio and Ali handle it perfectly.

If you remember where, I'd gladly take a look into it!

Thank you, Lucio!

I may be misreading things. So your post is extremely helpful.

In other words, when the "inflation" is true, or when it would be counterproductive to "deflate" because it would raise the other in an adversarial situation, best to ignore or even thank for the compliment.

Thanking for the compliment may also be better, as it reframes the situation anyways into a "compliment and thank you" exchange.

OFF TOPIC

Yestarday I was walking on the sidewalk behind 4 people who were occupying all the space.

I didn't push or want to pass, was just waiting for the opportunity.

One of them said:

Hey, let's make him pass.

And I answered

Thank you!

I think the thank you here may reframe things from "he wants to pass quickly and is bothering us, let him go" into "courtesy and thank you".

OFF TOPIC

So this is very helpful, as I was unsure about those situations and automatically went to "ignore", but doubting I had handled them well.

I'll refer here below the two examples I had in mind about you and Ali.

Quote from B on January 31, 2023, 12:59 pm

Here I saw Ali writing this - not saying it was in response to a power move, but it still addressed the thread:

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 25, 2022, 7:23 pm

#1. Treat Me as a "Boss" Maybe, But Please See Me as an Equal

On this part, yeah, it's respectful to acknowledge my new moderator authority.

But, I'd prefer if you still view me as an equal (which I think most in the forum still do).

I don't necessarily like reading that I have power over someone which is why I did so much power protecting in my post (and, as per Lucio's feedback, it turned out that it was too much). I do it to maintain that power-through approach and collaborative attitude that I enjoy giving and receiving here in this community.

So—and this goes for anyone reading this—I might be a moderator, but please still acknowledge me as the same Ali (who is still a student here to grow with you).

Here and here I saw a similar pattern - again, not qualifying the statement, just focusing on how to address:

1. I will always discuss as equals, even if there's a power differential...

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 15, 2022, 12:41 am

Man... Come on. ... Did you really think that I was saying that, at a personal and human level, you're not equal, that you're below me, and that I'm above you?

... Finally, one is equal at a personal human level, but not in very specific domains of knowledge or know-how.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 31, 2023, 1:53 pm

Ehehe yeah, right, great examples of addressing, how can we call this dynamic, status elevation/depression.

Thank you for going back and looking them up, Bel, it's much appreciated.

Yes, it was great that Ali asked to be treated as an equal, while also recognizing and accepting his admin status/power.

That's a good way of doing it, so you don't end up over-demeaning, or looking like you're uncomfortable in your role.

This answer was also good:

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 15, 2022, 12:41 am

Man... Come on.

This may be a misunderstanding, but worded like that is a misunderstanding that's damn disempowering to me.

More than disempowering actually, it's really demeaning.

Did you really think that I was saying that, at a personal and human level, you're not equal, that you're below me, and that I'm above you?
Like... Did I ever act like that, or come across like that?
Because such an interpretation says you'd really think very low of me.

Please don't jump to those conclusions because that's insulting -and, in a public space, even potential reputational damage-.

Rather than calling it "that was a power move", which would turn it into a combative dynamic of "you said this / I didn't mean that" where it's hard to see if anyone is right or wrong, it vulnerably displayed my human dissatisfaction and displeasure at the implication -before going assertive-.

That's something that people can relate to.

And when you can surface a power move in a way that people can understand and relate with, you're doing it well from a social and reputational point of view.

And it framed the power mover as a really low-level playing turkey for making up that type of non-existing malice -which was well called for-.