“Manipulating Emotions: A Study of Control and Confusion in Post-Separation Dynamics”
Individuals who engage in gaslighting primarily seek to control others…but why?
Narcissists may engage in gaslighting as a way to project their own insecurities and unacceptable traits onto others, thus avoiding confrontation with their own vulnerabilities. This act of projection allows them to maintain an illusion of perfection and superiority by shifting blame and responsibility for negative outcomes or shortcomings onto the victim. Such behavior is a defense mechanism that protects their fragile ego from acknowledgment of personal flaws or failures. Additionally, narcissistic individuals often view relationships primarily as tools for their own benefit, rather than as opportunities for genuine connection. Gaslighting becomes a tactic in this context to undermine and destabilize partners or associates, ensuring they remain in a less empowered, more manageable position. This strategy is employed to distort the victim’s perception of reality, thereby reinforcing the narcissist’s perceived authority and control within the relationship. By doing so, narcissists work to prevent any challenge to their dominance, securing their position at the top of the relationship hierarchy.
Unchain my heart
Baby, let, let me be
‘Cause you don’t care
Well, please
Set me free…
“Unchain My Heart” was originally written by Bobby Sharp and recorded by Ray Charles in 1961. The composition has since become a classic, covered by many artists and enduring in popularity due to its emotional depth and powerful melody.
The dynamics of human relationships often echo the haunting refrains of perennial classics, with their melodies resonating through the manifold complexities expressed in passive aggressive communication styles. The iconic “Unchain My Heart” emerges as a recurring theme or leitmotif for those entangled in the disorienting dance of gaslighting. As a kernel or central theme, the song as a cry for emancipation, mirrors the internal turmoil faced by manipulated individuals whose reality is constantly manipulated.
The often challenging to recognize, comprehend and deconstruct dynamics of gaslighting, nevertheless allow us to draw some parallels between the song’s plea for release from the chains of a burdensome love and the struggle of individuals seeking liberation from the shackles of psychological manipulation. Here, gaslighting, a strategy employed to destabilize and delegitimize another’s perception of reality, finds its reflection in the song’s core message. The two bullet points below delve into the behavior patterns typical of gaslighters — avoidance of accountability and a lack of validation for their victims — both of which resonate with the longing for acknowledgment and freedom expressed in the timeless lament of “Unchain My Heart.”
- They do this without assuming accountability or responsibility.
- Furthermore, they often fail to offer respect and validation to the other party. Essentially denying the victim a source of stable identity.
This behavior serves to undermine the other’s perception of reality, moving the victim’s(other’s) narrative center and destabilizing the their creative arc thereby increasing the gaslighter’s control and diminishing the other’s ability to challenge or question the gaslighter’s actions or authority. The gaslighter therefore controls the other through constructing a plot trajectory using kernels of truth, usually inverted, to create fibers of narrative composed of consecutively connected bits and pieces of episodic events reinterpreted as required to fit the manipulation which embalms the victim inside an insane heterotopia. The episodic events are usually as in Propp fairly standard functional elements or kernels which in themselves do not impact the plot outcome but determine the outcome through their interactions.
In Chomsky this form of gaslighting represents a form of hegemonic oppression to acquire consent by manufacturing a reality the individual must tacitly accept or be called out for being irrational or irresponsible. See Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky.
Let’s define the terms
Gaslighting is a psychological manipulation that distorts the victim’s perception of reality, often leading them to question their own memories, perceptions, and sanity. A classic example comes from the 1944 film Gaslight, where the protagonist’s husband systematically manipulates small elements of their environment to convince her of her own madness, playing on the lights and denying it, leading her to doubt her sanity.
In gaslighting scenarios, manipulators often isolate and weaken their victims by forging secretive or illicit pacts, effectively making the victims complicit under threat of exposure and introducing or inducing a set of selreflexive emotions to destabilize the victim. These include fear or anxiety, guilt and regret.
But there other other emotions as well. Empathy, Jealousy, Shame, Pride, Embarrassment, and Hubris(hubris is a noun that means excessive pride or self-confidence, or arrogance.)
