Last week we talked about how to hold a grudge, and crazy making behaviour is definitely grudge worthy. Gasligting is crazy making behaviour by another name, and it’s what this week’s book is about. Here I tell about what’s good, what drove me up the wall, and my take on Sarkis’ strategy to document, document, document in her book Gaslighting.

The Good

Through Gaslighting by Stephanie Moulton Sarkis, you will learn in broad strokes what this popular term tends to mean.  You can use the tactic descriptions and case studies to identify ways in which you might be subject to gaslighting or you may be using it yourself.  You will also get a sense of the extent of damage it can do.  Know that you are not alone, that there are ways to talk about it, and measures to take whether you are on the giving or receiving end.

If you have been around people who serially gaslight, you may already have a good sense of the strategies laid out in the book.  You may be so used to it, though, that you see it as normal.  Sarkis explains how this happens.  She outlines what, how and why it constitutes abuse and is clear that abusive relationships do not improve over time, but rather escalate.  Having experienced the destruction wreaked by these behaviours, you may have decided to never practice them yourself!  But have you decided to protect yourself from people who do this to you?  There are many ideas, recommendations and resources in the book to do just this. 

The basic message of the book is to get out of an abusive relationship.  Sarkis helps the reader identify what both healthy and abusive relationships look like.  She is very clear that getting out is almost impossible to do alone.  Getting therapy, along with support and protection from family, friends and the justice system is consistently recommended.  A chapter is dedicated to different types of therapy so that you can select the one best suited to you.  There is also an extensive resource section at the end of the book.  It will be necessary to extrapolate the gist of what she recommends to your local context if you do not live in the US.

Sarkis is careful to avoid victim-blaming.  The experience of people who have been repeatedly gaslighted is also normalised.  This is a great antidote to the chaos and lies sown by someone who emotionally abuses others on a daily basis.  

Another great antidote to judging yourself, victim-blaming, and the paranoia that arises from being gaslit is Malcolm Gladwell’s book, Talking to Strangers.  In it he covers 3 effective human communication strategies that occasionally get us into trouble: default to truth, expectations of transparency, and coupling.  He concludes, “Those occasions when our trusting nature gets violated are tragic.  But the alternative – to abandon trust as a defence against predation and deception – is worse”.

Many of the articles found on-line, or videos available on YouTube, address gaslighting on an interpersonal level.  Looking at it on a collective level is what Sarkis’ book adds to the conversation.  The discussion shows how it plays out in politics, the media, the internet, cults, and destructive groups like gangs and terrorist cells.  Here again, the importance of strength in numbers is highlighted.  

The Bad

Sarkis has been criticised for using a term that does not appear in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and she is the first to admit that.  She is a seasoned psychologist whose work regularly brings her into contact with this kind of behaviour.  By not using a DSM term, she removes the temptation for her readers to make an unqualified clinical diagnosis of Cluster B personality disorders (like narcissism) while giving the reader language to name and describe what they are experiencing or doing

In the introduction Sarkis explains how the book is structured and urges readers to read all chapters because they each have something useful no matter your situation.  This is true.  However, by structuring the book according to arenas where gaslighting plays out, the reader is invited to skip to the chapter that talks about the context they are in.  I would have found it more helpful if it were laid out according to tactics/strategies that comprise gaslighting.  This would have provided the intellectual space to deal with them in a more complex and nuanced manner.  Each chapter could then include case studies and examples from different contexts to illustrate it more, followed by strategies for dealing with the behaviour in question.  Also, the tactics could be arranged in a way that show how they build and escalate into something surprising, unbearable and abusive.  The information about what healthy relationships look like could be a chapter on its own.  In addition to their modus operandi, a chapter on the profile of why gaslighters (sic) do what they do would be useful.  The creativity in applying gaslighting tactics is as endless as we are unique.  Once we understand what motivates a person to use these strategies along with what they hope to achieve, we will better be able to see through this creativity.  It’s not that this information isn’t in the book.  It is.  It’s just that it is scattered all over the place.

Chapter 1 is a catalogue of behaviours that can be considered gaslighting.  The sketches are caricatures, emphasising one aspect and ignoring or downplaying others.  For almost all of the behaviours mentioned, I could think of a more complex, subtle and nuanced way that I have seen it played out.  I once supervised a twenty-something person whose boundless creativity with employing these strategies was impressive to behold.  

I experienced this book as a relentless onslaught.  The book feels vitriolic.  Although the author admits in passing that we all use gaslighting tactics from time to time, there is little if any compassion for people who do it.  She employs splitting and stereotyping:  people who consistently gaslight are given a label, gaslighters, and they have no redeeming qualities while the people on the receiving end are victims.  Life is much more complex than this.

It seems that her intent is to help people who are victims get away.  By the time I got to the end of the chapter on families (halfway through the book by the Kindle meter) I got the sense that everyone who gaslights is a  psychopath waiting to happen and that extreme measures are warranted always.  Bombarding readers with so much overwhelming and catastrophizing information may just paralyse them more… or make them put the book down and miss some important information.  She talks about how the abuse ramps up over time and that it can end in violence and quite possibly death.  I don’t doubt this in some cases.  It is ironic, then, that Sarkis seldom makes explicit the dangers inherent in taking the actions she lists in the book. 

