It’s amazing how people can have differing opinions of the same book. Last May, the Lovefraud Reader Ox Drover wrote a review of The Gaslight Effect, by Dr. Robin Stern. I am always on the lookout for books that will help readers understand, and recover from, a traumatic entanglement with a sociopath. Because Oxy was so complimentary about The Gaslight Effect, I was anxious to read it, and possibly recommend it to others.
Well, I read the book, but I’m not sure I can recommend it.
Oxy did point out that Dr. Stern never mentions the word, “sociopath,” referring to the perpetrator as the “gaslighter,” and the victim as the “gaslightee.” Although Oxy was willing to look past this omission, I’m not.
First of all, let’s define “gaslighting.” According to Wikipedia:
Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse in which false information is presented to the victim with the intent of making them doubt their own memory and perception. It may simply be the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, or it could be the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.
Gaslighting is nasty behavior. The problem I have with this book is that Dr. Stern never, ever mentions, not once, that a person who is gaslighting someone else may be malicious, controlling, and intent on destroying the soul of the victim. She does not mention that the gaslighter may be mentally and emotionally abusing someone else, simply for his or her amusement. She does not say that the gaslighter may be evil.
Here’s how Dr. Stern defines the gaslighting relationship:
The Gaslight Effect results from a relationship between two people: a gaslighter, who needs to be right in order to preserve his own sense of self and his sense of having power in the world; and a gaslightee, who allows the gaslighter to define her sense of reality because she idealizes him and seeks his approval.
This definition makes it seem like the two parties—gaslighter and gaslightee—are equally responsible for the dynamics. I don’t think that’s true. Then, a few pages later, Dr. Stern writes:
Of course, neither of you may be aware of what’s really happening. The gaslighter may genuinely believe every word he tells you or sincerely feel that he’s only saving you from yourself. Remember: He’s being driven by his own needs. Your gaslighter might seem like a strong, powerful man, or he may appear to be an insecure, tantrum-throwing little boy; either way, he feels weak and powerless. To feel powerful and safe, he has to prove that he is right, and he has to get you to agree with him.
Excuse me while I barf. Sociopaths who engage in gaslighting do not feel weak and powerless. They are motivated by dominance and feel totally entitled to do what they want and take what they want, even if it is someone else’s sanity.
Three types of gaslighters
Next, Dr. Stern describes three types of gaslighters—the Glamour Gaslighter, the Good-Guy Gaslighter, and the Intimidator. She spends the most time describing the Glamour Gaslighter:
He lets you know you’re the most wonderful woman in the world, the only one who’s ever understood him, the fairy-tale princess who has magically transformed his life. He’ll transform your life, too, he implies or even promises, he’ll shower you with affection, take you to wonderful places, sweep you off your feet with gifts or intimate confessions or sexual attention of a kind you’ve never known before.
This is a perfect description of a sociopath in full seduction mode. But Dr. Stern doesn’t seem to get it. Instead, she explains that this man is in love with the idea of a relationship. He likes to be a leading man, and is looking for a leading lady to fill her part.
Dr. Stern describes the Good-Guy Gaslighter as someone who needs to appear reasonable and good, but is deeply committed to getting his own way. She spends the least amount of time describing the Intimidator, perhaps because the problems are so obvious—put-downs, yelling, bullying, guilt trips and other types of punishment. In order for a relationship with an Intimidator to be more satisfying, she says, the Intimidator will need to alter his way of relating. Yeah, right.
Stress response
Much of this book describes sample cases of gaslightees trying to understand and cope with gaslighters. I’m sure this helps people realize and identify what is going on in these relationships.
The book, however, falls down when Dr. Stern explains why this behavior happens. She writes, “Gaslighting is a response to stress; people become either gaslighters or gaslightees when they feel threatened.”
Sociopaths don’t engage in gaslighting because they’re stressed. They engage in it because it’s who they are and what they do. And victims don’t become gaslightees because of stress. They are trapped because of a psychopathic bond created by the predator.
Then, Dr. Stern asks the reader to be honest:
Think about the ways in which you aren’t being your best self. Do you set off your gaslighter by being overly critical or demanding? Do you belittle your gaslighter or play on his vulnerabilities? Do you say or do things that you know will make him crazy?
Gee, the people I hear from are walking on eggshells trying not to set the guy off. Until, of course, it gets so bad that they have not choice but to explode.
What’s your view?
In the last chapter, Dr. Stern offers three courses of action for people in these situations: Changing the gaslighting relationship from within, limiting a gaslighting relationship, or leaving the relationship. Yes, these are the three choices, and the book offers suggestions on how to decide what to do.
When considering whether to stay in the relationship and change it from within, Dr. Stern reminds the reader to be compassionate, both for herself and the gaslighter. She writes:
You don’t have to put up with unlimited bad treatment, but if your gaslighter persists in gaslighting you, you can remind yourself that he is also suffering, perhaps even more than you are. After all, he almost certainly grew up in a home where he was gaslighted by someone and couldn’t make it stop—so now he doesn’t understand why you have the power to say no.
Is this true? I am asking an honest question of Lovefraud readers here, and I would appreciate your feedback. Have any of you ever been subjected to gaslighting by someone who was basically a good person with problems? Can any of you attribute gaslighting behavior to the perpetrator’s stress or internal pain? Or, do you feel that gaslighting behavior is due to sociopathic traits?
