Are people overusing the concept of "gaslighting"?

[futureapppsy2]

I think that gaslighting is definitely a legit concept that has utility, but lately, I've seen people use it as a way to stop people from ever disagreeing with them.

For example, the other day someone responded to something I said in a way that showed that they had interpreted what I had written differently from what I intended. I responded by saying "It's totally understandable that you interpreted that as "X". What I meant was more along the lines of "Y". I apologize for not asking more directly/clearly." and they got furious and told me that I was "gaslighting them." I've seen this pop up in online circles as well, where any type of attempt to clarify one's meaning is called gaslighting. Thoughts?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[cara susanna]

Speaking as an IPV researcher, absolutely. I think it's starting to lose its entire meaning, which was an important one.

 

[CheetahGirl]

I feel today's zeitgeist has exposed the layperson population to many specific terms that we actively explore in our careers. While I believe it's helpful to educate the public, I also feel that it's useful to clarify when these terms are being misused.

For example, I get super annoyed personally when people misuse with word "racist," when suggesting that one can be racist towards a dominate ethnic/racial group. By definition, racism is thrust upon the minority group, and what the majority group feels (from similar bias) is different...it's xenophobia, bigotry, prejudice, intolerance, discrimination, etc. (Future - I don't want to high-jack your thread by a discussion on racism, but similarly, I feel gaslighting is also being thrown out loosely without many understanding the original reference, the 1944 film Gaslight.)

I often times feel its better to just keep quiet unless it is professionally relevant because in my personal life, my frustration meter is going bonkers right about now.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

probably.

 

[WisNeuro]

I feel like this is a growing trend, particularly with progressive/SJ terms. It has a certain meaning when looked at empirically, then when it gets in lay speech, it becomes whatever people want it to mean, rendering the term so subjective to essentially eliminate its usefulness in any capacity.

 

[foreverbull]

I think it’s pretty common for people to misuse psychological terms or diagnoses that trickle into the lay public. It happens all the time with many terms, not just gaslighting. Don’t get me started on how the laypublic “understands“ bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and DID and mixes them all up. Also, the term “antisocial” is how the laypublic thinks introversion works (“I’m antisocial—I am exhausted by social interaction!”)—not psychopathy, which is the true original meaning (actions that go against society). Many Freudian terms get misused as well.

Gaslighting is just another term the public has grabbed onto and doesn’t understand, it seems!

Edit: I’ll add that a few students even told me at one point that the term “psychopathology” sounded somewhat offensive to them because it sounded like “psycho.” Not understanding a word’s meaning/origin can create all sorts of complications!

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I think it’s pretty common for people to misuse psychological terms or diagnoses that trickle into the lay public. It happens all the time with many terms, not just gaslighting. Don’t get me started on how the laypublic “understands“ bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and DID and mixes them all up. Also, the term “antisocial” is how the laypublic thinks introversion works (“I’m antisocial—I am exhausted by social interaction!”)—not psychopathy, which is the true original meaning (actions that go against society). Many Freudian terms get misused as well.

Gaslighting is just another term the public has grabbed onto and doesn’t understand, it seems!

I was going to say the same. It can be particularly frustrating when the usage is so wide-spread and negative, it requires us to come up with a completely new term to avoid further impacting vulnerable populations (ala MR and intellectual disability).

 

[Skye18]

I think it’s pretty common for people to misuse psychological terms or diagnoses that trickle into the lay public. It happens all the time with many terms, not just gaslighting. Don’t get me started on how the laypublic “understands“ bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and DID and mixes them all up. Also, the term “antisocial” is how the laypublic thinks introversion works (“I’m antisocial—I am exhausted by social interaction!”)—not psychopathy, which is the true original meaning (actions that go against society).

I rant about this pet peeve not infrequently. When people say "I'm antisocial!" I don't hear "I don't like being around people!", I hear "I'm entirely deficient in empathy!". Yes, I know they aren't actually saying that...but as someone with research interests in psychopathy, I'll never be able to unhear that.

