Anatomy of Trolls and How to Deal with Them

[Roxy Couturier]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I did say you wouldn't like how I defined it even though we both agreed on other people's interpretations of what GasLighting is.

No, as a wise person I know has said countless time, words mean things. Just because you have some different meaning rattling around your skull either from ignorance or obtuseness doesn't make it correct.

To gaslight someone means to manipulate another person into doubting their own perceptions, experiences or understanding of events, according to the American Psychological Association.

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

It's seems a fairly new word and one that some of us just saw as a codependent characteristic before then without a specific term to define it. I looked at several different sites for their definition and noticed there were dissimilarities how each author defined it. So we're not alone in disagreeing with particular cases whether gaslighting is involved.

The movie, GASLIGHT from whence the term is taken from came out in 1944. It's been in use intermittently in the 79-80 years since then.

From: https://www.ilcadv.org/will-you-light-the-gas-please-a-brief-history-of-the-term-gaslighting-and-the-movie-behind-it/

The term has its origin in a 1938 play called Gas Light, which was later adapted into a 1944 film renamed as Gaslight with one word instead of two. How this title became a term in its own right stems from the content of the plot and the popularity of the film. The term has been floating around ever since, showing up periodically in pop culture and psychology intermittently over the course of the past several decades.

In recent years the term has perhaps been overused, its meaning diluted through misuse to describe any minor disagreement or misunderstanding. But, simply put, gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse wherein one person attempts to distort the reality of another person in order to exert control.

How to Spot Gaslighting

Often, gaslighting is a very nuanced, gradual process that can be difficult to detect. The "long game" is being played here, in form of manipulation in the following ways:

• Witholding: The gaslighter won't listen to the victim or acts like they don't understand.
• Countering: The abuser questions the victim's memory and recollection of events.
• Trivializing: The abuser makes the victim feel as though they are being irrational about their concerns or making too big a deal of them.
• Forgetting: The abuser denies outright that a particular thing happened or pretends to have forgotten about it. One large-scale example of gaslighting is when people deny documented events, like the Holocaust.
• Diverting: The gaslighter changes the subject or focuses on the credibility of the person speaking versus the content.

The gaslighter might repeat sentences like, "You never remember things correctly," "You're imagining things," "You're too sensitive" and "I don't know what you're talking about," among others. All these are designed to make the victim second-guess themself.

[Roxy Couturier]

17 minutes ago, Ingrid Ingersoll said:

We used to go as fruit. 

We had someone dressed as Abraham Lincoln that came to our D/s sim and 'freed all the slaves'.

We lol'd

[BilliJo Aldrin]

4 hours ago, Stephanie Misfit said:

Friends and I used to get dressed up and go to Gor sims and play musical instruments. By no means is that against the TOS, but it certainly got us banned from some regions. And that's how you deal with trolls.

Occasionally I would go to a Gor sim and some Gorean master, after i greeted him by his first name, would say no, you will call me Master -lastname-. I'd say, that's cool. you can call me Ms Aldrin.

For some reason that never went down well.

So is going to a rp sim and deliberately flouting the rules trolling?

They can kick me out if they want. 😂

[BilliJo Aldrin]

4 hours ago, Roxy Couturier said:

No, as a wise person I know has said countless time, words mean things. Just because you have some different meaning rattling around your skull either from ignorance or obtuseness doesn't make it correct.

To gaslight someone means to manipulate another person into doubting their own perceptions, experiences or understanding of events, according to the American Psychological Association.

The movie, GASLIGHT from whence the term is taken from came out in 1944. It's been in use intermittently in the 79-80 years since then.

From: https://www.ilcadv.org/will-you-light-the-gas-please-a-brief-history-of-the-term-gaslighting-and-the-movie-behind-it/

The term has its origin in a 1938 play called Gas Light, which was later adapted into a 1944 film renamed as Gaslight with one word instead of two. How this title became a term in its own right stems from the content of the plot and the popularity of the film. The term has been floating around ever since, showing up periodically in pop culture and psychology intermittently over the course of the past several decades.