Self-conscious emotions are crucial components to one’s sense of self. They require the cognitive ability to reflect on the self. Socialization plays an increasing role in determining what situations elicit what emotions.
Other self-reflexive emotions: humility, envy, and gratitude
This move to activate the binding as an emotional response and a commitment between parties not only separates victims from their allies but also burdens them with guilt and fear, reinforcing the manipulator’s control.
Stockholm syndrome, a condition where victims empathize with and grow sympathetic to their captors, can emerge from such situations. Although rare, affecting about 8 percent of hostage victims, it highlights the deep psychological impact of prolonged manipulation. In fact, affected victims start to see their survival as linked to their captor’s well-being, confusing abuse for alliance.
Pacts and Alliances
These secretive pacts can lead to Stockholm syndrome by making individuals feel isolated and guilty, weakening their ability to see the situation clearly. The false bond created under duress mimics loyalty, making victims align with the gaslighter’s views, further entangling them in the manipulative relationship. This blurs the lines between abuser and ally, complicating the victim’s ability to escape the toxic dynamic.
Cohomologies, in the context of gaslighting, represent the overarching narrative structures that reveal gaps or unresolved tensions within a story, akin to emotional or psychological voids created by manipulation. The complex, layered narrative of Inception, 2010 by C. Nolan, as an exploration of cohomologies, with each dream layer offering a different ‘gap’ or reality to navigate, pushing characters to question the very fabric of their perceived reality and revealing the depths to which manipulation can alter perception.
Now here is the important detail
Cohomologies, when discussed within the context of gaslighting, reveal the intricacies of narrative manipulation by exposing the gaps or unresolved tensions in a story — essentially the emotional or psychological voids that manipulation creates. The 2010 film Inception serves as a prime example of cohomologies in action.
Here, each dream layer introduces a unique reality with its own set of rules and gaps, compelling characters (and viewers) to question the nature of their perceived reality. This multilayered narrative underscores how deep manipulation can go, affecting not just the immediate perception but also the underlying understanding of one’s reality.
To visualize cohomologies and their components in this context, imagine the narrative space as a complex, multidimensional structure:
- Kernels-τ: are the central truths or facts around which the narrative revolves. These are akin to the unchangeable core elements of a story or the foundational beliefs of an individual that remain constant despite attempts at manipulation. In a geometrical sense, kernels can be seen as the “center” or “holes” around which the rest of the narrative structure is built.
- Cocycles-ζ: represent the narrative threads or elements that are woven around the kernels. They can be thought of as the connective tissue that links various parts of the narrative, creating a coherent story. These cocycles wrap around the kernels, constructing the fibers of the narrative that extend outward from the core truths.
- Cohomologies then are the vertical stacks H^n of these narratives, representing the layered complexities of possible realities. Each layer, or each H^n, can be seen as a different version of the narrative, constructed from a selection of kernels and cocycles. This is similar to the layered dream realities in Nolan’s Inception, where each layer represents a distinct narrative and reality.
In a parallel to Vladimir Propp’s analysis of Russian folktales, where he identified a set of 31 functions and 7 characters that recur across tales, we can compare kernels to Propp’s narrative functions (the fundamental plot movements) and cocycles to the inventory of seven characters and actions that carry out or embody these functions. Propp’s framework suggests that any Russian folktale can be constructed from a specific combination of these functions and characters, fitting within the boundary conditions of the genre as cataloged in Alexander Afanasyev’s collection of 500 Russian fairy tales.
Just as Propp’s analysis indicates that there is a finite set of functions and characters from which any number of tales can be constructed, cohomologies in narrative theory suggest that from a given set of kernels (fundamental truths or narrative elements) and cocycles (connecting narrative threads), a range of possible narratives H^n can be created. These narratives, while diverse, all stem from the same foundational elements, yet are differentiated by how these elements are interconnected and layered.