 

[PsyDr]

I think it’s pretty common for people to misuse psychological terms or diagnoses that trickle into the lay public. It happens all the time with many terms, not just gaslighting. Don’t get me started on how the laypublic “understands“ bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and DID and mixes them all up. Also, the term “antisocial” is how the laypublic thinks introversion works (“I’m antisocial—I am exhausted by social interaction!”)—not psychopathy, which is the true original meaning (actions that go against society). Many Freudian terms get misused as well.

Gaslighting is just another term the public has grabbed onto and doesn’t understand, it seems!

Edit: I’ll add that a few students even told me at one point that the term “psychopathology” sounded somewhat offensive to them because it sounded like “psycho.” Not understanding a word’s meaning/origin can create all sorts of complications!

We go through this every so often. The term is euphemism tread wheel or something.

The Vineland tests come from the Vineland school for the intellectually disabled, founded in the mid 1800s. It was eventually run by Goddard, who first translated the Binet into English. Goddard was also the person who coined the term “*****” (FSIQ= 50-70), the term “imbecile” FSIQ= 50-25), and he used the already available term of “idiot” (FSIQ= 25-0). Goddard also helped write the USA’s first special education law. Then we started using the term “mental ******ation” around 1895, because people were using the previous technical terms as insults and the British were making their own system including Sir John Down, who discovered Down’s syndrome. In the 1960s, The WHO had to change a term related to ID because boy was the country of Mongolia unhappy to learn about how their names had been used. Then Obama had Rosas law, and now we have ID.

In summary: Lay people are gonna use terms to insult. We can change it, they’ll still use it. And I have too much time on my hands.

ps. Goddard knew Davenport (the head of the USA office of eugenics), who knew Pearson. Which is how IQ tests are related to Guinness beer, and the Holocaust.

 

[erg923]

Ok. I'll say it. Heard it on NPR 2-3 years ago, but not alot since them. Don't really know what this term means.

If it means someone trying to show someone that there may be different perceptive on an event, "outrage" seems silly. Why has this become a bad thing? Isn't that CBT?? I thought psychologists were suppose to educate people on the "grey areas" of individual behavior and/or motivation???

 

[WisNeuro]

Ok. I'll say it. Heard it on NPR 2-3 years ago, but not alot since them. Don't really know what this term means.

If it means someone trying to show someone that there is different perceptive on an event, this outrage seems silly. Why has this become a bad thing? I thought psychologists were suppose to educate people on the "grey areas" of individual behavior and/or motivation???

This is not really what this means at all.

Gaslighting - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[psychlife19]

Yes! I see it a lot, especially in terms of “the current president/presidential administration is GASLIGHTING the public”. And don’t even get me started on the recent debate. People around me were saying this or that candidate was triggering them with their abusive behavior through the tv screen and they personally felt re-traumatized based on their previous traumatic experiences in real life.
like @CheetahGirl said, it is easier to let it go because addressing every instance of this will make you go bonkers.
(Also I do not want this to turn into a thread on politics so I hope my comment was okay)

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Edit: I’ll add that a few students even told me at one point that the term “psychopathology” sounded somewhat offensive to them because it sounded like “psycho.” Not understanding a word’s meaning/origin can create all sorts of complications!

I hope this does not spread.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Goddard was also the person who coined the term “*****” (FSIQ= 50-70),

Interesting censorship from SDN. I cannot even guess this word.

“mental ******ation”

hmmmm, even more interesting since I can easily guess this term.

I can understand censoring the word r-e-t-a-r-d but I guess that means I cannot say that a fire extinguisher will ****** a fire. More importantly, the term used above should be fair play on a forum where intellectual disabilities are like to be discussed, especially when imbecile and idiot are permitted.