In recent years the term has perhaps been overused, its meaning diluted through misuse to describe any minor disagreement or misunderstanding. But, simply put, gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse wherein one person attempts to distort the reality of another person in order to exert control.

How to Spot Gaslighting

Often, gaslighting is a very nuanced, gradual process that can be difficult to detect. The "long game" is being played here, in form of manipulation in the following ways:

• Witholding: The gaslighter won't listen to the victim or acts like they don't understand.
• Countering: The abuser questions the victim's memory and recollection of events.
• Trivializing: The abuser makes the victim feel as though they are being irrational about their concerns or making too big a deal of them.
• Forgetting: The abuser denies outright that a particular thing happened or pretends to have forgotten about it. One large-scale example of gaslighting is when people deny documented events, like the Holocaust.
• Diverting: The gaslighter changes the subject or focuses on the credibility of the person speaking versus the content.

The gaslighter might repeat sentences like, "You never remember things correctly," "You're imagining things," "You're too sensitive" and "I don't know what you're talking about," among others. All these are designed to make the victim second-guess themself.

Gaslighting is just one of those terms people use to try and neutralize an opponent.

examples:

Stop gaslighting me, you know you are wrong.

What you just said  is just a conspiracy theory

oh stop saying that, you are so racist.

Its an attempt at aggression against someone you can't beat factually

 

[Roxy Couturier]

1 hour ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Gaslighting is just one of those terms people use to try and neutralize an opponent.

examples:

Stop gaslighting me, you know you are wrong.

What you just said  is just a conspiracy theory

oh stop saying that, you are so racist.

Its an attempt at aggression against someone you can't beat factually

 

Only if your arguments subtly trying to bend their perception of reality.

in order..

1. This might be gaslighting by the person that's saying it. (deflection)

2. Conspiracy theorists might be delusional.. so they're gaslighting themselves. They don't change anyone else's perception of reality. Not Gaslighting.

3. Saying racist crap means you're a racist, not a gaslighter. The person so accused isn't changing the targets perception of reality. Whether they're right or wrong in that assessment is another story, but still not gaslighting.

4. In my post, I quoted this part of the article on the history of the term gaslighting:

In recent years the term has perhaps been overused, its meaning diluted through misuse to describe any minor disagreement or misunderstanding.

Unless the 'facts' are entirely fabricated, that example also isn't gaslighting.

Gaslighting, is however, an actual thing that needs a specific set of circumstances.

So, if people level that accusation at you, then ask what part of reality do they think you're trying to alter. (That's not to say you could be wrong in an argument for any number of reasons, just that it's not gaslighting.)

[Arielle Popstar]

6 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's not a guess that most people would find it annoying being attacked by something in SL. I"m sure there are some who would not, but I'm certain most people like to explore freely without having their agency taken away by an experience they had no part in creating. There have been numerous examples on the forum of people being bothered by such behavior.

The fact that anyone would continue to infringe on another via attacking them in whatever way, knowing most found it bothersome, is griefing.

 

6 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

Oh, I wasn't talking about noobs in particular. You're right that no one here can say whether a specific joker hassling a noob is "victimizing" him or not. It's probably pretty fair to guess that many noobs do feel annoyed and discomforted by it, though.  That should be enough to suggest to a jokester of moderate intelligence that it's not a good idea to play "fun jokes" on strangers.  I think we were all probably told a zillion times in kindergarten not to pick on other kids. (Remember the line? "Stop now or somebody's going to get hurt.") How hard can it be for seasoned SL residents to figure out that the same common sense rule applies in a welcome area?

Enough noobs and even older residents aren't so sensitive to take offense at every little slight, perceived or real, and there are enough out there who even like the fact that someone was at least paying attention to them. I've had some good conversations with some residents who were doing what could be considered a griefing thing initially and used that to meet residents.

I'm sure residents such as yourselves would take offense being busy people creating and developing stuff but for others who are looking for something to do it could well be a way of meeting another who is at least out there doing something.