In the context of gaslighting, the manipulator effectively chooses and alters the cocycles and the arrangement of cohomologies to create a disorienting array of possible realities for the victim, each designed to undermine their perception of the core truth (the kernel) around which their reality is constructed. This manipulation mirrors the way narratives are constructed in folklore and film, highlighting the power of narrative structures to shape and reshape our understanding of reality.
Homologies signify the underlying, consistent themes or truths within a narrative that remain intact despite the surface-level distortions of gaslighting. The enduring love and resilience of Celie, the protagonist in The Color Purple, despite the manipulative abuse she faces, embody a homology of enduring human spirit, showcasing how deep, unalterable truths about human resilience and the capacity for love persist even in the face of relentless distortion and manipulation.
Kernels (Null Spaces) in the analysis of gaslighting represent the foundational truths or facts that remain unaltered despite the manipulator’s attempts to obscure or invert them. The unchangeable fact of Hamlet’s father’s murder in Hamlet serves as a kernel around which Claudius builds layers of deception, attempting to weave a narrative that hides this central truth beneath a web of lies and manipulation.
Fibers (fibrils) of Narrative Construction are the narrative threads that are constructed around the kernels of truth. Gaslighters manipulate these fibers to weave an alternate reality. In *Gone Girl*, Amy’s concocted diary entries serve as manipulated fibers of narrative, crafting a false storyline to frame her husband for her murder, illustrating how manipulated narratives can be woven around kernels of truth to create compelling yet false stories.
The chronotope, is a term used by Mikhail Bakhtin, and refers to the intrinsic connectedness of temporal and spatial relationships within a narrative, which gaslighters manipulate to create disorienting heterotopias. The many possible morphological loci of time and space as events in Kafka’s The Trial exemplify a disorienting chronotope that mirrors the effects of gaslighting, where the protagonist is ensnared in an incomprehensible legal system, reflecting how gaslighting disorients and isolates its victims.
In literary theory and philosophy of language, a chronotope is how time and space are represented in language and discourse. The term comes from the words chronos, meaning “time”, and topos, meaning “space”.
The chronotope as a tool in the gaslighter’s arsenal represents the genre or style in which the gaslighter chooses to manipulate the victim’s narrative. The genre in which the victim’s narrative is managed can significantly impact the effectiveness and subtlety of the manipulation. Bakhtin’s categorization of genres, including “Greek romance” among 6 others, offers a wide latitude to develop a framework to explore the various narrative styles a gaslighter might adopt to disorient and control their victim. Each genre, with its unique set of temporal and spatial dynamics, provides a distinct mode of narrative manipulation.
For instance, adopting a style from “Greek romance” involves introducing elements of adventure, unexpected developments, and often, a journey that the victim is compelled to undertake. In this scenario, the gaslighter creates a narrative filled with uncertainty and continuous challenges, much like the unpredictable odysseys or journeys of Greek heroes. The victim, placed in the role of the protagonist, is forced to navigate a series of trials and tribulations, never quite understanding the rules of the world they are thrust into. This mirrors the disorienting trajectory of Joseph K. in Kafka’s “The Trial,” where the protagonist is dragged through an incomprehensible legal process, illustrating how the chronotope — through the manipulation of time and space — serves to disorient and destabilize.
In manipulating genre in gaslighting, the gaslighter as an author, can shift the narrative into a tragedy, where the victim is led to believe that their actions inevitably lead to negative outcomes, instilling a sense of fatalism and helplessness.
Alternatively, the narrative might morph into a farce, where the victim’s serious concerns and perceptions are trivialized, leading them to doubt the legitimacy of their own experiences.
The genre chosen by the gaslighter effectively becomes the Kantian lens through which the victim experiences their reality, shaping their perception of events, time, and space. By manipulating the genre, the gaslighter not only controls the narrative but also the victim’s role within it, whether as a tragic hero, a bewildered wanderer in a romance, or a hapless character in a farce. This manipulation extends to the creation of heterotopias — alternate realities that contrast sharply with the victim’s known world, further disorienting them and skewing their perception of reality.