The WHO had to change a term related to ID because boy was the country of Mongolia unhappy to learn about how their names had been used. Then

Took me a bit to figure out that "boy" was not a noun in this case
Mongolian idiocy is not a term I ever heard before (had to google to figure out what you were saying)

Obama had Rosas law, and now we have ID.

I actually had no idea this law existed.

Which is how IQ tests are related to Guinness beer, and the Holocaust.

Even through googling I couldn't connect the dots. Please tell me more.

In summary: Lay people are gonna use terms to insult. We can change it, they’ll still use it. And I have too much time on my hands.

I agree but I guess it is worth trying. Time will tell if ID takes on a pejorative colloquial form.

 

[Unipsychler]

Can we add narcissism/narcissist to this list? On Reddit, it means anyone who is selfish, which of course is anyone who makes a choice you don't like.

Similarly, "gaslighting" means disagreeing with you and not immediately caving after you've presented your viewpoint.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Can we add narcissism/narcissist to this list? On Reddit, it means anyone who is selfish, which of course is anyone who makes a choice you don't like.

Similarly, "gaslighting" means disagreeing with you and not immediately caving after you've presented your viewpoint.

Oh yes—on reddit, everyone’s exes either has BPD or NPD!

 

[futureapppsy2]

Interesting censorship from SDN. I cannot even guess this word.


hmmmm, even more interesting since I can easily guess this term.

I can understand censoring the word r-e-t-a-r-d but I guess that means I cannot say that a fire extinguisher will ****** a fire. More importantly, the term used above should be fair play on a forum where intellectual disabilities are like to be discussed, especially when imbecile and idiot are permitted.


Took me a bit to figure out that "boy" was not a noun in this case
Mongolian idiocy is not a term I ever heard before (had to google to figure out what you were saying)


I actually had no idea this law existed.


Even through googling I couldn't connect the dots. Please tell me more.


I agree but I guess it is worth trying. Time will tell if ID takes on a pejorative colloquial form.

Keep in mind that the a) psychology section of SDN is relatively small; b) most SDNers have no clinical or research interests around MR/ID; c) many SDNers are undergrads: d) MR is no longer used as a clinical term; e) our word filter capabilities are what they are; f) context clues are a thing; and g) the r-word is widely considered a slur in the US (because it’s been used as one).

 

[cara susanna]

I run into this whenever I see the term "complex PTSD." Which is quite often. Apparently every professional outside of SDN is diagnosing it now.

Oh, and people get mad if you call someone narcissistic since it's "ableist towards Cluster B." Even though narcissism is a trait and not necessarily a diagnosis.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I run into this whenever I see the term "complex PTSD." Which is quite often. Apparently every professional outside of SDN is diagnosing it now.

Oh, and people get mad if you call someone narcissistic since it's "ableist towards Cluster B." Even though narcissism is a trait and not necessarily a diagnosis.

As someone whose work is deeply entrenched in disability justice, it really bugs me to see ableism misused in that way. Interestingly, I've also seen laypeople start to claim that BPD is actually female autism (as in "women who have been diagnosed with BPD are actually autistic"), which doesn't make much sense to me, as someone with research and clinical experience in autism, trauma, and NSSI/suicidality.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Keep in mind that the a) psychology section of SDN is relatively small; b) most SDNers have no clinical or research interests around MR/ID; c) many SDNers are undergrads: d) MR is no longer used as a clinical term; e) our word filter capabilities are what they are; f) context clues are a thing; and g) the r-word is widely considered a slur in the US (because it’s been used as one).

My goal isn't to argue what words should or should not be censored. I am simply highlighting that imbecile and idiot are not censored yet have the same history as MR and only differ in temporal use. Seems like an uneven application of the rules (like the word I cannot even guess, @PsyDr what is that word?) and a poor filter capability. There are inherent problems to censoring speech since saying psychomotor ******ation may be misinterpreted by people that don't know any better (along with the other terms discussed in this thread). I am also aware of the harmful effects that words can have on others. The issue here is that MR is unlikely to be used as a slur or an attack on SDN. I understand ****** (I have never heard anyone refer to it as the r-word and I am purposefully writing it since I know it will be censored and that seems more fitting than spelling it with dashes) is a very different word than MR and I am more in support of censoring that word (but am skeptical of the whole thing). I am not in support of censoring MR. But that is my opinion and I am not looking to change the rules on this site. My post was purely from the surprise of learning this since I have been a member on here for 10 years.

