Trigger Warning: Word Discussion: Gaslighting

[Ythan]

Also being gaslit into believing you're the one gaslighting

This is how I first learned the word.

[Guillotina]

Gaslighting vs Positive Reality Support.

Gaslighting is a manipulation technique used to deny a person’s reality in order to make them doubt their own mind, intuition, and perception of events. The term comes from a play/movie where a husband dismisses as merely imagined his wife’s notice of the gas lights being dimmed, while he indeed inadvertently dimmed the lights by using gas lights elsewhere to search for jewels of a woman he has murdered. Gaslighting is often contrasted to the positive support of player ‘realities’, but that support can also be feigned and twisted to mafia advantage. In fact the two are often commingled so that it becomes confusing to separate harm from an appearance of support – a passive-aggressive chipping away of player confidences, tricking them into being unsure of anything.

Gaslighting too may take various forms.

a) Withholding / withdrawal / appeal to emotion.

This technique feigns a lack of understanding, with such posts as, “I’m not going to stay and listen to this garbage”, “You’re trying to confuse me”; “Are you trying to get me to rage-quit?”. It allows a player to throw a bit of a fit and stomp off.

b) Denial and/or Forgetfullness.

Akin to withdrawal, rather than holding back needed information, this technique denies or ‘forgets’ that factual events even happened. “What are you talking about?”; “You’re making that up”; “That was all just in your head”.

c) Countering.

We often see a countering of role claims, but this countering is where a player calls into question another player’s remembrance and presentation of past events. Again, an altering of what is ‘real’. “Pfft! You thought that last time and were sooo wrong!”; “You obviously never believed in me”; “Always with the negative waves – you see everything in the most negative way”.

d) Trivialising, Condescending, and Patronising.

This involves making light of a player’s contributions or insights, to intimidate them into losing confidence. “LOL, you’re just not very good at this, are you?”. Often this is conveyed as mere banter or joking, but always negative, and usually involving ad hominem attacks on a player, rather than directly on a player’s arguments or insights.

e) Blocking and Diverting.

This technique seeks to control the narrative, usually by changing the subject back to the victim’s own thoughts. We’ll discuss changing the subject again next, but here the purpose is to block or divert from a true subject with the purpose of driving the target bonkers. “Quit having a meltdown”; “Where did that crazy idea come from?”; “That’s just more of the same garbage you’ve been spewing”.

Again, we’ve focused mostly on the negative aspects of gaslighting used by the mafia or wolf team, but these techniques can also be effectively engaged by villagers to the benefit of town, sometimes deflecting wolfish purpose or aimed at town’s own, often as some weird meta-bonding ritual from game to game. Town players aren’t intent to drive other villagers crazy, of course, but neither ought they to blurt out town power roles or always everything they know. They may conveniently ‘forget’ facts or certain game mechanics hoping to trip-up a wolf. Just as mafia may stage fights within their ranks or bus a teammate, town too may fake a wagon on one they consider town to see who bites, faking a skewed view of reality. They may actually trivialise a fellow townie’s contributions in order to strong-arm a more unified town front. Or, they may purposefully divert a conversation they consider to be derailing town logic or efficiency.

[AniX]

I think we can agree if gaslighting is acceptable in Mafia and calling out gaslighting is not acceptable we have an unfair and toxic strategy and the game of Mafia is unbalanced in favor of toxic players as you have a strategy for players to abuse other players with no recourse. That is a fact, not an opinion.

I think the disconnect here is that the technical definition of gaslighting and the emotional heft of the TERM gaslighting do not align in game. I don't think anyone is saying "you cannot call out someone trying to make you doubt in a Mafia game",
they are saying that in Mafia, causing someone to doubt as a manipulation tactic (where it is part of the game) is so vastly different from doing it in actual interpersonal interactions (where it is abuse) that the same term shouldn't be used for both.

[TemporalLich]

I think we can agree if gaslighting is acceptable in Mafia and calling out gaslighting is not acceptable we have an unfair and toxic strategy and the game of Mafia is unbalanced in favor of toxic players as you have a strategy for players to abuse other players with no recourse. That is a fact, not an opinion.