[Arielle Popstar]

6 hours ago, Roxy Couturier said:

No, as a wise person I know has said countless time, words mean things. Just because you have some different meaning rattling around your skull either from ignorance or obtuseness doesn't make it correct.

To gaslight someone means to manipulate another person into doubting their own perceptions, experiences or understanding of events, according to the American Psychological Association.

The movie, GASLIGHT from whence the term is taken from came out in 1944. It's been in use intermittently in the 79-80 years since then.

From: https://www.ilcadv.org/will-you-light-the-gas-please-a-brief-history-of-the-term-gaslighting-and-the-movie-behind-it/

The term has its origin in a 1938 play called Gas Light, which was later adapted into a 1944 film renamed as Gaslight with one word instead of two. How this title became a term in its own right stems from the content of the plot and the popularity of the film. The term has been floating around ever since, showing up periodically in pop culture and psychology intermittently over the course of the past several decades.

In recent years the term has perhaps been overused, its meaning diluted through misuse to describe any minor disagreement or misunderstanding. But, simply put, gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse wherein one person attempts to distort the reality of another person in order to exert control.

How to Spot Gaslighting

Often, gaslighting is a very nuanced, gradual process that can be difficult to detect. The "long game" is being played here, in form of manipulation in the following ways:

• Witholding: The gaslighter won't listen to the victim or acts like they don't understand.
• Countering: The abuser questions the victim's memory and recollection of events.
• Trivializing: The abuser makes the victim feel as though they are being irrational about their concerns or making too big a deal of them.
• Forgetting: The abuser denies outright that a particular thing happened or pretends to have forgotten about it. One large-scale example of gaslighting is when people deny documented events, like the Holocaust.
• Diverting: The gaslighter changes the subject or focuses on the credibility of the person speaking versus the content.

The gaslighter might repeat sentences like, "You never remember things correctly," "You're imagining things," "You're too sensitive" and "I don't know what you're talking about," among others. All these are designed to make the victim second-guess themself.

Thanks for the movie history lesson but anyone who has had to deal with childhood issues of growing up in dysfunctional homes, has a pretty good idea already of what gaslighting is, even if it isn't termed as such. When most of what one feels, thinks and experiences is said to be wrong or dysfunctional, one learns to habitually not trust their own instincts and becomes vulnerable to those who will be more then happy to tell them what they should think or feel for any given situation.

On the other side of the same coin, there are those who having seen how manipulative gaslighters are, automatically reject whatever is said by those who who have that tendency. Seems like we have that going on here.

[Rowan Amore]

2 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Gaslighting is just one of those terms people use to try and neutralize an opponent.

examples:

Stop gaslighting me, you know you are wrong.

What you just said  is just a conspiracy theory

oh stop saying that, you are so racist.

Its an attempt at aggression against someone you can't beat factually

 

But when someone says something that is true and you simply don't remember that you said something, that's not gaslighting or making a "spurious allegation".  

https://community.secondlife.com/forums/topic/431541-is-it-griefing-if-you-push-someone-on-your-own-property/

 

[Roxy Couturier]

14 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Thanks for the movie history lesson but anyone who has had to deal with childhood issues of growing up in dysfunctional homes, has a pretty good idea already of what gaslighting is, even if it isn't termed as such. When most of what one feels, thinks and experiences is said to be wrong or dysfunctional, one learns to habitually not trust their own instincts and becomes vulnerable to those who will be more then happy to tell them what they should think or feel for any given situation.

On the other side of the same coin, there are those who having seen how manipulative gaslighters are, automatically reject whatever is said by those who who have that tendency. Seems like we have that going on here.

Yes, it's a form of abuse. From my post, that you quoted above:

But, simply put, gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse wherein one person attempts to distort the reality of another person in order to exert control.

Those are the two things necessary for it to be gaslighting; the distortion of reality in order to exert control.

"What do you mean I owe you $20? I paid that back a week ago!"

It's a real term for a specific form of abuse.

Another thing mentioned in the links I provided is that it can be a form of generational abuse. The victim becomes the perpetrator to others. A learned form of abuse, like many of them.