Furthermore, is there any empirical evidence that it is widely considered a slur? I figure that the vast majority of people really don't care.

As my post highlights, I am in support of changing the language from MR to ID while understanding that in 20 years kids may be calling other kids intelect disables or some other similar term. I think you and I can agree that it is stigma and ignorance that is the problem more so than language.

 

[PsyDr]

@DynamicDidactic

1)Let's play a game. Complete this word: M_R_N One vowel will get you there. Coined by Goddard.

2) Long story short:

1901: Pearson founds the journal Biometrika.

~1901a: Charles Davenport, a biologist, gets on editorial staff at Biometrika.

1908: The head brewer at Guinness (Gossett) published the student's t-distribution in Biometrika. He used the pseudonym "student" because of corporate policy.

1910: Davenport start the Eugenics Records Office, which was funded by Carnegie and Rockefeller.

1911: Goddard helps write the first special education law in the USA.

1913a: Goddard translates the Binet Intelligence test into English, and publishes the manual.

1913b: Goddard starts the IQ testing program at Ellis Island.

~1914: Goddard gets on staff at the Eugenics Records Office (later joined by Yerkes, Thorndike, and Alexander Graham Bell)

1917: Goddard publishes some BS racist data from the Ellis Island program. Hint: the Nazis LOVED his findings, and mentioned them in some stuff.

1924-1938: The Eugenics Record Office advocates for Eugenics, and sterilization of immigrants, etc. The co-founder of the Eugenics Records Office wrote the Viriginia Law that allowed serilization of individuals commited to mental institutions in 1924. Davenport helps write a federal law about immigrations restrictions around that time. Weirdly, W.E.B. Dubois gets on board as a fan of eugenics.

1939: Seeing some developments in Europe, the money men decide that maybe having the or names attached to eugenics is a bad idea. Funding gets pulled. Eugenics office is closed down.

TL; DR: dude who started the Eugenics office in the USA was on staff with for the journal where Guinness’ head brewer published. Same dude employed the guy who introduced IQ tests in the USA.

 

[R. Matey]

@DynamicDidactic

1)Let's play a game. Complete this word: M_R_N One vowel will get you there. Coined by Goddard.

2) Long story short:

1901: Pearson founds the journal Biometrika.

~1901a: Charles Davenport, a biologist, gets on editorial staff at Biometrika.

1908: The head brewer at Guinness (Gossett) published the student's t-distribution in Biometrika. He used the pseudonym "student" because of corporate policy.

1910: Davenport start the Eugenics Records Office, which was funded by Carnegie and Rockefeller.

1911: Goddard helps write the first special education law in the USA.

1913a: Goddard translates the Binet Intelligence test into English, and publishes the manual.

1913b: Goddard starts the IQ testing program at Ellis Island.

~1914: Goddard gets on staff at the Eugenics Records Office (later joined by Yerkes, Thorndike, and Alexander Graham Bell)

1917: Goddard publishes some BS racist data from the Ellis Island program. Hint: the Nazis LOVED his findings, and mentioned them in some stuff.

1924-1938: The Eugenics Record Office advocates for Eugenics, and sterilization of immigrants, etc. The co-founder of the Eugenics Records Office wrote the Viriginia Law that allowed serilization of individuals commited to mental institutions in 1924. Davenport helps write a federal law about immigrations restrictions around that time. Weirdly, W.E.B. Dubois gets on board as a fan of eugenics.

1939: Seeing some developments in Europe, the money men decide that maybe having the or names attached to eugenics is a bad idea. Funding gets pulled. Eugenics office is closed down.