Clearly, the gaslighter’s manipulation of genre, inspired by Bakhtin’s categorizations, reveals the sophisticated ways in which narratives can be crafted to disorient, control, and isolate victims. By understanding these manipulative techniques, one can better recognize and resist the disorienting effects of gaslighting, whether they manifest in the shifting sands of a Kafkaesque legal nightmare or the labyrinthine odysseys of Greek romance.
Heterotopias are spaces of otherness, conceptualized by Foucault, representing the alternative realities or perceptions created by gaslighting. The mirrored world in Lewis Carroll’s *Through the Looking-Glass* acts as a heterotopia, standing in stark contrast to Alice’s known reality and showcasing how gaslighting can create a mirror universe where nothing is as it seems, and the victim’s grasp on their own reality becomes tenuous.
These examples bridge the dynamics of gaslighting with intricate concepts from mathematics, literary theory, and film criticism, offering a nuanced perspective on how narratives and realities are manipulated and the profound impact this manipulation can have on individuals’ perception of truth and self.
“Unchain My Heart,” performed first by Ray Charles, deliberates on a plea for liberation from an unreciprocated emotional bond. The narrative captures a deep yearning for freedom from a relationship where care and love are absent.
From a purely mathematical perceptive of created boundary conditions which gaslighting represents, the lyrics metaphorically resemble the process of identifying kernels and cohomologies in the sense that they both involve a separation or disentanglement from a larger structure.
- In mathematics, kernels (τ) symbolize the collection of elements that map to a neutral element, such as zero, within a function. This concept represents the pursuit of identifying inputs leading to a condition of stasis or neutrality. Mirroring this mathematical idea, the lyrical appeal to “Unchain my heart” expresses a longing for emotional equilibrium or liberation, essentially seeking those factors in a relationship that would nullify the emotional weight. Just as kernels signify foundational truths from which various narratives (cocycles, ζ) can unfold, the plea in the song underscores a fundamental desire for freedom and relief from emotional constraints, drawing a parallel to the mathematical pursuit of identifying core inputs that result in a neutral outcome.
- Cohomologies explore space properties using algebraic structures, focusing on null spaces (τ) — the gaps or holes in a space that resist simple resolution, akin to immutable truths such as the laws of motion. This concept parallels the emotional landscape depicted in the song, characterized by unresolved tensions between a longing for freedom and the constraints of an unfulfilling relationship. The singer’s plea for emancipation navigates these emotional voids, striving for a solution that releases the heart from its bindings, reminiscent of addressing a complex cohomological challenge by comprehending its framework and overcoming the emotional gaps.
- In emotional manipulation, gaslighters create narratives and perceptions that distort the victim’s reality, much like null spaces in cohomology represent ambiguous or undefined areas. These spaces manifest as gaps between the victim’s actual experiences and their altered perceptions.
Let’s clarify the terms and their application in the context of emotional manipulation, like gaslighting:
- Kernels-τ represent the origins or core issues within a relationship that lead to conflict or emotional distress. In mathematical terms, a kernel is a set of inputs that result in a neutral output in a function, often zero. In relationships, these “kernels” can be thought of as the unresolved core issues or behaviors that lead to a neutral or negative emotional state.
2. Gaps in the context of emotional manipulation refer to the discrepancies or voids between what is real and what is perceived. These are the ‘spaces’ created by the manipulator’s actions where the victim’s perception of reality becomes unclear. The spaces represent mathematical concepts of null spaces, which are gaps or holes in a structure that aren’t easily resolved.
3. In emotional manipulation(management), like gaslighting, the manipulator exploits these kernels and gaps. They might deny or twist the truth about the core issues (kernels-τ), creating confusion and doubt. This process creates and widens the ‘gaps’ in the victim’s understanding of their own experiences, making it difficult for them to distinguish between what is real and what is manipulated.
4. The manipulation of these gaps and kernels serves to disorient and control the victim, making them dependent on the gaslighter for their version of reality. The victim’s struggle to reconcile these gaps with their sense of truth keeps them in a state of uncertainty and vulnerability.
Kernels are the core issues or truths in a situation, while gaps represent the spaces of uncertainty created by manipulation. In gaslighting, the abuser manipulates these elements to control or undermine the victim’s perception of reality.