So, someone that griefs another to the point where the victim is distraught and said victim gets told they're 'too sensitive' or 'You're blowing it out of proportion. It was just a joke.' is being gaslit, because those feeling of distress are their actual reality.

[Rolig Loon]

2 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Enough noobs and even older residents aren't so sensitive to take offense at every little slight, perceived or real, and there are enough out there who even like the fact that someone was at least paying attention to them. I've had some good conversations with some residents who were doing what could be considered a griefing thing initially and used that to meet residents.

I agree.  We weren't talking about little slights, of course, but I suppose we could go down the rabbit hole of defining what "little" means.  The context of this discussion makes it clear that most of us (including you) are concerned about actions that an average SL resident would see as annoying or hurtful -- things that our mothers would have taught us are unkind or rude.  You (the generic "you", not Arielle) can sometimes get away with playing pranks and talking trash to your friends, who recognize that you are normally sort of an idiot and are just "having fun".  You shouldn't expect that a SL newcomer will know that. She'll assume that you are typical of SL residents in general. If we are genuinely interested in keeping SL alive by welcoming new people and retaining seasoned members, we shouldn't be greeting strangers with rudeness and thoughtless "jokes". 

2 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I'm sure residents such as yourselves would take offense being busy people creating and developing stuff but for others who are looking for something to do it could well be a way of meeting another who is at least out there doing something.

How about just saying, "Hi!  I'm Arielle."  Leave the whoopie cushion at home.

[Codex Alpha]

Gaslighting, in short, is 'trying to make someone else think they are crazy, that their grasp of reality is wrong". The prior explations regarding the movie "Gaslighting", where this all originates is spot on. If people watch that movie, they will truly understand what it means. That being said, some very real gaslighting goes on on this forum quite frequently.

You will know if you are a victim of Gaslighting, if in the end you ask yourself "Am I crazy? Am I losing sense of reality?"

Or if you ask your abuser "Should I go see a therapist? With the way you describe things, I think I need one!" and they answer...

"Yes you should!"

The whole point of a gaslighter is to replace your reality with their own, as a form of ultimate manipulation. After all, if your sense of reality is so warped... and this person is so adamant about it... perhaps it is true?

 

As a looooooong time gamer, I know the difference between 'mischief', 'trolling', and 'griefing'.

Mischief is someone up to basically harmless pranks and stunts, not meaning anything bad by it, and is relying on the target's patience and 'sense of humour' to understand that it is playful and jestful. If some people don't like such things, and they get all 'upset', in general most of us would consider that person as 'not having a sense of humour'.

eg. Me dressed as a Tiny Meerkat pops into your kitchen and opens your fridge and /me rummages around your fridge... looking for a reaction.. If any you cutely say "Me hungry, me want sammich".

The situation heavily relies on the cuteness of  your avatar, your actions and speech, and perhaps that absurdity of the scene.

The true 'jokester' mischievous character WILL end the encounter if met with anger or frustration, as that is not their intent.

 

Trolling or 'trawling', a fishing term where you drag a net behind the boat 'to see what fish you catch', is a person doing or saying controversial things in a situation to get a reaction. They're putting  out 'hooks' of sorts, with 'bait' to see who bites. Any reaction to that purposeful (intent) action will give the troll glee (or content for a SL trolling video on YouTube from all the people who scream when someone simply stands on their driveway).

How many trolls are actually here on the forums? I see people point at each other and call each other trolls all day... just because someone's opinion seems ludicrous to you, doesn't make them a troll. Trolls have INTENT.

Note that since the term 'trolling' has been around so long, it has been watered down somewhat to describe the previous word 'mischief', which is more based in trying to engage someone in harmless behaviour

eg. "I was just trolling you eating my pizza in front of you when I knew you were hungry - I was going to offer you some"

eg. "I knew you were teleporting in, so I put Trump statue here with MAGA sign, cuz I know you hate Trump"

A more ill-intended troll should be considered more of a griefer - as their intent is to definitely make you upset, disrupt your gameplay, or get you to rage (see flaming).