TL; DR: dude who started the Eugenics office in the USA was on staff with for the journal where Guinness’ head brewer published. Same dude employed the guy who introduced IQ tests in the USA.

Did you just have this in your head or did you do research?

 

[PsyDr]

Did you just have this in your head or did you do research?

Framework in head, went back to get dates to make a more cogent presentation. I’m literally like this. But I don’t know crap about popular press. OCPD combined with my background is a hell of a thing.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Oh, and people get mad if you call someone narcissistic since it's "ableist towards Cluster B." Even though narcissism is a trait and not necessarily a diagnosis.

What does being "ableist towards Cluster B" look like??

 

[cara susanna]

What does being "ableist towards Cluster B" look like??

Good question. It's basically like assuming someone has a Cluster B disorder because they're acting badly. I've also seen claims of it from people using certain terms, like apparently calling someone a psychopath is ableist towards psychopaths?

I'm not saying that I agree with ANY of this, btw.

 

[Ollie123]

This thread is a spectacular reminder of why I retain the social media presence of that great-grandparent of yours who doesn't own a cell phone and is still mildly afraid of their answering machine (not because of you all, just because of the stories you tell me). I read this board and one financial forum where I'm probably at least 1-2 standard deviations below the mean age. Have a FB account I almost never use and nothing else. I occasionally hear about gaslighting in real life, but almost never see it used incorrectly and I imagine this is more frequently being misused in online circles. I can live without knowing about the cute little online community of psychopaths who get together to discuss their psychopath rights. Or - more likely - a group of people who decided to build an identity around being a psychopath for some reason despite meeting none of the criteria, but now take themselves super-seriously and talk about nothing else to the unending frustration of their family and (likely former) RL friends.

Increasingly out of touch with technology and happier that way. As someone who self-identified as a "techie" for most of his life and built his first computer when he was 12, it is an interesting turn of events.

 

[deleted480308]

I feel today's zeitgeist has exposed the layperson population to many specific terms that we actively explore in our careers. While I believe it's helpful to educate the public, I also feel that it's useful to clarify when these terms are being misused.

For example, I get super annoyed personally when people misuse with word "racist," when suggesting that one can be racist towards a dominate ethnic/racial group. By definition, racism is thrust upon the minority group, and what the majority group feels (from similar bias) is different...it's xenophobia, bigotry, prejudice, intolerance, discrimination, etc. (Future - I don't want to high-jack your thread by a discussion on racism, but similarly, I feel gaslighting is also being thrown out loosely without many understanding the original reference, the 1944 film Gaslight.)

I often times feel its better to just keep quiet unless it is professionally relevant because in my personal life, my frustration meter is going bonkers right about now.

That’s not what racism has traditionally meant, if anything it is a newly (opportunistic) partially adopted useage

 

[DynamicDidactic]

I do not subscribe to Freudian theories of treatment but it seems that even mental health clinicians use the term countertransference incorrectly.

But, maybe its me. A lot of the psychoanalytic ideas have different meanings among different splinter cells.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

That’s not what racism has traditionally meant, if anything it is a newly (opportunistic) partially adopted useage

Maybe you are both correct.
From google:

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

EDIT: upon further inquiry, google is one of the few to include the majority/minority clause. But, the meanings of words do change over time.

 

[deleted480308]

Maybe you are both correct.
From google:

agree the “typically” is very possible. Just saying power is in no way a requirement

 

[CheetahGirl]

That’s not what racism has traditionally meant, if anything it is a newly (opportunistic) partially adopted useage

Hence the spirit of this discussion....

If we disagree about the operational definitions, we'll hardly arrive at the same conclusions...

NOTE: "...typically one [group] that is a minority or marginalized." - Source: Lexico.com, collaboration between Dictionary.com and Oxford University Press

 

[WisNeuro]

Hence the spirit of this discussion....

If we disagree about the operational definitions, we'll hardly arrive at the same conclusions...