I think the disconnect here is that the technical definition of gaslighting and the emotional heft of the TERM gaslighting do not align in game. I don't think anyone is saying "you cannot call out someone trying to make you doubt in a Mafia game",
they are saying that in Mafia, causing someone to doubt as a manipulation tactic (where it is part of the game) is so vastly different from doing it in actual interpersonal interactions (where it is abuse) that the same term shouldn't be used for both.

Equivocation would turn that statement into a logical fallacy that does not make sense.

"I think we can agree if gaslighting [causing someone to doubt their reality as a manipulation tactic] is acceptable in Mafia and calling out gaslighting [a form of abuse in interpersonal interactions] is not acceptable we have an unfair and toxic strategy and the game of Mafia is unbalanced in favor of toxic players as you have a strategy for players to abuse other players with no recourse. That is a fact, not an opinion." is a prime example of equivocation, and ends up allowing the Mafia bubble to pop due to a word having two meanings.

A way to solve this is to invent a new Mafia term that means gaslighting [causing someone to doubt their reality as a manipulation tactic] but doesn't have connotations of abuse. "Morphing" tried to do this but I don't see them as equal. However with gaslighting [causing someone to doubt their reality as a manipulation tactic] not being meta to my knowledge any attempt to do this would just fall apart.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Plasmalighting sounds like an awesome replacement.

[Flea The Magician]

I think we can agree if gaslighting is acceptable in Mafia and calling out gaslighting is not acceptable we have an unfair and toxic strategy and the game of Mafia is unbalanced in favor of toxic players as you have a strategy for players to abuse other players with no recourse. That is a fact, not an opinion.

I think the disconnect here is that the technical definition of gaslighting and the emotional heft of the TERM gaslighting do not align in game. I don't think anyone is saying "you cannot call out someone trying to make you doubt in a Mafia game",
they are saying that in Mafia, causing someone to doubt as a manipulation tactic (where it is part of the game) is so vastly different from doing it in actual interpersonal interactions (where it is abuse) that the same term shouldn't be used for both.

I love when people give me a word I'm looking for but somehow fail to get.


We all know emotions play a big part in Mafia, if you've seen my games you've seen I'm a fucker for emotional manipulation.

Gaslighting has MASSIVE negative emotional attachment for a number of people, contributing to a words shock value or buzz value.
We've all see when someone drops a load of buzzwords to try and get their way, and then people will call that what it is.
Gaslighting is a word with varying shock value, and for some people it has high shock value, for me its essentially a kill signal (Stop immediately, no matter what.)

And guill, it ain't just one memory. It's a good few years and multiple alters worth of them

[morph the cat]

.

[Guillotina]

I think we can agree if gaslighting is acceptable in Mafia and calling out gaslighting is not acceptable we have an unfair and toxic strategy and the game of Mafia is unbalanced in favor of toxic players as you have a strategy for players to abuse other players with no recourse. That is a fact, not an opinion.

I think the disconnect here is that the technical definition of gaslighting and the emotional heft of the TERM gaslighting do not align in game. I don't think anyone is saying "you cannot call out someone trying to make you doubt in a Mafia game",
they are saying that in Mafia, causing someone to doubt as a manipulation tactic (where it is part of the game) is so vastly different from doing it in actual interpersonal interactions (where it is abuse) that the same term shouldn't be used for both.

Equivocation would turn that statement into a logical fallacy that does not make sense.

"I think we can agree if gaslighting [causing someone to doubt their reality as a manipulation tactic] is acceptable in Mafia and calling out gaslighting [a form of abuse in interpersonal interactions] is not acceptable we have an unfair and toxic strategy and the game of Mafia is unbalanced in favor of toxic players as you have a strategy for players to abuse other players with no recourse. That is a fact, not an opinion." is a prime example of equivocation, and ends up allowing the Mafia bubble to pop due to a word having two meanings.

A way to solve this is to invent a new Mafia term that means gaslighting [causing someone to doubt their reality as a manipulation tactic] but doesn't have connotations of abuse. "Morphing" tried to do this but I don't see them as equal. However with gaslighting [causing someone to doubt their reality as a manipulation tactic] not being meta to my knowledge any attempt to do this would just fall apart.