 

Flaming. Flaming is similar to 'trolling', and happens more specifically on forums, though it can happen anywhere.

It's when someone is purposefully posting or saying things that are meant to incite anger or rage in the target. It's similar to trolling as it may not have an actual target, but the intent is much more malicious than simple trolling. This could also include any statements meant to 'enflame' another person, including accusations, etc.

 

Griefing is mainly from gaming and could be considered to be the most malicious form. Griefing is meant to 'destroy other people's gaming experience' and goes to the level of disturbing gameplay, sabotaging one's own team, harassing your own team, etc.

This might be in the form of classic games where:

Blocking the spawn doorway so your team members can't get out to defend or replenish numbers (TFC/TF2, Quake)

Purposefully running around while infected, spreading infection to teammates (TFC)

Blowing up your own planes, tanks and vehicles so teammates stranded (Battlefield Series)

Flashbanging/stunning teammates so they are blind at crucial moments of firefighting (Counterstrike)

A high level player kills a lower level player repeated times (ganking) until the player leaves the game in frustration (World Of Warcraft)

Griefing is the level where someone is purposefully trying to destroy your ability to conduct or enjoy the gameplay, and is the worst level.

 

Newbie' vs "noob / n00b". From gaming community, a newbie is a player who is new to the game, and the community will embrace them, help them learn the game, and are patient with them as they do so.

A n00b is someone who has played the game, has experience, should have 'common sense' or at least the sense of what the community rule are - 'should know better', but acts against that.

n00b also can mean 'ignorant', 'foolish' or general pejorative. Note that in more modern times, 'noob' and 'troll' have widened to include more generalized usage - though that usage is incorrect, as both relied on actual context and situation.

For better or worse the hardcore gamer community adopted it and noob or n00b soon became a popular insult in games like Counter Strike.

When noob finally entered the Oxford English Dictionary it was defined as “A person who is inexperienced in a particular sphere or activity, especially computing or the use of the Internet.”

 

Edited May 27 by Codex Alpha

[Luna Bliss]

5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Enough noobs and even older residents aren't so sensitive to take offense at every little slight, perceived or real, and there are enough out there who even like the fact that someone was at least paying attention to them. I've had some good conversations with some residents who were doing what could be considered a griefing thing initially and used that to meet residents.

I'm sure residents such as yourselves would take offense being busy people creating and developing stuff but for others who are looking for something to do it could well be a way of meeting another who is at least out there doing something.

I've noticed a pattern in nearly all your debates relating to differences in social expectations between two parties. Weight or approval is usually given to the one asserting their behavior, often ramrodding their way through Second Life in the name of "freedom" much of the time, while the party who is offended by such behavior is viewed as being overly sensitive in your eyes, as exhibiting "snowflake' behavior and needing to "toughen up" to better get along with those asserting themselves.
You might want to take a look as to why your arguments nearly always devolve into this pattern.

Edited May 27 by Luna Bliss

[Codex Alpha]

13 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

So, are you saying that it's perfectly OK for someone to play a practical joke on a person because it's "all in fun", even if the other person finds it hurtful or demeaning? 

Yes. and no.

The person playing the practical joke doesn't know how anyone will react, but their intent is to just have a little fun, and hopefully make your day a little brighter by appealing to your sense of humour. Notice the word 'appealing', because that's all of us can ever do, no matter who it is. Joking with someone else is always a risk, but it doesn't mean it is malicious.

However, if someone is the type to have no sense of humour, has no patience anymore in SL with their fellow citizens.. .well.. that's really their problem. A harmless joker will leave them alone then, because it was only meant in jest, and not meant to harm.

13 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

it's "all in fun", even if the other person finds it hurtful or demeaning?  Perception does seem to be the key, but things seem a bit lopsided.  A person at the butt of the "joke" may see that the joker is having fun, but that doesn't make it any less hurtful. Why is the burden on him to pretend that it's "all in fun" for him too?  Why isn't it just as fair to expect the joker to see that his actions are not "fun" for the victim?

