Quote from John Freeman on July 28, 2023, 7:09 pm

Thanks for your answer Lucio.

Yes I prefer to keep rapport, hence my answer. Agree, Philosopher's frame, rapport building and bridge. Got it. It's helpful thanks.

And Bel's answer when I want to be higher power depending on circumstances.

Thanks to both of you.

Quote from John Freeman on July 28, 2023, 8:56 pm

Reading PU I now understand why I was uneasy when a nurse would leave the patient’s room in the ER and say: “if you need anything tell me”.

It is a power move. They frame themselves as me needing something from them. Therefore as more powerful: I need them they don’t need me.

So I will use a quite dominant counter power move:

Nurse: if you need anything just tell me.

Me: it will be all thank you. (Smile)

Nurse: Perfect.

Me: thank you.

So with this I clearly states who’s in charge. I’m aware it’s very dominant. It also communicates “don’t play these games with me” I think. The “thank you” with the smile softens it.

I added the “Perfect.” as they do it all the time. So I put it as an exercise. Here I think that answering with a “thank you” keeps the power dynamics in my favour (as it should be I’m not their subordinate) and keep it warm.

Using a less dominant power move:

Nurse: if you need anything just tell me.

Me: it’s perfect as it is thank you (Smile)

Nurse: Perfect.

Me: thank you.

Here it is less dominant and more appropriate socially. It also steals the “perfect” (I say “good job” not them) from them. So their “perfect” is emptied of its dominance and I stay on top while allowing them to play their game. They might feel like they got on top but they did not.

Nurse: if you need anything just tell me.

Me: it’s all good thank you (Smile)

Nurse: Perfect.

Me: thank you.

I prefer this version it's warmer and more colleague-to-colleague like.

Quote from John Freeman on July 29, 2023, 6:51 am

Another option still is low effort compliance: raising a thumb up.

And of course it all depends on the person’s tone and the relationship one has.

Quote from John Freeman on July 29, 2023, 7:43 am

I was thinking about my (manipulative) mother.

I thought: she gave me life, she fed me, she raised me and I keep her at arms’ length. Am I a bad son?

I think not. Yes I’m grateful for all that I received. However it was her responsibility to raise me and take care of me I’m her son. It was her choice to have me.

It’s like if you mistreat your pet (I know I’m not a pet it’s an image) and he’s now biting you or barking at you. Is it the pet’s fault? I think not.

So it was her responsibility. I know she was limited in her capacity and I accept that. However I have the right to take care of myself if that means keeping her not too close to me. If she would be loving she would want me to take care of myself even if that meant not being close to her.

So I think it’s typical of the abused’s guilt. The abused feels guilty for his self-caring self-protecting behavior towards an abuser. Indeed the abuser embedded the message: “you’re not worthy of that.” And/or “you owe me everything” denying the abused’s right to self-care and/or agency.

One has the right to protect oneself from an abuser even if it’s a parent. Especially taking into account that an abuse from a close one for many years does way more damage on the long term.

I know since I’m still recovering from it after all these years.

Quote from B on July 29, 2023, 3:04 pm

Hi John,

interjecting here to point out one website that contains lots of useful information on this, and that greatly aided me in my personal recovery (and of course feel free to disregard completely if not of interest):

https://www.decision-making-confidence.com/setting-boundaries-with-controlling-parents.html

By the way, thank you for the suggestion on the book on self-sabotage. It was great!

Quote from John Freeman on July 29, 2023, 8:31 pm

Great article, thank you Bel.

I like the concept of pseudo personality. I think this is what some people call the “false self”. Some people (don’t even have to be children of manipulators) saw it and broke out of it. Other people with severe personality disorder could not survive without it. I think their self is so shrunk and so dry that it cannot function as a functional self. This article made me want to read your thread about manipulative people. At first I thought: “I had enough of this dark stuff. I studied it enough ». But after reading this sentence:

The trick to getting away from the control is to understand the subtleties of mind control and manipulation. When you learn about the tactics used against you, and why those tactics were used with you and what effect they had in the moment, the effects of these tactics disappears and you are no longer held captive by the manipulators.

