6 Reasons ‘Why Women Aren’t Crazy’ is Only Part of the Story - A critique of Gaslighting

2012-05-21T20:02:21+00:00

Bringing up the possibility that a woman might be wrong is considered abusive and misogynistic. That's what "gaslighting" is referring to. It's an attempt to disempower women who might possibly deviate from the radfem ideology.

C0CKPUNCHER · 2012-05-21T17:58:30+00:00

Don't link to that site.

"How listening changes everything: Mark Greene seeks a non-gender binary discussion of gas lighting.

Yashar Ali’s explosively popular article “Why Women Aren’t Crazy” is out there racking up Facebook shares in the tens of thousands. This tells me its resonating with a lot of women AND men. But, Ali’s article, although valid on some very real levels, tells a limited narrative in a limiting way.

Ali’s central thesis is that men consistently seek to undermine and devalue women’s emotional responses. The process is called “gaslighting”, in reference to a 1940′s film where a husband tries to drive his wife crazy by purposely refusing to acknowledge her perception of events in the world. Ali warns us we have a “gaslighting epidemic in our country”, the result of “the slow and steady drumbeat of women being undermined and dismissed, on a daily basis” by men. He goes on to say “gaslighting is one of many reasons why we are dealing with this public construction of women as ‘crazy’”.

I’d like to talk about a number of issues I have with Ali’s emotionally compelling but ultimately incomplete narrative.

1 Women are not the only ones being “gaslighted”

Women are not the only ones who’s emotional responses are being invalidated or suppressed in our culture. For many men, the message we receive from our co-workers, friends, lovers and families is quite clear. Our acceptable range of emotional responses should be restricted to a very narrow set of traditional male responses (Typically macho-confidence or anger). We are not encouraged to express uncertainty, fear, sadness, discontent or panic. We are not encouraged to express things that may decrease the sense of security in our families or partnerships. The script we are handed is very clear: “Things are going to be fine. I’m going to make sure everything is okay.” Rinse and repeat. What’s ironic here is that expressing our more fragile emotions in a safe and receptive space is a powerful way to grow security and stability. Rest assured, men know what it feels like to be told to suppress our emotions of grief, melancholy or fear. And, sadly, when we do as we are told and hide these “unacceptable emotions,” they often reemerge as explosive anger, drug or alcohol abuse, or stress-related illnesses.

2 Ali’s gaslighted women are powerless victims

Ali’s article drives a narrative that women are victims of damaging external influences over which they have little or no power. When you invite people to view themselves as victims of this kind, you leave out a very important participant in the narrative. Any of us, men or women, who view ourselves as victims must also take responsibility for the role we play in these processes, both in terms of how the events occur and in how we choose to interpret the events after the fact. Ali encourages women to view themselves as victims without asking of his readers the requisite self-examination that will empower breaking out of the victim cycle. In order for gaslighting to work, you have to allow it continue. Given the changes society has undergone, some substantial percentage of women (say 50%) don’t have to sit and take the kind of silencing Ali describes any more. So I would ask that gaslighting not be treated as a universal phenomenon, but instead as something we are, to some substantive degree, in transition away from.

3 Ali’s article leverages dramatic language that blames and pathologizes

The language in Ali’s article, “emotional manipulation” “epidemic” “pre-meditated” “neurosis” is designed to encourage an adversarial and sometimes pathological diagnosis of a wide range of human interactions. If you say to someone, “you’re gaslighting me” the dialogue is taken down a path defined by pathological and abuse markers. Markers which should not be assigned or taken on lightly. Once we assign those kind of markers to ourselves or others close to us, we put in place abuse and victimhood frames which overshadow possibilities for flexibility, growth and mutual discovery. If you are being abused, by all means, bring in the calvary. But we must all be wary of the urge to drop the rhetorical A-bomb on our partner when a few months in therapy might put the two of you back on a track toward more honest and open emotional communication.

4 Ali’s article encourages his readers to employ simplistic binary assumptions

For instance, Ali writes: “A remark intended to shut you down like, “Calm down, you’re overreacting,” after you just addressed someone else’s bad behavior, is emotional manipulation—pure and simple.”

Ali encourages the recipient of this “gaslighting” statement to view it as intended to shut her down. In doing so, he encourages his female readers to assume a specific intent behind this kind of statement. Is it his intention that we should believe the recipient of this statement NEVER overreacts? That would be unusual. Most of us have overreacted at least once in our lives.

An example of this might be, “my boss hates me” or “I suck at relationships.” These kind of responses burst out in moments when our capacity is tapped out and we’re feeling like we’re failures. These kinds of statements and the emotions that accompany them are probably not the only way we can frame these situations. These are victim statements born out of frustration. And most of us have overreacted like this at one time or another.

When I overreact periodically, my wife often helps me out by suggesting that my reason for feeling reactive may be fear-based or seated in some perceptions that I might want to reconsider. Usually, the response I give after I cool down is much more balanced and productive. My point is this. We can’t remove the sentence “You’re overreacting” from our dialogues. We can’t stigmatize the use of that kind of suggestion. And we can’t assume its a negative. It can be a heartfelt attempt to be helpful. We can always add the word “maybe” in front of it, but ultimately, being willing to reflect on and reconsider our emotional responses is one of the most powerful gifts we can give our partners and ourselves.

hardwarequestions · 2012-05-21T17:02:44+00:00

are we recognizing the validity of gaslighting now?

Alanna · 2012-05-21T22:23:15+00:00

For all the guys convinced that "gaslighting" is just another thing feminists made up just to demonize men: the absolutely justified objections to the articles posted here and here are basically using the same argument-- that feminists are using minimizing, dismissing, and shaming language to both excuse their own indifference to MR issues and to encourage others to follow their example. The goal is exactly the same-- to further marginalize the less powerful viewpoint.

6 Reasons ‘Why Women Aren’t Crazy’ is Only Part of the Story - A critique of Gaslighting

Comments

1 Women are not the only ones being “gaslighted”

2 Ali’s gaslighted women are powerless victims

3 Ali’s article leverages dramatic language that blames and pathologizes

4 Ali’s article encourages his readers to employ simplistic binary assumptions

5 Ali provides examples that misidentify strengths as weaknesses

6 Ali’s article encourages counterproductive binary arguments

Title	6 Reasons ‘Why Women Aren’t Crazy’ is Only Part of the Story - A critique of Gaslighting
Author	megaSAHD
Upvotes	3
Comments	15
Date	May 21, 2012 4:26 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/txol0/6_reasons_why_women_arent_crazy_is_only_part_of/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/6-reasons-why-women-arent-crazy-is-only-part-of.1021375 https://theredarchive.com/post/1021375