Like most radical women I have read many articles on gaslighting. Usually they focus on intimate relationships while using gender neutral language and come from a psychological point of view, rather than one of Radical Feminist analysis. Here I will attempt to frame Gaslighting within established Radical Feminist Theory and Praxis. The theory I will try to establish is that Gaslighting operates in both interpersonal relationships and systemically within the English speaking Western World. While I believe it is systemic across all Countries and Cultures, I need to narrow the scope of this article to avoid writing a book. The praxis will include examples of gaslighting where I will give you, the reader, opportunity to analyse text and see the gaslighting prior to it being broken down to expose the tactics used. These examples will not be fictional, but rather be taken from real life so that together, we can begin the journey of healing Gaslit Induced Trauma.

This work draws on both the psychology of gaslighting and established feminist theory to create an original radical feminist analysis of Systemic Societal Gaslighting. The term Systemic Societal Gaslighting is one I coined myself.

In sisterhood, Sabrinna Valisce xx

The techniques of Gaslighting are:

Blocking

Withholding

Diverting

Countering

Trivialising and

Denying.

Blocking is a form of avoidance. The abuser simply refuses to engage in the conversation. Interpersonally this will be seen in sentences like, ‘End of discussion,’ stated immediately after the abuser has had their say and before the gaslit victim has even processed what just happened. Other examples include, ‘I am not discussing this with you.’ ‘Not this again!’ These sentences in and of themselves are not gaslighting in isolation. They form part of a greater pattern whereby the victim’s viewpoint is second guessed as crazy and the perpetrators view is correct and sane. Systemic Societal Blocking can be seen in our mainstream media where certain points of view are either not reported on at all or, when they are reported, the context is one of rabble-rousers and malcontents, and in the context of Radical Feminist political action, hysteria, bitterness, old woman, extremists, feminazi’s or panic raising alarmists. The female view is not represented.

Withholding is when the abuser purposely feigns forgetfulness, lack of understanding or refuses to acknowledge what happened. When this happens in interpersonal relationships the abuser says things like, ‘Oh, I don’t recall that,’ or ‘You’re not making any sense and are just saying things to confuse me,’ or they rewrite history to suit themselves. Let’s use the example of the victim spending hours making a birthday cake for a child. The abuser cut a piece and began to eat it prior to the child’s party, when the victim walks into the kitchen catching the gas-lighter in the act. The victim then had to make a whole new cake from scratch. Later that night the victim asks, ‘Why did you do that?’ The abuser pretends not to know what he did. The victim explains. The abuser pretends not to understand. The victim explains again. This repeats itself until the perp realises the tactic isn’t working. So now he tells the victim, ‘I thought you made it for me’. Now the victim is confused. Suddenly the abuser finds he has the upper hand and concocts a cleverly crafted story using prior conversations, events that did happen and he twists these to form a whole new backstory. In Systemic Societal Gaslighting we see a rewriting of feminist history and events. The most classic being, “Women were given the vote”. Women were never given the vote. Women fought hard, were imprisoned, beaten, force fed, slandered, made homeless and ostracised. The vote came as a result of fortitude, strength and determined sisterhood.

Diverting is changing the subject entirely or shifting the focus. In interpersonal exchanges it will look like the victim raising valid concerns to be met with the abuser taking away the context of hurt on her to make it all about him. He may tell her that she’s overstating things and really couldn’t possibly be feeling like that before telling her a story of something that happened to him that’s ‘more relevant’ or he may twist the story to make it about how she is the abuser and he is the injured party. In Systemic Societal Diverting, an example is, every time a feminist points out the hypersexualisation and objectification of women in the media she will be met with accusations of prudery that make her the problem, examples of how these images are really a put down of men by showing them as drooling idiots, thus it’s misandry not misogyny, that the women chose it and who is she to tell women what to do with their bodies, that she wants to see women in burqa’s and thus she’s the misogynist and accusations of slut shaming. What doesn’t happen is engagement with her concerns.

Countering calls the victim’s memory into question and often draws on prior incidents of gaslighting. Interpersonally this will usually occur in the form of questions. ‘Are you sure that’s what you heard? I can’t imagine saying that.’ ‘Remember when you held that view last Christmas and you were wrong?’ ‘To play devils advocate here, what if you’re interpreting this though your usual negative thinking and are seeing problems that just don’t exist?’ In Systemic Societal Gaslighting we may see a story on an alleged rape. Along with the report is an undermining of her credibility. We’re told she had trouble at school and was assigned a councillor in her first year at university. She was seen arguing with her former best friend in the cafeteria. She moved six times in only one year due to problems with housemates and it would appear she has social issues.