- Creating Imaginary Spaces: Gaslighters distort reality by denying the victim’s experiences, contradicting their memories, or presenting false information as truth. This distortion creates a gap between the victim’s actual experiences and their understanding, similar to undefined areas in mathematical structures.
- Manipulating Information: Gaslighters gather and twist information into cocycle fibers around truth kernels to shape the victim’s emotional perspective. They control the victim’s access to information, reinforcing the gaslighter’s narrative while dismissing contradictory evidence. This selective exposure keeps the victim aligned with the gaslighter’s constructed reality.
- Managing Emotional Gaps: The gaps created are used to isolate the victim and make them dependent on the gaslighter for understanding reality. Gaslighters manage these gaps by constantly shifting the narrative, keeping the victim confused and self-doubting. This ensures the victim focuses on resolving inconsistencies in their understanding rather than questioning the gaslighter’s motives.
- Navigating Basic Truths: Despite the manipulation, certain basic truths about the victim’s experiences remain unchanged. Gaslighters acknowledge these truths to maintain credibility but weave them into their larger deceptive narrative. This approach allows gaslighters to navigate around immutable truths while still controlling the overall narrative.
In both cases, the mathematical analogies help illuminate the song’s underlying themes of seeking resolution and liberation from a constraining situation, using kernels to symbolize the quest for emotional neutrality and cohomologies to represent the complex emotional spaces filled with unresolved tensions.
“Unchain My Heart” perhaps metaphorically references gaslighting by expressing the anguish of feeling trapped and the longing for emotional freedom within a relationship where one’s feelings are neglected. The song’s plea for release and recognition of the partner’s indifference echo the experiences of those seeking escape from manipulative control. This thematic interpretation highlights the struggle for autonomy and the emotional resilience required to break free from such dynamics, offering insight into the psychological aspects of gaslighting.
The repeated requests to “Unchain my heart / Please set me free” resonate with the concept of the parallax view, emphasizing the disparity between two opposing perceptions: the narrator’s perceived value of the relationship versus the actual disregard from the partner. This discrepancy highlights a critical aspect of human relationships and self-perception, echoing the psychological and existential dimensions explored by thinkers like Žižek and Zupančič.
In this song, Cocker articulates the complex tension between one’s inner world of feelings and desires and the outer world of relational dynamics and social expectations. The call for release, “Oh set me free / Oh woman why don’t you do that for me,” underscores a profound emotional entanglement and the longing for detachment from sources of pain and limitation, mirroring the human endeavor to reconcile internal desires with external realities.
Case study:
A husband, in the process of being exonerated after a wrongful conviction, returns to civilian life and moves in with his wife into a serene park view condominium. He creates a business for them which requires her to travel to another state, say VA or WV.
Despite their reunion, the dynamics of their relationship have shifted, notably in their communication and financial dealings. The wife seeks financial assistance from her ex-husband to and to pay for the apartment. Rather than specifying the amount required or discussing the matter directly, she adopts an indirect approach. She frequently contacts him, leaving messages urging him to call her back. Each message implies an urgency but lacks the essential details necessary for the ex-husband to understand the situation fully or to take concrete action. She complains of her difficulties but does not accept relevant advice or the responsibility for her actions or mistakes. Her bad behavior cause her to become more aggressive and angry as her financial situation creates the need for more and more money. The husband limited by multiple medical conditions and still dealing with his post incarceration complications cannot travel to deal with financial problems both created and perpetuated by the wife.
This method of communication leaves the ex-husband in a state of confusion and frustration. He finds himself questioning his perception of the situation and his ability to meet her needs effectively, hallmarks of the emotional disorientation often induced by gaslighting. The wife’s avoidance of direct communication and her insistence on creating a sense of urgency without providing clear information are key features of this scenario. The wife frequently uses the couples son who is 4.0 GPA student at a top academic institution as an example of the husband’s failure as a father.