As you could read Gaslightning takes many forms.

Morphing to me from this point forward is any of those scenarios, including making someone doubt their reality.

I don't know, I'm always in the bubble. If I'm scum, I will destroy town with all tactics at my disposal and If I'm town, I will destroy scum the same way, not really my issue if I'm in the bubble and someone else pops it when they shouldn't.

[AniX]

I think simply calling out the underlying behavior without trying to invent new vocabulary for it would probably be the best path. People engaged in this behavior and were called out on it before 1944, they engaged in it and were called out on it prior to the rise of gaslighting as a distinct term.

[Guillotina]

So whenever I use "Morphing" you know what I mean.

We object. That's not what Morphing means.

It does for me. Add it to your dictionary of how to comprehend Guillotina language.

[morph the cat]

.

[Guillotina]

So whenever I use "Morphing" you know what I mean.

We object. That's not what Morphing means.

It does for me. Add it to your dictionary of how to comprehend Guillotina language.

Nope!

We

are morph and stuff we do is by definition "morphing".

Then it is also that, have you heard of words having different meanings?

There you go!

[Flea The Magician]

I think simply calling out the underlying behavior without trying to invent new vocabulary for it would probably be the best path. People engaged in this behavior and were called out on it before 1944, they engaged in it and were called out on it prior to the rise of gaslighting as a distinct term.

OK so each game is in a bubble, as guill says.
The rules of that bubble reality are defined by the rules of the game, and each players reality is further defined by their role PM.
Unless a game has the specific bastard mechanic of moderator lies, none of this reality should ever be capable of being twisted or manipulated. (part of the initial issue iirc)

You have absolutes. Referenceable absolutes that reinforce and protect that boundary of reality in a game.

This is my line here.

In meatworld games, absolutely gaslighting happens because you do not have that hard backreference, you do not have your RolePM and you not have those rules written down to refer to.
In forum games, not so much. The reinforcement and stuff is there.

Yes I do take gaslighting as an extreme, a majority of my friend circles have had it inflicted on them and we all get stupidly protective of each other over it.

And frankly now I'm getting a little bit pissed off at the joking and mocking thats happening here while I'm trying to explain why I take such an exception to it.

[morph the cat]

apologies for my insensitivity.

I've redacted my posts.

[Jake The Wolfie]

I think simply calling out the underlying behavior without trying to invent new vocabulary for it would probably be the best path. People engaged in this behavior and were called out on it before 1944, they engaged in it and were called out on it prior to the rise of gaslighting as a distinct term.

I'm not sure how comparable this is to lunch (L-word is too clank n jank for me), but if a word or phrase is causing someone emotional stress and causing a state of panic in them, then the first step is removal of that word from our volcabulary until further notice. It can be reinstated if the call was bad, but we can't reinstate users we drive away because they weren't lting about their exerience.
You can reverse life in prison, but not execution.

[T3]

Gaslighting is specifically tied to domestic abuse. I guess saying it almost implies domestic abuse which we don't want. I don't know about the specific situation. I don't see why not saying: "Hey, what you're doing is abusive and lying to my face"

[kdowns]

Gaslighting is specifically tied to domestic abuse. I guess saying it almost implies domestic abuse which we don't want. I don't know about the specific situation. I don't see why not saying: "Hey, what you're doing is abusive and lying to my face"

But at the same time, Gaslighting is the same exact term that people use in that situation. Though this may just be how my brain processes things, I don't exactly see a problem in using it personally as it's referring to a specific act that often does happen in a game of mafia. Though at the same time we've also started to use words in place of longstanding words previously that now carry a negative connotation. I would give examples but for obvious reasons I won't.

Also I was also a player in the game and was caught very off guard when Titus was reprimanded for their word choice.

[Gamma Emerald]

I think simply calling out the underlying behavior without trying to invent new vocabulary for it would probably be the best path. People engaged in this behavior and were called out on it before 1944, they engaged in it and were called out on it prior to the rise of gaslighting as a distinct term.