Made me want to read it. I probably have more things to learn about manipulation to further open my eyes. The truth is that I think I will never be able to fully realize the damage done. It’s not that important in the end. It’s about focussing on the healing.

It’s good to know that other people validate self-protection in terms of limiting/stopping contacts. I read it before but it’s good to read again as the subconscious guilt can still persist despite the conscious realizations.

Also, I don’t know how it sounds to you. From my observation the thing that the people active here have probably in common (among other things) is a manipulative parent. Maybe I’m wrong.

I’m glad you liked the book!

Quote from John Freeman on July 29, 2023, 10:16 pm

Searching for one quote from Carl Jung, I actually find a few that goes nicely with the ideas we talked about:

“I am not what happened to me, I am what I choose to become.”

“You are what you do, not what you say you'll do.”

“There's no coming to consciousness without pain.”

Quote from B on July 30, 2023, 1:13 am

Quote from John Freeman on July 29, 2023, 8:31 pm

Great article, thank you Bel.

I like the concept of pseudo personality. I think this is what some people call the “false self”. Some people (don’t even have to be children of manipulators) saw it and broke out of it. Other people with severe personality disorder could not survive without it. I think their self is so shrunk and so dry that it cannot function as a functional self. This article made me want to read your thread about manipulative people. At first I thought: “I had enough of this dark stuff. I studied it enough ». But after reading this sentence:

The trick to getting away from the control is to understand the subtleties of mind control and manipulation. When you learn about the tactics used against you, and why those tactics were used with you and what effect they had in the moment, the effects of these tactics disappears and you are no longer held captive by the manipulators.

Made me want to read it. I probably have more things to learn about manipulation to further open my eyes. The truth is that I think I will never be able to fully realize the damage done. It’s not that important in the end. It’s about focussing on the healing.

It’s good to know that other people validate self-protection in terms of limiting/stopping contacts. I read it before but it’s good to read again as the subconscious guilt can still persist despite the conscious realizations.

Also, I don’t know how it sounds to you. From my observation the thing that the people active here have probably in common (among other things) is a manipulative parent. Maybe I’m wrong.

I’m glad you liked the book!

Yes, I agree on everything. The entire website was useful for my healing.

To me the difference between the pseudopersonality and the false self is that the pseudopersonality is present in "normal" abused people (who can change for the better), while the "false self" is present in personality disordered people (who usually cannot change).

In the case of personality disordered people, as you noted the "true personality" does not exist. There's nothing to "heal". These people cannot get rid of the "false self" because the "false self" is the only thing that keeps them functioning.

In the case of normal abused people, instead, the true personality is not destroyed by the abuse, and re-develops once the pseudopersonality is removed. They have a trauma, not a disorder.

It is also impossible to get rid of the twisted beliefs and thinking patterns that the abuse/manipulation one had to endure caused, unless one sees the manipulation he suffered clearly.

To make an example, let's say a parent has a manipulative personality, due to being personality-disordered (and thus being unable to change for the better). And let's say that this parent has a habit of manipulating his/her son by soliciting private information from his son (which the son specifically asks his parent to keep in confidence) and then sharing it on purpose with other people in the extended family.

Let's also say that when the son comes to know that the parent has betrayed a confidence, the parent - when confronted - has a habit of gaslighting the son about it, for instance by replying "I hadn't understood I couldn't tell the information to anyone, not even to Sam!".

This btw is very common in abusive dysfunctional families, and totally unconceivable in normal empathetic families.

Well: in this situation, unless the son is able to see and understand that his parent is deliberately betraying his private information to triangulate him, the son will, unconsciously, likely:

• always excuse the parent and other potential abusers in his life doing the same, as if the triangulation was an "innocuous mistake"; and thus
• do the same in his personal life (ie betray others' personal private information that they shared with him), and then absolve himself (the son) whenever someone complains.

So, not seeing what one's parent has done/is doing leads both to continue to continue accepting abuse/manipulation (from the parent and from others), and to abusing/manipulating others unwittingly.

On the contrary, if and when a son comes to see that a parent was doing something to manipulate, then the two effects above are forever removed from the son's life. The son will both distance from people who try to abuse him as the parents did, and stop unwittingly manipulating others in the same way his/her parents did to him.