The How To

Document, document, document — this is one of the strategies that Sarkis is emphatic about.

From personal experience, documentation can be a declaration of war.  This is because documentation belies both the personal image and narrative that are so important to people who gaslight.  I do not recommend using it to hold someone like this accountable on a daily basis. 

Documentation is important first and foremost because of what it does for you:

• It gives you something to refer back to as proof that you are not crazy!  
• The pattern(s) will begin to emerge as you flip back through all the incidents that you have written down.
• You will be able to identify how many qualities are present and how persistent they are.  
• It will reveal whether you need to take steps to protect yourself, and which ones.  
• It will give you material to work with in identifying your beliefs and values, and affirming that you deserve to be treated with dignity, kindness and respect. 

Sophie Hannah’s process for How To Hold a Grudge is a great way to document what is happening, assess the seriousness of it, identify the right thing to do, and affirm your worth while acknowledging that the person who is harming you is a human being worthy of compassion even as they are to be kept very far away.  (You can read my review of this process here).

There are times, however, when you will want to take legal or disciplinary action, and then documentation following the correct format is required.   Writing down the incident as soon as possible is best since memory plays tricks on us later and is influenced by conversations with others.  A very helpful app is Talk to Spot, which will walk you through all the categories that protect you in a court of law.  As a supervisor, I learned the hard way that any old documentation is not good enough.  It has to contain certain key information to stand up to legal challenges.  As such, your HR department won’t allow you to let someone go if your documentation does not make the grade. 

All written communication is a form of documentation.  It is a good suggestion to communicate as much as possible in writing with the person gaslighting you.  Take screenshots of your electronic chats so that they cannot be deleted by the other person.  If this is occurring in a work context, be sure to send screenshots and copies of e-mails to your personal e-mail account, or store on a personal usb device.  Again, seeing the pattern is what will free you to take the next steps you need to and confirm (or not) the extent of what you are experiencing.  If you do have to go to court, then you also have evidence to back you up.

Conclusion

“Educating yourself is one of the most powerful steps you can take to combat gaslighters and their harassment”, so says Sarkis.  I couldn’t agree more.  There is a lot of good and helpful information in her book, Gaslighting, that you can use to educate yourself.  Despite its redeeming qualities, I got bored and annoyed and overwhelmed and had to force myself to read to the end.  At times it feels like all the author’s experience and information was slapped together as quickly as possible.  This may account for the higgledy-piggledy information that you have to wade through all over the place to find what you really need.  There is little acknowledgement of degrees; degrees of gaslighting and degrees of the measures to take. What can happen when you take the recommended steps to put a stop to gaslighting are also hardly dealt with.  She seems to deal in extremes.

The Good

Chris Voss knows something that Screwtape does too:  when we don’t look out for our interests, all hell breaks loose.  Hence the title: Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if your life depended on it. 

The book is about negotiating in your own self-interest without being selfish.  You do this through understanding who you are negotiating with, and perceiving what they want. 

Each chapter is dedicated to developing and learning to use a specific tool that will definitely improve your communication skills, and potentially also your negotiation skills in the future.  Some of the skills are not new to those who have studied the field, and for some of us a few of them are already habits (like labelling, for instance).  There are lots of great techniques and skills that are easy to put into practice and that will surprise even seasoned conflict transformation practitioners.  As Voss says, they are game changers.  (See below on How to Master No) Each skill builds on the previous one. In theory, by the end of the book you should have a full tool-box that will turn you into a better negotiator in the home, work, school, community, and social settings.

Voss turns conventional wisdom about negotiating on its head through the stories he tells, and by referring to scientific studies in behavioural economics and psychology.  What I really appreciate about the book is the philosophical underpinning along with the core values espoused by the author.  This is not a winner takes all book about negotiation.  It is a profoundly humanising approach that values connection, creating relationship and getting people to talk and think together above all else.  The emphasis is on deeply empathising with the party you are negotiating with, even if you detest what they stand for.  Voss’s starting point is always the person sitting in front of you, and asks you to quiet your own mind and assumptions while you do that.   Then you can move from there to disagree when needed without being disagreeable.  I wonder if Malcolm Gladwell looks at all the “disagreeable” people he admires whether he will find that they know how to disagree without actually being disagreeable?  Although, just to be clear, Voss is not talking about saccharine niceness either.  He says this is disingenuous manipulation that won’t get you far.  That is why mastering the art of “No” is so important.

The Bad

I have at least two friends who struggled to get to the end of this book.  I did not have that problem.  Perhaps it is because I have a background, and therefore an interest, in conflict transformation.  I will say that the tone sometimes skates dangerously close to false modesty alternating with arrogance, which I find quite off-putting until I get into the nitty gritty of what he is saying, and then I concentrate on content rather than tone.