Perception is the key. You use very specific words there.  If the target is a sane and reasonable person, with a reasonable sense of humour, then they should be able to determine truly what is playful vs hurtful and demeaning.

"Me want sammich out of fridge. Me take sandwich" is mischievous.

"Can I use your washroom please? I have to go bad!" is mischievous.

"I came to see how ugly your home was" or "I was curious why you wear such ugly clothes, have ugly avatar" is hurftful.

"You're probably an unattractive woman in RL, that's why you have to play pretend in SL" is demeaning.

13 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

It's not a matter of either person changing the other's perception of reality but a matter of both people recognizing that the perceptions are different.  If they are radically different, the "joking" ought to stop. 

Joking, poking fun, being mischievous and practical jokes rely on both parties 'sense of humour'. Sometimes they don't align, but it's not as extreme a difference in reactions as MANY here would pose happens in SL.

I hope people here can tell the difference betweek friendly 'joking' vs trolling, flaming and griefing.

Else really, 'get a sense of humour' or 'stop taking SL so seriously' or 'lighten up' or 'take a break', or for some 'put a ban line around your land or get a private server so no one will ever see, talk or engage with you ever again'.

I personally think Second Life (and Sansar in the past) have lost a great deal of that 'sense of humour' that we used to enjoy a decade ago. My opinion and experience as of late having been on both platforms is "F man, you are all SO SERIOUS!"

[Codex Alpha]

Second Life in general could use a lot more sense of humour.

Everyone is sooooo.... serious...

Edited May 27 by Codex Alpha

[Codex Alpha]

2 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

 You shouldn't expect that a SL newcomer will know that. She'll assume that you are typical of SL residents in general. If we are genuinely interested in keeping SL alive by welcoming new people and retaining seasoned members, we shouldn't be greeting strangers with rudeness and thoughtless "jokes". 

How about just saying, "Hi!  I'm Arielle."  Leave the whoopie cushion at home.

And conversely,

If we are genuinely interested in keeping SL alive by welcoming new people and retaining seasoned members, we shouldn't be greeting strangers with impatience, frustration, and anger.

As I have mentioned before...

My first experience in Second Life was getting a pink rubber dong hitting me in the face. I went to a Freebie store, accepted some sort of avatar animation permission and got humped by a plastic donkey.

I reacted with "WTF just happened, lol, this place is hilarious!"

However, if you're Serious Suzie, you're going to be really upset.

[Love Zhaoying]

12 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

And conversely,

If we are genuinely interested in keeping SL alive by welcoming new people and retaining seasoned members, we shouldn't be greeting strangers with impatience, frustration, and anger.

As I have mentioned before...

My first experience in Second Life was getting a pink rubber dong hitting me in the face. I went to a Freebie store, accepted some sort of avatar animation permission and got humped by a plastic donkey.

I reacted with "WTF just happened, lol, this place is hilarious!"

However, if you're Serious Suzie, you're going to be really upset.

I love that your new profile pic is even more "Troll-Like"! 

Adding to that, I opened this comment and it's about "pink rubber dongs".

Well done!

It's like a "Meta-Post" (a trolling post about trolling).

[Love Zhaoying]

43 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I've noticed a pattern in nearly all your debates relating to differences in social expectations between two parties. Weight or approval is usually given to the one asserting their behavior, often ramrodding their way through Second Life in the name of "freedom" much of the time, while the party who is offended by such behavior is viewed as being overly sensitive in your eyes, as exhibiting "snowflake' behavior and needing to "toughen up" to better get along with those asserting themselves.
You might want to take a look as to why your arguments nearly always devolve into this pattern.

Was it Arielle or someone else, who often used to post about "personal responsibility" in addition to the list you provided?  I see less posts about that lately. There must be a reason. Assuming it's Arielle I am thinking about, I guess "personal responsibility" isn't that important (or comes back to bite one).

