🎵 Taylor Swift is the New Grateful Dead!?!?! 🎵

“I’d like to be my old self again But I’m still trying to find it.”

-Taylor Swift, “All Too Well”

I’ve wanted to write about gaslighting since I started this newsletter.

What does this have to do with Queen Taylor?

Well, nothing. And everything, I suppose.

(Stay with me…)

Taylor Swift is a phenomenon; she’s not my favorite artist, but it’s impossible not to respect her accomplishments. And with my limited knowledge, I think that what makes Taylor Swift so successful is the way in which she captures the full range of emotions through her lyrics.

On one level, “All Too Well” is a song about a terrible breakup. But it’s far more than that. And it provides Swift’s window into how someone she once loved could manipulate her emotions. And while Swift never uses the word “gaslighting” in the song, understanding the song’s meaning, and how it relates to our work, are deeply related.

(We’ll get to the Grateful Dead part later…)

Gaslight Effect

In 2022, Merriam-Webster named “gaslighting” its word of the year, pointing out that in a single year, the total number of online searches on their website for the term increased by 1,740%. While gaslighting become more commonly used due to recent events, the term has a fascinating history.

Interestingly, I had no idea that the term gaslighting actually comes from a play and film called Gas Light, originally made in England and later reproduced in the United States in a movie starring Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman. Here’s the original trailer from 1944:

The film centers around a husband trying to manipulate his wife into believing that she is going insane so that he can steal her inheritance, switching the gas lights around in their home to exacerbate her self-doubt (hence the term “gaslight”). “Gaslight” comes to be a synonym for psychological manipulation, allowing one to achieve personal gain by getting another person to falsely doubt their competence.

Although “gaslight” became a more commonly used term due to increases in concerns about fake news, deep fakes, etc., ultimately gaslighting is a way of manipulating relationships. What we refer to today as “gaslighting” is really a term called the “gaslight effect” coined by psychoanalyst Dr. Robin Stern:

“The Gaslight Effect results from a relationship between two people: a gaslighter, who needs to be right in order to preserve his own sense of self and his sense of having power in the world; and a gaslightee, who allows the gaslighter to define her sense of reality because she idealizes him and seeks his approval…If there’s even a little piece of you that thinks you’re not good enough by yourself — if even a small part of you feels you need your gaslighter’s love or approval to be whole — then you are susceptible to gaslighting. And a gaslighter will take advantage of that vulnerability to make you doubt yourself, over and over again.”

Of course, the villain in the gaslighting relationship is the one doing the gaslighting, whether that be an intimate partner, friend, boss, etc. However, Dr. Stern argues that a person cannot gaslight without a willing participant, and her work largely focuses on how to get the victim out of the toxic relational loop.

Today, the APA’s Dictionary of Psychology defines “gaslighting” as, “to manipulate another person into doubting his or her perceptions, experiences, or understanding of events.”

Unfortunately, gaslighting is a common characteristic of toxic work environments, which you can learn more about by listening to this podcast:

Sadly, there are levels and varieties of toxic relationships, and gaslighting is one in a series of ways in which people can be victimized by people who can only find their self-worth through holding power over others. And while a victim of gaslighting can face terrible consequences, this is not the worst part of the story.

Blind to Betrayal

I am honored to serve on the Rabbinic Advisory Board for Jewish Women International (JWI), a wonderful organization that, among other things, focuses on education about domestic violence in the Jewish Community. Several years ago, I was the editor-in-chief of their updated Clergy Guide for Domestic Abuse, which you can download here. During that my research, I learned about a term called DARVO.

Jennifer Freyd’s Blind to Betrayal focuses on the psychology of betrayal, and why all of us can be blind to what others have done to us, particularly regarding issues of sexual abuse and sexual assault. Part scientific and part autobiographical (read more to find out), Freyd’s book was eye-opening for me about a topic about which I know too little. And this brings us to DARVO.

DARVO refers to a process that takes place when a victim of abuse comes forward, and, in response, the perpetrator will engage in a process where they Deny, Attack, and Reverse the Victim and Offender. If you’ve ever heard of an instance where a credible accusation comes forward about abuse only to see the accusation devolve into a “he said/she said/they said” situation, you are likely seeing DARVO in action. In one sense, DARVO is a kind of gaslighting, which is why I am including this book recommendation in this week’s issue. In another sense, DARVO is a way of reducing a victim’s credibility and is far more common than we want to admit. Perhaps this is why DARVO even made its way into an episode of South Park (warning: it’s TV-MA):

Freyd’s book provides an easy-to-digest framework for someone like me to understand cycles of abuse (due to my lack of knowledge), but also because it helps us understand some of the issues all of us confront in our workplaces. Some readers of our newsletter deal with younger populations where abuse and assault can come up in the programs that we run; other people are simply trying to navigate toxic workplaces. But no matter the context, it’s important to understand that it can be hard for people to come forward, and how systems can let people down when they do come forward. Taylor Swift is brave enough to talk about her experiences; more of us can learn from her example.

Visible Voices Podcast

Weekly Links

1. Why Taylor Swift is the New Grateful Dead: Yes, this is a real article, and you should read it. As a lifelong Phish Phan, all I can say is “mad respect.” But someone let me know if she plays a Bar or Bat Mitzvah like Flo Rida?
2. To Be Successful, You Need to Fail 16% of the Time: Any article with this kind of title gets my attention. Read it and decide for yourself.
3. Embarrassment is Part of a Growth Process: I’ve recently gotten interested in a newsletter called Zen Habits, and this piece on embarrassment sparked my thinking.
4. Social Media Debate Continues: I read two pieces last week that were fascinating because of their divergences. The first was the warning from Dr. Vivek Murphy, the United States Surgeon General, about the danger that social media poses to teenagers. The second was a piece from The New York Times on the net positive role of social media for LGBTQ youth. One need not see these articles as contradictory, but they both exist in a complex landscape.
5. The Oath Keepers Enjoy Tax-Exempt Status: I’ve shared links about this previously, but how is it possible that the Oath Keepers, one of the groups at the center of the January 6th Insurrection, have the same tax status as our respective organizations? Turns out, it’s not hard.