Like all of us, Voss has some blindspots… There are a number of assumptions and some background information that are glossed over:  

• He takes as a given that you understand and can practice empathy.  
• He assumes you know what you want and how to establish, as well as respect, boundaries.
• He assumes that you know the basic mediation and negotiation skills, like active listening.  He takes active listening to another level in his book.
• He promotes himself as just an ordinary guy who has found himself doing extraordinary things with the skills he has unlocked. We know he isn’t an ordinary guy from his dedication to his parents who unconditionally loved him.  How many of us can truly say that?  More than 50% of us, at least, have traumatised childhoods to talk about.  And that directly impacts on two of the points above – honed empathy skills, and being good at boundaries.
• Similarly, he glosses over how being a white male opens doors for him that it doesn’t for others.  There is limited if any power analysis or attention to negotiating off the back-foot.
• He works as part of a large (and elite) team whose job it is to do this.  Most of us have to go into these situations under-resourced, without a budget or exclusive time dedicated to negotiating the issue at hand.

Another issue I have is that he seems to approach every situation as if it is a negotiation and implies that almost all of life is just that.  This leads to the syndrome of “if you have a hammer, everything becomes a nail”.

There are a number of sweeping generalisations, such as  “I’ll try” always means “no” in practice, or what I just mentioned above.

Like other authors on mediation, negotiation and arbitration techniques, he doesn’t address what to do when the person you are negotiating with has also read the same book.  Essentially, they can see through what you are doing and have been inoculated against your technique.  He also doesn’t warn you about how these techniques can backfire when dealing with someone toxic who you have to see day in and day out.  Very different things are at stake in life and death negotiations with hostage takers who you will never see again and don’t have to live or work with daily.  Life and death, or any other, negotiations with narcissists who are part of your family, friendship or professional network are entirely a different story.

How To

Beware ‘Yes’ — Master ‘No’

Not all “Yeses” and “Noes” are created equal.  Usually we think of “Yes” as something positive, and by extension “No” must be negative because it is “Yes’s” opposite.  We instinctively jump to the conclusion that “No” is an act of rejection, a manifestation of stubbornness, or that it means the end of the discussion. Rather, Voss puts forward some powerful arguments for why we should seek a “No” in order to begin the discussions.  “No” protects the status quo while buying time to think and providing an oasis of control.  

You would have to read Chapter 5 of Never Split the Difference to follow all the arguments that lay out what “No” does. In summary, though, No

• allows the real issues to be brought forth,
• protects people from making ineffective decisions, or allows them to change them,
• slows the conversation down so that people can embrace their decisions
• helps people feel safe, secure, emotionally comfortable and in control of their decisions, and
• moves everyone’s efforts forward because it spurs people to action and gets creativity flowing.

He argues that if you want to negotiate a good outcome that everyone can feel good about, you have to learn to ask for “No”, then become comfortable hearing “No”, and train yourself to listen to what it actually means.  Potentially “No” means:

• I am not ready yet to agree;
• You are making me feel uncomfortable;
• I do not understand;
• I don’t think I can afford it;
• I want something else;
• I need more information; or 
• I want to talk it over with someone else.

While Voss puts this forward as a complete list of possible extended interpretations of the word “No”, I wonder if it is exhaustive.  Please feel free to add an interpretation that comes to your mind in the comments section below.

He also says that if you try every which way to get a “No” that is not forthcoming you should run.  It means that your counterpart is confused or indecisive or has a hidden agenda.  (This is one of those categorical statements that I mentioned may be problematic).

So, what’s wrong with “Yes”? Because as Fischer and Ury posit, Getting to Yes is what we want at the end of the day.  Again, the author explains how we conflate the positive value of that final “Yes” with a positive value of “Yes” in general.  Like “No”, “Yes” doesn’t always mean “Yes”.  We are told to listen carefully and identify which one we are being offered.  

• Are we being offered a counterfeit “Yes” designed as a polite way to get us off their back?
• Is it a confirmation “Yes”, a reflexive response to a black-and-white question? Or
• Is it a commitment “Yes”, a true agreement that leads to action?

To quote Voss, “Triggering “No” peels away the plastic falsehood of “Yes” and gets you to what’s really at stake.”

Conclusion

I liked this book.  It is very practical and I think that there are things that anyone from any background can use (like mirroring and labelling) that improve communication, understanding and connection in a conversation.  I value the affirmation that creating human relationship is the first goal of any negotiation.  However, the book is offered as a series of techniques for anyone to use in almost any circumstance.  It obviates the need for discernment, understanding what the consequences can be in on-going relationships, and that these skills are not built overnight. Practice, practice, practice is needed in order to see results.  What happens when it backfires?  And what happens if you are the woman in the room who puts a great suggestion on the table that everyone ignores, only for a man to put that same suggestion on the table later and it to be taken up whole-heartedly?  For “woman” add person of colour, a person with a disability, a person identifying as LGBTQ+, poor, with an accent, dressed differently (you get the picture) or any combination of all these things.

Back to top