 

[Persephone Emerald]

5 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Thanks for the movie history lesson but anyone who has had to deal with childhood issues of growing up in dysfunctional homes, has a pretty good idea already of what gaslighting is, even if it isn't termed as such. When most of what one feels, thinks and experiences is said to be wrong or dysfunctional, one learns to habitually not trust their own instincts and becomes vulnerable to those who will be more then happy to tell them what they should think or feel for any given situation.

On the other side of the same coin, there are those who having seen how manipulative gaslighters are, automatically reject whatever is said by those who who have that tendency. Seems like we have that going on here.

11 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

[snip]

I hope people here can tell the difference betweek friendly 'joking' vs trolling, flaming and griefing.

Else really, 'get a sense of humour' or 'stop taking SL so seriously' or 'lighten up' or 'take a break', or for some 'put a ban line around your land or get a private server so no one will ever see, talk or engage with you ever again'.

I personally think Second Life (and Sansar in the past) have lost a great deal of that 'sense of humour' that we used to enjoy a decade ago. My opinion and experience as of late having been on both platforms is "F man, you are all SO SERIOUS!"

Some people have less tolerance for being teased or trolled because they've been gaslighted and abused in RL. 

Gaslighting example (from RL):

My Mom had put my name on her house as a co-owner, because she said she wanted to leave it to me after she died. A few years later she wanted to take out a mortgage on it, because she was always overspending and running up debt. I wouldn't agree to cosigning on a mortgage because then I'd be financially liable for the debt. She told me that if I didn't cosign or take my name off the house, then she was "through with me." I believed her and was very upset. This being the weekend before Thanksgiving, I bought her a floral arrangement, wrote a letter saying my goodbye to her, and took both to her house to leave them on her front porch.

She opened the door when I got there, laughed, said I should have known she wasn't serious and that I was "too sensitive". - That's gaslighting.

 

"Sibling" teasing/ trolling example (RL)

My housemate's dog always ate her treats quickly. When both were given bones or rawhide treats, my dog would wait until my housemate's dog had already eaten hers, then slowly chew on her own. She knew exactly what she was doing. The dog who had already eaten her own treat would whine, while mine tormented her by slowly eating hers in front of her and growling if the other got too close.

[Codex Alpha]

1 hour ago, Persephone Emerald said:

She opened the door when I got there, laughed, said I should have known she wasn't serious and that I was "too sensitive". - That's gaslighting.

No. That is not gaslighting, though it is in the toolbox of the Narcissist, who will say "You're too sensitive", yet it can lead to or be part of gaslighting, to be true, but let's not water it down.

Gaslighting would be if she had said "I never said that!" or maybe even go so far as "Well you said you would co-sign, you swore up and down you would, now you deny it?"

Gaslighing is about the abuser attempting to replace your reality with their own, and hopefully to the point where you even question your own sanity. Gaslighting, in short is 'attempted crazy making'.

See Gaslight (Movie) (IMDB)

Ten years after her aunt was murdered in their London home, a woman returns from Italy in the 1880s to resume residence with her new husband. His obsessive interest in the home rises from a secret that may require driving his wife insane.

1 hour ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Some people have less tolerance for being teased or trolled because they've been gaslighted and abused in RL.

:: shrugs :: Though I can understand that and recognize it, it's not my problem.

One shouldn't expect a safe space when coming to SL, and if they have so much trauma that they can't relate to others on the internet (who yes, can trend to be more crazy/nasty), then I would hope they would seek RL therapy before possibly causing themselve more pain and trauma.

Else you would be an advocate of enforcing a 'safe space' in SL so no one could ever be offended? They tried that on Sansar, complete with rewarded tattletaling - until no one was left, and no one wanted to speak on their mics anymore - lest someone take something the wrong way..

Edited May 27 by Codex Alpha
Clarification and removing 'trigger words'

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

See Gaslight (Movie) to truly see.

Irony!

Since the title is because the baddie keeps turning down the light, and the victim cannot "see". 

(The baddie tries to convince the victim they are going blind.)

 

[Persephone Emerald]

6 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Was it Arielle or someone else, who often used to post about "personal responsibility" in addition to the list you provided?  I see less posts about that lately. There must be a reason. Assuming it's Arielle I am thinking about, I guess "personal responsibility" isn't that important (or comes back to bite one).