Except there are terms that are already used to describe mafia play
Chainsawing is a mafia shorthand for defending someone by going after the person attacking them
So to say “we shouldn’t invent a new term to define a specific idea” is entirely contrary to how history has gone for this sort of thing.

[AniX]

I think you misunderstood me a bit. I am not saying that a term is bad on the face of it. It would be perfectly reasonable if a term came about organically (as I presume chainsawing did) among players. I meant I don't think workshopping a new term clinically, as was happening, and then trying to introduce it to the game is advisable or likely to work well.

[Guillotina]

Gaslighting is specifically tied to domestic abuse. I guess saying it almost implies domestic abuse which we don't want. I don't know about the specific situation. I don't see why not saying: "Hey, what you're doing is abusive and lying to my face"

But at the same time, Gaslighting is the same exact term that people use in that situation. Though this may just be how my brain processes things, I don't exactly see a problem in using it personally as it's referring to a specific act that often does happen in a game of mafia. Though at the same time we've also started to use words in place of longstanding words previously that now carry a negative connotation. I would give examples but for obvious reasons I won't.

Also I was also a player in the game and was caught very off guard when Titus was reprimanded for their word choice.

I personally wouldn't have reprimanded Titus for the word choice.

I get it that it may trigger traumatic events in people but at the end of the day, it is part of our vocabulary and it's not our fault that you have trauma related issues with that word. If the player obviously didn't intent to upset the other with the word and she was just calling out a behavior within the bubble, that is very prominent in mafia games. I don't feel it should be punishable.

[AniX]

I wouldn't qualify anything that happened as a punishment. The only result of Titus using the word was being asked not to use it going forward, a request extended equally to every other member of the game. That isn't a punishment or reprimand any more than if I used the wrong name for someone and am corrected, I am being punished.

[joqiza]

I think you misunderstood me a bit. I am not saying that a term is bad on the face of it. It would be perfectly reasonable if a term came about organically (as I presume chainsawing did) among players. I meant I don't think workshopping a new term clinically, as was happening, and then trying to introduce it to the game is advisable or likely to work well.

Isn't workshopping a new term essentially what was done with words like "lim" to describe voting out a player? Has that not worked well enough? (Genuine question, not rhetorical. I'm not really active enough to know if it's been a success... though from the few games I've played it seems like it's worked fine.)

Personally I have no discomfort around the term 'gaslight' but would/will happily use a different term if it makes people more comfortable. I see these kind of things as house rules. At the end of the day we're sitting down with a bunch of people and playing a party game. If some folks at the table would prefer we not use certain language then we can abstain from using it. If we're not sure who has sensitivities around what we can err on the side of caution. I think of this as, like, cordial regard.

It's a separate discussion from whether the actual act of gaslighting, by which I mean making someone doubt their own reality in order to manipulate them, is appropriate in the context of mafia. Which I think it is, for reasons others have pointed out. There are plenty of things we do in the context of mafia which would be unacceptable in our daily lives and normal relationships. IMO.

I feel like I lack context on the specific instance discussed in the original post, but I hope it's resolved amicably as I sense genuine sentiment on both sides.

[Nancy Drew 39]

I super <3 <3 > 3 Flea, fae is my hero.

[Menalque]

Isn't workshopping a new term essentially what was done with words like "lim" to describe voting out a player? Has that not worked well enough? (Genuine question, not rhetorical. I'm not really active enough to know if it's been a success... though from the few games I've played it seems like it's worked fine.)

Not really, imo. Right after lynch was banned there were multiple alternatives used (I myself was a strong proponent of “guillotined” but it didn’t catch on, rip) and people would, in the same game, use their preferred word. Over time lim became the most standard probably because it fits well into terms like lylo and because the abbreviation is short and simple to write. While it was suggested as a possible replacement for people to use in games, it wasn’t really workshopped beyond “this would be a viable alternative”, if memory serves me right.

[Jake The Wolfie]

Gaslighting may not be possible for what a player axiomatically knows, but a player could be, as an example, gaslight into flipping their read on a player.