Trivialising is when a serious issue is made out to be tiny. Interpersonally this is seen a lot in domestic violence. ‘I’m sorry I lost my cool. It’s a one-off. I don’t know what came over me. That’s just so unlike me.’ ‘Oh come on. It’s not that bad. I only raised my voice. It’s not like I hit you or anything.’ The Systemic Gaslighting of Male Violence Against Women isolates incidents, refuses to name the agent, attributes mental illness and former abuse as the culprits and downplays the language. Using murder as an example we see headlines like, ‘Woman killed by stiletto shoe’, and in the article it says ‘it is alleged she was the victim of unwanted sex before being stabbed with her own shoe’. The words murder, rape, and man clearly avoided. The link to the other 50 or more other incidents remain unmentioned.

And finally we come to Denial. Denial can often be accompanied with Mocking. A famous quote comes to mind, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” Clinton. This is a fantastic example of both the personal and the societal. ‘That woman’ is a well-worn jibe in society that we all understand as an undermining of her character. The emphasis is often placed on ‘that’ which dehumanises. Objects are ‘that’ thing. People have names.

Now that we’ve defined what Gaslighting is and the main techniques used, we will define the Male Gaze. Then, we can move into the deeper aspects of Systemic Gaslighting as a feminist issue of trauma and isolation.

The theory of the Male Gaze was coined in 1975 by the feminist film critic Laura Mulvey. The male gaze is comparable to scopophilia, with females in the passive role of the observed.

Since 1975 media has dramatically changed. We have expanded from the world of billboards, shop windows, magazines and TV to ads being displayed in bathroom stalls, on taxis and every spare square inch of available space. We also have an entire virtual world at our fingertips all day everyday. With this has come the rise of pornography creating Porn Culture. Porn Culture has commodified all women and girls. Social media profiles are now our branding and we are the product. This changes the context of The Male Gaze as a form of scopophilia greatly. No longer is it relegated to the business of paid modelling and acting but it now acts in all areas of life. We are our Brand as we walk down the street, do our grocery shopping, have coffee with friends and discuss the latest court case to acquit a rapist in our closed groups. We are living both the effects of being exposed to the Male Gaze from the media spotlight and the effects of being directly in the mini spotlight. We are now subjected to a double male gaze. As Gail Dines pointedly observed, a woman is either sexy or invisible. As my mother, a second wave radical feminist astutely pointed out to me, there’s a hierarchy within invisibility. She then told me a story from earlier that day, of walking at a brisk pace with awareness of her posture as part of her physiotherapy. A man in her own age group double took at her and leered making no attempt to conceal superficial physical attraction. She said, “There is no escaping the gaze. At 68 I feel it still, and from women too. Sizing each other up.” I responded, “Yes. Women become the gatekeepers.”

*Definition written by me*

The Male Gaze is intrinsically connected to Systemic Societal Gaslighting. It is the only lens allowable in society. This necessitates that women must rearrange our own experiences to align with the mainstream narratives of reality. Our realities thus become questionable falsehoods. To emphasise the point I’ll give a solid example from my own life; being sent to a Stag Do as part of a 6-girl team. The venue was a private house and we were sent as the evenings entertainment. Let me first give you the Male Gaze Mainstream version from the point of view of the Best Man.

‘We’re losing one of the boys to marriage. He’ll never be free again, so last night of freedom for him. This has got to be the best party ever. There’s all the boys here, plenty of beer, we got porn playing projected onto the walls and some stripper-whores. Music’s on, girls are doing their thing. It’s hot and just some harmless fun. Guys are payin’ ‘em out a bit but they’re lovin’ it. Good blokes, my mates. Sex on tap. This parties a blast.’

Now let me give you the Female Lens.