I wonder if there might be a thin line between "personal responsibility" and victim blaming, and even self-blame?

I can't really psychoanalyse other forumites, but I can suggest how manipulative patterns sometimes affect victims of them. When a child is repeatedly told they're bad and that the parent hurts them because they deserve it, the child tends to believe this is true. Even if the child isn't told that they deserve to be hurt, if neglect or abuse happens when they're young and totally dependent on the parent, they will assume they must've done something wrong, because they can't accept that the person they love, trust and depend upon would hurt them without a good reason. They internalize self-blame for abuse that others inflict on them, rather than accepting that others can be hurtful without good reason and that the world can be unpredictable and unfair.

Blaming oneself for how we react to the behavior of others can also give us a feeling of having some control, when we can't really control the behavior of others.

[Istelathis]

Ya'll are wrong.

This is gaslighting!

[Luna Bliss]

22 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

30 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

She opened the door when I got there, laughed, said I should have known she wasn't serious and that I was "too sensitive". - That's gaslighting.

No. That is not gaslighting, though it is in the toolbox of the Narcissist, who will say "You're too sensitive", yet it can lead to or be part of gaslighting, to be true, but let's not water it down.

Gaslighting would be if she had said "I never said that!" or maybe even go so far as "Well you said you would co-sign, you swore up and down you would, now you deny it?"

Gaslighing is about the abuser attempting to replace your reality with their own, and hopefully to the point where you even question your own sanity. Gaslighting, in short is 'attempted crazy making'.

Yes this is gaslighting. Gaslighting can occur in degrees and it's not just the most severe degree that can be termed 'gaslighting.  Also, a gaslighter might not be conscious of their behavior, but it's still gaslighting.

[Persephone Emerald]

15 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

No. That is not gaslighting, though it is in the toolbox of the Narcissist, who will say "You're too sensitive", yet it can lead to or be part of gaslighting, to be true, but let's not water it down.

Gaslighting would be if she had said "I never said that!" or maybe even go so far as "Well you said you would co-sign, you swore up and down you would, now you deny it?"

Gaslighing is about the abuser attempting to replace your reality with their own, and hopefully to the point where you even question your own sanity. Gaslighting, in short is 'attempted crazy making'.

Gaslighting was saying I should have known she wasn't serious, when she acted like she was serious. Who says to their child, "I'm through with you" if they're not serious?, then laughs and acts like that didn't mean anything. Note, she never apologized for saying that. She just acted like I was the one who had been overemotional and overreacted to her threat of disowning me.

[Codex Alpha]

19 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Yes this is gaslighting. Gaslighting can occur in degrees and it's not just the most severe degree that can be termed 'gaslighting.  Also, a gaslighter might not be conscious of their behavior, but it's still gaslighting.

You didn't counter me with any reasons why you say it falls under the definition of gaslighting, but I did. Simply asserting a point does not make it true;

Lets AGAIN look at the definition of 'gaslighting', in it's purest and intended form:

Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse where a person causes someone to question their sanity, memories, or perception of reality. People who experience gaslighting may feel confused, anxious, or unable to trust themselves.

How does:
"She opened the door when I got there, laughed, said I should have known she wasn't serious and that I was "too sensitive" qualify under that definition?

Did you read the ENTIRETY of my post, where I backed up my argument with EXAMPLES?

 

18 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Gaslighting was saying I should have known she wasn't serious, when she acted like she was serious. Who says to their child, "I'm through with you" if they're not serious?, then laughs and acts like that didn't mean anything. Note, she never apologized for saying that. She just acted like I was the one who had been overemotional and overreacted to her threat of disowning me.

That's symptoms of narcissistic behaviour,  or more common abusive behaviour, not gaslighting specifically.

"You're too sensitive"

"I"m through with you" (discarding)

"You're crazy, that's not what I said. You heard wrong" (Gaslighting)

Edited May 27 by Codex Alpha