Quote from John Freeman on July 30, 2023, 8:41 pm

Hello Bel,

To me the difference between the pseudopersonality and the false self is that the pseudopersonality is present in "normal" abused people (who can change for the better), while the "false self" is present in personality disordered people (who usually cannot change).

I think the semantic you introduce here is useful indeed. These are definitely 2 different concepts.

So, not seeing what one's parent has done/is doing leads both to continue to continue accepting abuse/manipulation (from the parent and from others), and to abusing/manipulating others unwittingly.

Yes, I can see better now how becoming aware of manipulative tactics in general can help "heal". That is to remove these learned patterns from the abused's behaviour.

Personally I was horrified and ashamed (and still am honestly) when I noticed the kind of behaviours I reproduced. That's why when people (here) confronted me with them I felt like I was being gaslighted. The reflection that was presented to me did not feel like this is what I was doing. That's when I had to admit to myself that it was unconscious and therefore that I was unaware of it (hence being defensive about it: if one feels one is innocent one is angry to be charged as guilty. Even if one is guilty. It feels like one is innocent.). Unconscious or conscious I take responsibility for it and I learned from it.

The problem is that when one is confronted with their own manipulative or gaslighting behaviour they most probably will deny it (being semi- or totally unaware of it and/or being too painful to admit). So now they look even more like a manipulator or a gaslighter to others: not only the person perceived as being manipulative or gaslighting but on top of it the person is denying it. So it looks even more like manipulation, lying or gaslighting. That's why the only solution of this inception-like situation is for the person to take some distance and own their nasty behaviour (whether it's learned or a decision does not matter for other group members for good reasons). Yes it's painful but if one does not take this distance and take responsibility for it then there's no chance of redemption and the behaviour is likely to stay.

The difference is the same as you exposed above: the "real gaslighter/manipulator" uses these behaviours as baseline behaviours. They don't really have a choice. It's a pattern of survival. The "learned gaslighter/manipulator" learned through imitation, he has a choice not to use them so he can unlearn them if one is willing. So the "real one" is not able (nor willing) while the "learned one" is able (functional self) but must be willing. One can feel shame (and therefore change) the other cannot. The ability to feel shame is key I believe.

So it goes back to the quote I posted: if we don't become aware we are doomed to repeat our unconscious behaviours (as you probably already know).

Edit: another possibility. Having had submitted for so long to an abuser one can overreact to confrontation. That is I think where the "thin skin" could come from or at least one of the reason. The abused feel like being attacked when it's not the case. So maybe the abused goes out to "win" in an attempt of self-preservation: "I will not let myself be abused/dominated again". When it's actually not an abuse/attack. So maybe I say maybe the abused projects unconsciously the abuser on other people who are not. That's also why it's tricky to learn power dynamics coming from there. And maybe why the person when opening their eyes to social games suddenly start to think that "everyone is out there to get them". Yes, some people will try to dominate us. But probably in a smaller proportion than the one perceived. It makes me think about the people who have been physically abused as children and then see angry faces on neutral faces in one psychological experiment. So maybe when one has been abused one become agressive because one thinks other people are being agressive. I'm not sure I'm hypothesising here. So maybe people who have been dominated a lot become over-reactive to domination attempts (real or imagined) afterwards.

Also, I noticed that to heal, one has to admit to oneself he/she has been abused. That's not a really flattering identity (does not have to be an identity either). Also that paints a much more negative picture of one's family and past. That was hard to do for me. To realize that my father was not a local celebrity. That my mother was not this nice, smart and generous person. I think it was one of the hardest thing in my life actually. To see my past and family as they really were and to accept how dysfunctional my family was. As I said, I will never be fully able to grasp this reality I believe.

The positive (let's end on a positive note) is that this is also a positive mirror of our own resilience and capacity of adaptation. It is a compliment to our fight for healing and our achievements (I feel like I'm at an AA meeting, but I won't use humour to brush the reality of it. It's true: rising from such environments is indeed something to be proud of).

Thanks, Bel!