‘Just arrived at the gig. Check exits: windows, doors, layout of house check. Where’s the phone? No landline. Got my mobile. Emergency dial is locked in. Dudebro’s lookin’ at me all expectantly while telling me about a triple anal he watched once. His two mates are laughing like fucking jackasses. Gonna have to separate ‘em. Blue shirt is gettin handsy with Carmen. Better call her over. She does doubles. ‘Hey Carmen, get yr butt over here.’ Tell dudebro I bet he can’t handle us both. That’ll get him thinking of 2 girls instead of triple anal. Much safer. Where the fuck is Cindy? Better barge thru a closed door on the way to a bedroom and make sure she’s ok. Tap Alex on the shoulder on the way passed, ‘See ya in a half hr.’ Someone knows where i am. Double check exits. Pathways to them clear to the front, blocked to the back.’

As you can see above, the narratives are not even similar in nature. One is all about fun, partying, hot girls and sex flowing. The other is like a hostage situation. Even when prostitution is supposedly shown from the girls perspective in TV and movies, the Male Gaze is used. Watch any episode of Secret Diary of a Callgirl and you’ll spot it immediately despite the show giving the main characters thoughts for the viewer to hear. Simply put, they’re not the real thoughts of any real woman. This operates as both personal gaslighting and Systemic Societal Gaslighting. In that situation we had to concurrently hold two perspectives, that of the Observed and our own truth. Women watching portrayals of situations like this are also holding two visions simultaneously.

This happens to every woman. She cannot see herself in society as herself, only ever as a male fantasy version. Every experience has a Male Gaze narrative in the media repeated a thousand times and then repeated again by family, friends and co-workers. Her truth becomes isolated and unspoken. She becomes invisible and mute.

Unlearning the Male Gaze by learning to spot and dissect both personal and societal gaslighting gives us back the power that is rightfully ours. As a sisterhood, the more we help each other break silence and see our own truths the stronger we get. Currently women repeat the narratives of abuse because they are deeply embedded in gaslit faux reality. Women don’t do this because they’re nasty and want the Female Lens suppressed. It’s hard work to trust yourself and your instincts in a world that has denied yours and your sisters views of reality for thousands of years. This is something we need to help each other unlearn and relearn.

The next section will have real life examples. One of personal gaslighting, and one of Systemic Societal Gaslighting. Use this section like an exercise. I’ll give you the text first. See how much you can spot before reading further. Following the text will be my interpretation. Hopefully, you’ll see even more than I do.

The text- Personal Gaslighting. Background info. The apologizer slandered the person they are apologizing to. The person receiving the apology is a radical feminist. The Radical Feminist’s response was to call out the slander and prove it false while also making it known that slander is a toxic behaviour.

“I’ve been saying for a while that we lack solidarity and too often entertain cults of personality”

For the start of the ‘Nonpology’ the writer situates herself as understanding solidarity and having the morality of character to practice solidarity. This is in direct opposition to the act of slandering another person. Already in just the first sentence we see the Gaslighting Technique of Withholding the truth.

Solidarity very much refers to the sisterhood. Sisterhood was best described by Andrea

Dworkin. This will be addressed at the end of the text breakdown so it can be

contextualised to the whole.

“This concerns feminism as a whole, not only radical feminists We should work with our Liberal sisters on matters pertinent to women’s liberation.”

The second sentence attacks the politics of the radical feminist by name-calling her a Liberal feminist. Tacked on the end is the word, ‘sisters’. This is the tactic of Denial with it’s common counterpart of Mocking. It denies the reality via baseless mocking.

“Taking this to heart, I offer my apologies to [name].”

Here we see rewriting of history. The history in this case is the first two sentences. If we rewrite it in plain non-manipulative English it reads; ‘Taking into account that I refuse to admit slandering and maintain my moral superiority, I name call you a liberal feminist, deny

your contributions to radical feminism and this is, in my view, an apology.’ This is the

technique of Countering. It calls into question the victims memory of events. In this case, the memory of the first two sentences.

“Although I stand by my political based opinions of her I shall not continue this feud.”

An opinion of a human being is not politically based. It is personal. Men’s Rights Activists (MRA’s) use Anti-Feminism as a political excuse for women hating but the very definition of a movement is to describe what one is fighting for. The definition of a Hate Group is to define who one is against. So, just like this Systemic Gaslighting of the MRA’s, this personal gaslighting example twists a position of being against another to pose it as though it is a moral position within a movement fighting for something. In Radical Feminism we usually refer to this as a Reversal. In the psychology theory of gaslighting this is called Diverting. It diverts one’s attention off the real issue and onto something else. In the systemic example the diversion is away from misogyny to redirect onto a fake politics masquerading as rights. In this personal example the diversion is away from personal slander to redirect to a false politics within a real human rights movement. In the second part of the sentence we see it being framed as a feud. This is the gaslighting technique of Trivialisation. Slander is never a feud. It is the unfair and nasty act of lying about a person.