NOTE: "...typically one [group] that is a minority or marginalized." - Source: Lexico.com, collaboration between Dictionary.com and Oxford University Press

I think the "power" part of the definition argument is mostly used by one side to mislead. Even if you concede the theoretical issue that a member of a minority group can be racist to a majority group member, the fact that remains the impact of racism is not a constant. On average it will impact the member of the minority group to a much larger extent.

 

[CheetahGirl]

Just saying power is in no way a requirement

Power (and control) are constructs of abuse, which kind of go hand in hand with how racism manifests (you can do a quick literature search to find more info).

I think the "power" part of the definition argument is mostly used by one side to mislead. Even if you concede the theoretical issue that a member of a minority group can be racist to a majority group member, the fact that remains the impact of racism is not a constant. On average it will impact the member of the minority group to a much larger extent.

V. true. However, if you're deeply studying multiculturalism (objectively....through each of our biased lenses), it is the other qualifiers mentioned (xenophobia, bigotry, prejudice, intolerance, discrimination, etc.) that are detailed when one from the minority group conveys distaste/distrust/superiority/etc. towards the majority group...it is not 'racism' in the traditional sense....in my opinion. But this is high-level thought...not meant, nor received by everyone.

 

[deleted480308]

I think the "power" part of the definition argument is mostly used by one side to mislead. Even if you concede the theoretical issue that a member of a minority group can be racist to a majority group member, the fact that remains the impact of racism is not a constant. On average it will impact the member of the minority group to a much larger extent.

It’s used the other way around as a defense, “I can’t possibly be as crappy a person as those white racists, did you notice I’m not white”. Racists are crappy and this modified definition is an attempt to hide from that

agreed end impact on the victim is altered by power of the racist, doesn’t change if the racist is racist or not

 

[deleted480308]

Power (and control) are constructs of abuse, which kind of go hand in hand with how racism manifests (you can do a quick literature search to find more info).



V. true. However, if you're deeply studying multiculturalism (objectively....through each of our biased lenses), it is the other qualifiers mentioned (xenophobia, bigotry, prejudice, intolerance, discrimination, etc.) that are detailed when one from the minority group conveys distaste/distrust/superiority/etc. towards the majority group...it is not 'racism' in the traditional sense....in my opinion (as someone who received a multicultural scholarship for grad school - it remains my job to call out the proper operational definitions, especially now...when appropriate). But this is high-level thought...not meant, nor received by everyone.

Agreed that a powerful racist is more dangerous than a powerless one, but both are racists

 

[CheetahGirl]

Agreed that a powerful racist is more dangerous than a powerless one, but both are racists

Totally agree. I prefer to be anti-racist. Nip it all in the bud.

 

[WisNeuro]

Agreed that a powerful racist is more dangerous than a powerless one, but both are racists

Sure, I'll concede that, but it's a fairly meaningless argument. It's pretty much only used to distract from the real arguments.

 

[deleted480308]

Sure, I'll concede that, but it's a fairly meaningless argument. It's pretty much only used to distract from the real arguments.

Someone being a racist and trying to hide from that by changing definitions is a real argument worth having.

 

[cara susanna]

I also want to add that I've been correcting people about toxic masculinity ever since seeing MCParent's post about it.

 

[WisNeuro]

Someone being a racist and trying to hide from that by changing definitions is a real argument worth having.

That's not the argument that usually happens, though. Sure, we can have an academic argument about it. But, it usually comes up in policy debates or such, where some would rather the status quo be maintained because "everybody's racist, so racism is meaningless and we shoudln't do anything about it" type of argument.

 

[CheetahGirl]

Someone being a racist and trying to hide from that by changing definitions is a real argument worth having.

Deflection, projection (projective identification), minimization, invalidation, grandiosity, rationalization (when emotion should be employed), compartmentalization (when rationalization could be used), regression, cognitive dissonance, Dunning-Kruger effect....(I could go on and on)...all currently on display.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

"everybody's racist, so racism is meaningless and we shouldn't do anything about it" type of argument.

what an interesting, and logically flawed argument. Any example of this in the popular sphere?

