Making it Better: The future of WP

Post Reply New Topic

Is it still gaslighting if it's unintentional?

An example would be someone truly cannot recall they said something so they keep saying they never said it. There is a false memory involved here and everyone gets them so of course two people can be arguing about a situation saying they didn't say X and the other person insists they did.

Or another example is when I was a kid, I lived in the moment so I didn't understand consequences to my past actions. Let's say i pushed my brother and then a half hour later I am in another room and my mom comes in and says I pushed my brother, I would have argued and said I did not because in my mind, I did not push my brother because he isn't with me. Man look at all this gas lighting I must have done as a child.

Or what about when someone thinks you have ill intentions but you don't are they gas lighting you because they are claiming what you are doing and what they are claiming is false but they are telling you you have ulterior motives and you are just bullying people and having guises in your comments. They can say you are gas lighting everyone because you are saying "that is not true, I am not doing any of that" and you can say the same about them, they are gas lighting you.

Plus I have heard gas lighting is often a misused term. You wouldn't say a 3 year old is gas lighting you when they denied they made a mess in the kitchen when you confront them about it. Their brains are not that far developed so they don't remember making that mess and they also live in the moment and don't understand consequences to their past term actions so you have to catch them in the act and give them an immediate consequence.

It's common among narcissists, but it isn't limited to them. It's one of those patterns of behaviours that's repeated by individuals and entities that want to control others.

Is it still gaslighting if it's unintentional?

An example would be someone truly cannot recall they said something so they keep saying they never said it. There is a false memory involved here and everyone gets them so of course two people can be arguing about a situation saying they didn't say X and the other person insists they did.

Or another example is when I was a kid, I lived in the moment so I didn't understand consequences to my past actions. Let's say i pushed my brother and then a half hour later I am in another room and my mom comes in and says I pushed my brother, I would have argued and said I did not because in my mind, I did not push my brother because he isn't with me. Man look at all this gas lighting I must have done as a child.

Or what about when someone thinks you have ill intentions but you don't are they gas lighting you because they are claiming what you are doing and what they are claiming is false but they are telling you you have ulterior motives and you are just bullying people and having guises in your comments. They can say you are gas lighting everyone because you are saying "that is not true, I am not doing any of that" and you can say the same about them, they are gas lighting you.

Plus I have heard gas lighting is often a misused term. You wouldn't say a 3 year old is gas lighting you when they denied they made a mess in the kitchen when you confront them about it. Their brains are not that far developed so they don't remember making that mess and they also live in the moment and don't understand consequences to their past term actions so you have to catch them in the act and give them an immediate consequence.

Calling people names and slures isn’t disagreeing with people
Or is is it ok ever time I disagree with woman here to call them a slut or b***h, or c**t?

People here are actively constantly violating the rules. Sorry calling people you disagree with nazi, white supremist, dog with fleas, etc isn’t “just disagreeing.

It’s exactly what the rules forbid.

Anyone who is in here covering for and making excuses for such behavior is just as bad as those who do it.

I was actually intelligent at that age, and my youngest brother was more like an eight year old at the age of three. He could easily out think adults!

If someone consistently puts the interests and concerns of white people ahead of those of other people is it unfair to refer to that person as a white supremacist when they meet the definition? Acting insulted to be described by a label that one meets the definition of is dishonest and an example of gaslighting.

How does one unintentionally call black people nigars? Would you buy such excuse?
No? Then why buy it when people call me a dog with fleas who should be avoided and purged from wp? Why by it when they constantly call me a nazi or white surprimist cause I disagree with the violence of blm?

It’s ironic and hypocritical of people to call people names for disagreeing but then accuse their victims of said behavior

I’m mostly mute now cause of this s**t but I couldn’t stand the apologists here.

Those who constantly break the rules and should be permanently banned as they were from af

You sound exactly like if she dresses like a slut then it’s ok to call her a slut
She derseved it look how she was dressed.

Just cause you deem people white supremist doesn’t make it so and doesn’t excuse you to violated the rules about personal attacks or attacking groups.

There’s a racist on wp but it’s nit me.

It's a lot easier to outhink adults who presume they're dealing with someone who thinks like baby. Being underestimated can be a huge handicap in one's favour in that situation.

If some conservative joined and started calling you horrible things I’d defend you not excuse said attacks.

White supremacy is a term used to characterize various belief systems central to which are one or more of the following key tenets: 1) whites should have dominance over people of other backgrounds, especially where they may co-exist; 2) whites should live by themselves in a whites-only society; 3) white people have their own "culture" that is superior to other cultures; 4) white people are genetically superior to other people. As a full-fledged ideology, white supremacy is far more encompassing than simple racism or bigotry. Most white supremacists today further believe that the white race is in danger of extinction due to a rising “flood” of non-whites, who are controlled and manipulated by Jews, and that imminent action is need to “save” the white race.

One doesn't need to be a card-carrying member of a white supremacist organization to be a white supremacist, if one consistently argues in favour of placing the interests of whites ahead of others that's adequate enough for the term to be applicable. Raising the bar to avoid offending those who might otherwise meet the definition seems like backing away to avoid having to call a spade a spade.

evidence , please