“[Name] has done some incredible work advocating the Nordic Model, and it serves no one to continue this, bar perhaps, our own ego’s.”

Here, the abuser frames how a response must be interpreted. In real language it would read, ‘If you don’t accept repeated attacks from me and my version of events then you are an egotist. Oh yeah, and this ‘nonpology’ is public. That means others will think that too.’ The point of this sentence is to gaslight the observer and the victim. Observers are outright told to ignore all evidence of manipulation and abuse, and to frame this as an ego feud between two people. This is another use of Diversion.

“I expect no apology in return for the baseless accusations I have received because this is not the aim of this activity.”

The baseless accusations were calling out slander and proving it false. Self-defence and calling out toxic behaviour is not baseless. It is based on defending one’s work, integrity, life path and personal honour. No apology should ever be expected from a victim to an abuser for setting the record straight, and an abuser does not deserve to be liked by their victim. It is unrealistic to expect the victim to expose slander while speaking positively of their abuser. No one does that. This is the technique of Countering. It undermines the victims memory of events, twisting their understandable upset responses to pretend the abuser is the real victim.

“I only hope that [name] accepts my heartfelt apology and that I forgive her. I have no way of contacting her but I trust this will make it along the grapevine.”

Here the words, ‘heartfelt apology’ quite literally act to gaslight the very nature of what is being said. Within the same sentence Countering and Reversal is used to position the speaker as the victim. This is an entirely fake apology. In fact there is no admittance of wrongdoing at all. Every detail is a further attack on the victim. It is also made clear here that this ‘nonpology’ is not really directed to the victim at all. It is directed at others who have witnessed that there is a problem but may not be clued in to what that problem entails. It is also designed to appear as though the abuser is taking the higher ground.

“I encourage all women to consider their position in our movement, their goals and reflect on how your behaviour may impact those. Let’s finish this together. #thefinalwave”.”

To finish up, the abuser ends on a threat. After a nebulous excuse to try and explain why the target deserved what she got, showing the most rudimentary form of misogyny within ‘malestream” society, the subtext reads, ‘See, she had it coming.’ The victims lack of love for her abuser is now a stain on her position within the movement. Then, the hashtag comes in to give a sense of power. Now, anyone who has been in the radical feminist movement for a decent whack of time will know we are nowhere near to the final wave. We have, in fact, slipped steadily backward for decades. The real work will not be done by hashtags and crossing ones fingers in hope. The abuser has no choice but to acknowledge the real world work of the victim because it has been public, but downplays it via keyboard warrior tactics.

None of the elements of a true apology exist in this highly manipulative piece of gaslighting. There are 6 elements to a true apology, not least of which is what one is sorry for.

Earlier I mentioned that sisterhood and solidarity was established in the first few sentences and I would analyse this in context of the whole. I’ll begin with a quote of Andrea Dworkin.

I don’t interpret what she said as ‘CupCakism’. Here’s what she DIDN’T say:

-Turn the other cheek

-Take shit like a doormat

-Allow yourself to be gaslit

-Never expose bullying

-Allow toxicity into your life

-If its a woman harming you, its ok

-There’s no such thing as Internalised Sexism

-Patriarchal hate tactics are ok when women use them

-Don’t ever stand up for yourself

-Being unfairly trashed should be met with love for your abuser

-If a woman says ‘sisterhood’ you should ignore her deeds and only listen to that one word

-All women must be liked by you.

Sisterhood cannot be a one-way street anymore than friendship can. It’s hard work and requires more than empty lip-service. A gaslighting non-apology is not an apology and using the word ‘heartfelt’ doesn’t erase the repeated attacks in the same sentence and paragraphs. I completely agree with what Andrea Dworkin did write. In my own words, I interpret that quote as saying, fight for all women including bullies and slanderers. Liberation must be for all. So, it’s a political action, not necessarily a space of choosing to be gullible and vulnerable to further attack. Calling out serious abuse is not unsisterly. It is just as much a part of breaking down internalised misogyny as calling out societal abuse. We learn by shining a light on it, by naming the problem.

In part 2 we will focus on Systemic Societal Gaslighting. This too must be exposed, analysed and named if we are to ever overcome misogyny in all it’s forms.