I fall on the side that all humans are designed to be discriminatory by nature (not just based on race). However, this is meaningful and it would probably be helpful to do something about it. I feel it would be more worthhile to work on being aware of our biases and attempt to counteract them when they do not serve a helpful role.

Also, this thread really got hijacked.

 

[WisNeuro]

what an interesting, and logically flawed argument. Any example of this in the popular sphere?

Indeed, when the argument is made, it's supposed to be flawed. You see it all the time from the WH, such as when they are asked to denounce white supremacists, and the response is usually the "we denounce ALL violence" or "there are good people on both sides," etc. It's simply a rhetorical tool used to deflect action. And yes, we are a little afield of the OP.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Indeed, when the argument is made, it's supposed to be flawed. You see it all the time from the WH, such as when they are asked to denounce white supremacists, and the response is usually the "we denounce ALL violence" or "there are good people on both sides," etc. It's simply a rhetorical tool used to deflect action. And yes, we are a little afield of the OP.

oh yeah, that. I guess, to me, that seems to not even accept that racism exists. I wonder who accepts that it exists but it should not be addressed.

 

[WisNeuro]

oh yeah, that. I guess, to me, that seems to not even accept that racism exists. I wonder who accepts that it exists but it should not be addressed.

Well, I'd argue that plenty of people know it exists, and would like it to remain that way. But, many of these people know that there will be negative consequences if they make those views publicly known. Easier, and more appealing to a certain base, if we just pretend it doesn't exist or that it's just a minor inconvenience.

 

[deleted480308]

Deflection, projection (projective identification), minimization, invalidation, grandiosity, rationalization (when emotion should be employed), compartmentalization (when rationalization could be used), regression, cognitive dissonance, Dunning-Kruger effect....(I could go on and on)...all currently on display.

You made a big point about how you dislike people using a word properly when you were using it wrong. We had a pretty civil conversation about the definitions of the word and I had thought we came to an agreement that all racists (regardless of power) are bad.

I’m a little confused by this turn

 

[PsyDr]

Dunning-Kruger effect....(I could go on and on)...all currently on display.

I believe it was David Dunning who said,


“The first rule of the Dunning-Kruger club is you don’t know you’re a member of the Dunning-Kruger club. People miss that.”

And

“But there are a couple things that people get wrong that are major.

The first is they think it’s about them [i.e., others]. That is, there are those people out there who are stupid and don’t realize they are stupid.

Now, those people may exist, and the work isn’t about that.”

 

[CheetahGirl]

@PsyDr - one of my favorite memes

You made a big point about how you dislike people using a word properly when you were using it wrong.

I did not say I was using the word "racism" incorrectly, rather that the average layperson is misunderstanding the concept and actively misusing the word.

@sb247 - Please remind of your background, again (i.e., are you a undergrad, grad student, psychologist, etc.?)...then, I may know how elaborate to clear some confusion.

 

[deleted480308]

@PsyDr - one of my favorite memes

View attachment 320051





I did not say I was using the word "racism" incorrectly, rather that the average layperson is misunderstanding the concept and actively misusing the word.

@sb247 - Please remind of your background, again (i.e., are you a undergrad, grad student, psychologist, etc.?)...then, I may know how elaborate to clear some confusion.

I’m a doctor, and if you are still insisting a less powerful demographic can’t be racist you are wrong

 

[PsyDr]

@PsyDr - one of my favorite memes

View attachment 320051





I did not say I was using the word "racism" incorrectly, rather that the average layperson is misunderstanding the concept and actively misusing the word.

@sb247 - Please remind of your background, again (i.e., are you a undergrad, grad student, psychologist, etc.?)...then, I may know how elaborate to clear some confusion.

We both know I am exactly the type of stupid that liked this movie when it came out.