Gaslighting and Beyond: Unfolding the Full Spectrum of Emotional Manipulation

Gaslighting, a term that has firmly planted itself in our societal lexicon, refers to the psychological manipulation tactic whereby one person attempts to sow seeds of doubt in a target, making them question their own memory, perception, or sanity. It is a destructive form of emotional abuse, often employed by sociopaths, narcissists, and abusive individuals. However, the vast and varied landscape of emotional manipulation cannot be solely encapsulated by the term ‘gaslighting’. There are nuanced variations of these interactions which deserve their own terms.

In an attempt to complement gaslighting, we propose three new terms - ‘paperlighting’, ‘gasdarking’, and ‘paperdarking’. These not only help in understanding the different forms of manipulative behavior but also promote conversations on a wider array of human interaction.

Paperlighting

Derived from the imagery of using paper as an inefficient fuel source, ‘paperlighting’ refers to unsuccessful attempts at gaslighting. These are situations where the instigator fails to create doubt in the target’s mind or tries to manipulate a target who is clearly aware of the manipulation tactics being used.

For instance, a partner may repeatedly accuse you of forgetting conversations that never took place, attempting to make you question your memory. But if you’re vigilant, maintaining records of your conversations, their attempt at gaslighting turns out to be merely paperlighting, as their lies cannot be substantiated.

However, the intent behind paperlighting may not always be straightforward. In some cases, it could be employed maliciously to assert dominance, despite knowing the poor prospects of success. A boss might continuously point out non-existent errors in your work, fully aware that you’ll fact-check and find none, with their main intention being to assert their authority over you.

Gasdarking

A term with more of a dual-nature, ‘gasdarking’ refers to the act of encouraging someone to trust in their sanity or powers of reasoning. If used ethically, it could be a tool to bolster the confidence of those prone to self-doubt. A therapist reassuring a patient with anxiety disorder of their logical reasoning capabilities is an example of benevolent gasdarking.

However, when applied irresponsibly, it can exacerbate delusions or ungrounded beliefs in those who may indeed need professional help. Consider a situation where a friend encourages a conspiracy theorist to trust their unfounded beliefs rather than questioning them. This validates the theorist’s irrationality, potentially causing harm.

Paperdarking

Rounding off the set, we have ‘paperdarking’. This term signifies ineffective gasdarking attempts. Like paperlighting, the effectiveness here is in question, not the intent. It could be well-meaning yet ineffective attempts to support someone.

For instance, telling a person with imposter syndrome that they’re just as competent as their colleagues, without addressing the root of their self-doubt, can be considered paperdarking. Their persistent self-doubt may make them perceive your reassurances as empty platitudes, rendering your efforts ineffective.

However, in some contexts, paperdarking could also be used humorously or jokingly, for instance, when friends engage in friendly banter, playfully assuring each other of their ‘unrivaled intelligence’ despite their shared knowledge of certain ludicrous decisions made.

Conclusion and Implications

In conclusion, it’s important to recognize that manipulation and reassurance are not black and white concepts. They often exist on spectrums, and the outcomes can be influenced by a multitude of factors. By introducing terms like ‘paperlighting’, ‘gasdarking’, and ‘paperdarking’, we not only enrich our understanding of human interaction but also provide a lexicon for behaviors that were previously overlooked or misunderstood.

These newly proposed terms invite us to consider a wider range of behaviors and interactions. They highlight the often overlooked aspects of emotional manipulation and support, giving a name to the nuances that can play a significant role in a person’s psychological well-being. They emphasize that intentions and efficacy are separate facets of our actions and interactions with others.

For instance, ‘paperlighting’ underlines that an attempt at manipulation isn’t harmless simply because it fails. The very act can indicate a power imbalance or an intent to cause harm, which should be addressed. On the other hand, it highlights that well-meaning actions (as in ‘paperdarking’) can fail if they’re not appropriately attuned to the receiver’s needs or perspective.

Similarly, ‘gasdarking’ brings to attention the complexities of reassurance and validation. While it is crucial to build confidence and affirm sanity, one should be careful not to fuel delusions or unwarranted self-confidence. This term serves as a reminder that, like gaslighting, gasdarking also needs to be used responsibly, taking into account the individual’s mental state and the context.

Through these new terms, we also explore how benign actions may become harmful, and vice versa, depending on the situation. This brings a more sophisticated understanding of human interaction, pointing out that the same actions may have different consequences in different contexts.

Lastly, these terms can serve as a tool for introspection and self-awareness. Being aware of these concepts helps us scrutinize our own behavior in our interactions. It prompts us to consider the possible impacts of our actions, whether we’re perpetrating paperlighting, falling short with paperdarking, or misapplying gasdarking. They provide us with a language to dissect, discuss, and eventually improve our relationships and interactions.

In conclusion, enriching our vocabulary with ‘paperlighting’, ‘gasdarking’, and ‘paperdarking’, adds depth to our understanding of emotional manipulation and support. By highlighting and naming these varied interactions, we open the door to more nuanced conversations and a more profound understanding of the complex world of human interaction and emotional health.

I came up with this with some friends. “Gasdarking” was first coined by us more than a year ago, with this meaning, and I have since found that, while the term has not been coined many other times on the Internet – it had 7 Google results –, it has sometimes carried this same meaning, though not always with the positive connotation we had intended it to have, which is why I have left this neutral here. The paper terms were come up with just today, because we were talking about someone who maliciously paperlighted people, as with the boss in the article example. The article was GPT-4 – I couldn’t have brought myself to write that much text about what is basically a meme, although I endorse all of the content, which I corrected by hand on at least one point. At first, I posted this with the chart to my Facebook meme page, but then I copied it over to here as well.

Chart with the meanings of the terms.