This approach manipulates the emotional and cognitive state of the ex-husband, making him doubt his understanding and responsiveness to her needs. The repetitive nature of the wife’s vague requests and the lack of clear information can lead to a cycle of confusion and misunderstanding. The ex-husband might feel trapped in a situation where he wants to help but is continuously left guessing how to do so effectively. This case exemplifies how gaslighting can manifest in relationships, particularly in the context of financial negotiations or support. The manipulator (in this case, the wife) leverages ambiguity and emotional urgency to gain control over the situation, leaving the victim (the ex-husband) doubting his perceptions and decisions. This case study sheds light on the complexities of gaslighting within personal relationships, highlighting the importance of direct communication and clarity in interactions, especially when financial support and emotional well-being are at stake.
Case Study Overview:
The wife, in this scenario, seeks financial support from her ex-husband for an apartment, yet she avoids straightforward communication. Instead of providing the specific amount needed for the apartment, she frequently contacts him, urging him to call her back, thereby escalating the situation’s perceived urgency without delivering the necessary details for resolution. This behavior may leave the ex-husband feeling confused, frustrated, and possibly questioning his understanding of the situation, which are common outcomes in gaslighting scenarios.
Analysis in Relation to Gaslighting:
- Seeking Control without Responsibility: The wife’s insistence on the ex-husband’s involvement, without providing clear information, puts him in a position where he feels obliged to respond but is unable to take any meaningful action due to the lack of crucial details. This dynamic creates a situation where she exercises control over his actions and emotions without taking responsibility for facilitating the solution (i.e., paying the apartment rent).
- Avoiding Accountability: By not providing the rent amount directly, the wife avoids engaging in a transparent and constructive conversation that could lead to a resolution. This avoidance can serve to keep the ex-husband in a state of dependency and uncertainty, questioning his perceptions and actions, which is a hallmark of gaslighting.
- Manipulating Perceptions: The continuous escalation of urgency, without corresponding information, manipulates the ex-husband’s perception of the situation’s severity. This manipulation can make him feel unjustly pressured and anxious, further entrenching the control the wife seeks to maintain.
- Withholding Validation: The wife’s actions withhold validation of the ex-husband’s need for clarity and respect in communication. By not acknowledging the simplicity of the solution (providing the rent amount), she invalidates any logic or reason he might apply to the situation, undermining his confidence and self-esteem.
This case study illustrates how gaslighting can manifest not just through direct deception but through manipulation of the communication process and control dynamics within a relationship. It underscores the importance of clear, direct communication and mutual respect to prevent and address such manipulative behaviors.
Emotional Undercurrents: Complex Emotions Within Gaslighting Dynamics
Self-reflexive emotions significantly influence gaslighting dynamics, affecting both the gaslighter and the victim. Shame, pride, regret, remorse, guilt, humility, self-assurance, and gratitude each play a role in the psychological landscape of gaslighting relationships.
Gaslighters might use shame as a tool, projecting it onto their victims to avoid facing their own inadequacies. Victims might feel ashamed as their perceptions are invalidated. Pride for gaslighters is linked to their control and superiority, which gets threatened when questioned, leading to more aggressive behaviors. Victims may feel embarrassed about being manipulated.
Victims often experience regret and remorse for their decisions influenced by gaslighting, while gaslighters rarely show genuine remorse, as this would mean acknowledging their manipulative behavior. Victims also struggle with guilt, blaming themselves for issues in the relationship, a feeling exploited by gaslighters to maintain control.
Humility in victims can be distorted, leading them to see themselves as fundamentally flawed due to the gaslighter’s manipulation. Gaslighters might feign humility to manipulate, while their actions erode the victim’s self-assurance, making them doubt their judgments.
Victims may feel gratitude towards the gaslighter for moments of kindness, not recognizing these as manipulative tactics. Gaslighters might demand gratitude to reinforce dominance. Understanding these emotions is crucial for supporting victims, helping them rebuild their self-perception and reality, and navigating the emotional aftermath of gaslighting.
Individuals who engage in gaslighting primarily seek to control others…but why?
Look at my next blog for an answer…