Afraid to recommend
Overall, I have mixed feelings about this book, The Gaslight Effect. The author does a good job of explaining what the behavior looks like, and the questions victims should ask themselves to determine what is really going on. She offers strategies for coping with the behavior, including leaving the relationship.
But Dr. Stern seems to come from that school of therapy that believes both parties contribute equally to relationship problems. Throughout the entire book, I kept waiting for the author to warn the reader that some gaslighters have dangerous, pathological personality disorders, and they should run, not walk, for the nearest exit. The warning never came.
Therefore, I’m afraid to recommend the book, because it may encourage people to stay and try to work things out with an abuser. And the longer people stay in a gaslighting relationship, the more power they lose, and the harder it is to finally leave.
I am slow to respond to posts because our family shares this computer…
Oxy and Skylar,
Thanks for the book suggestions; I’m going to Amazon next. I don’t know why I have procrastinated buying books! Seems I am afraid to do anything anymore.
Jeannie,
No worries, I understand you are emotional! What a terrible bunch of pain, and maybe posting about it helps you. Sometimes posting makes me feel SO MUCH better. I totally understand feeling selfish when you are hurting. I have done so much of that. I used to be generous to a fault, not anymore!! Starting to treat people more kindly is another thing I am procrastinating on I guess.
I also am going through having thoughts of wanting him DEAD. I do not want to do the actual killing, not at all, but it would not bother me one bit to find out he died in a car crash, drug overdose, whatever. He so richly deserves it! It is just simple JUSTICE.
A few weeks ago I was having horrible dreams about chopping him to bits – yuck! – but those intense revenge feelings have subsided. I don’t think I have a lot of hate toward him most of the time, but he truly should be in jail at least.
Hugs to Jeannie, and to all of us, and let’s think about butterflies and rainbows before we go to sleep! lol
To JustDreamin
Funny that you mentioned dreams.
I had a dream about Jim before Dec 8. In that dream Jim was going to be hurt in someway. (can’t remember how) I said NO and forced myself to wake up. (which is hard to do!) Then he harrassed me on Dec 8 and all that mess in court….
I’m kicking myself! I should have let that dream play out!
Just as I am ready to post, you guys are off to sleep! I am replying to LL, who replied to my post before I went to sleep last night. I wish there was a “reply” button on each so you know which one I am replying to.
Anyway, sorry for the typo, LL – I DID mean that ex sexually assaulted me, not the therapist!
Jeannie and justdreamin, thank you for sharing – very touching and at the same time, enlightening, reading all your experiences. Like you, I, too want ex dead, although I would pity him so much that he didn’t get a change to reform and live a fruitful life before dying.
It’s so hard to go NC when you have kids. He texted me yesterday to tell me what he found out about our eldest (who is travelling). Then because he is flying out to meet her next week, he texted our second daughter to drive him to the airport – she has pushed away all his advances and this time was no exception. Then he texted me to ask me to take him to the airport. WHY on earth would he think I would want to do that? It goes to show how much he dismisses all our experiences. As if we could just be friends, like he says all “government booklets on divorce and separation” advocate. He keeps quoting on literature that is meant for “normal” people. And the trouble is, that is the kind of advice that counsellors have told him, and keep giving him – advice that enhances relationship between two NORMAL people. He actually thinks he is a good guy that sometimes lost it, as anyone would’ve if they had kids like ours.
Dancingnancies, thanks for your post about co-dependency myths. Will keep those quotes.
I personally found co-dependancy treatment extremely helpful. It empowered me, taught me boundrys, taught me to trust my instincts, focus on myself and what I needed, See through manipulation and gas-lighting, scape-goating and the like, taught me discernment, and gave me back my self confidence. It provided me a guide book and direction.
Dancingnancies, I read your very good posts about self acceptance and snot blaming ourselves for what happened to us, and I agree with you, whole heartedly, but I don’t think co-dependancy treatment in any way contradicts your point of view. JMHO.
Kim While I personally don’t like the TERM “co-dependency” the CONCEPT of “enabling” others being a dysfunctional behavior is I think very valid and the “training” you had in “co-dependency” is essentially about OUR NOT ENABLING others by taking on their responsibilities, or doing for them what they should be doing for themselves.
It is not unusual that people equate the concepts of “co-dependency” and “enabling” as BLAMING THE VICTIM which it IS NOT AT ALL. When the concepts of being “co-dependent” or “enabling” was first explained to me I didn’t quite grasp the differences in “blaming the victim” and the concept of my participation in the abuse.
Sure, two “normal” people can be dysfunctional and behave in ways that are enabling by one and lack of responsibility by the other, and when the bottom line comes, they can both learn better behavior and quit behaving in a dysfunctional way. NOT so with the psychopath. They are NOT going to learn ways to be functional and have a healthy relationship.
When we “enable” others to shirk their responsibilities by assuming those responsibilities ourselves, it ALWAYS ends up in “hurt feelings” on one part, and on resentment on the other part. The enabler begins to feel “I’ve done thus and so for you and now you don’t appreciate it” and the enabled begins to feel “she is always trying to control my decisions.” Of course this is NOTHING COMPARED TO A REAL PSYCHOPATH’S bad and abusive behavior.
I think the enabling starts out with small things like a mother enabling her children’s sloppy behavior for example. She says “100 times” “Pick up your clothes off the floor” the children don’t do this and she becomes resentful and picks them up herself and as she picks the clothing up, she becomes more resentful, and eventually explodes in anger with the pent up resentment “I slave for you and you never help around the house.” The kids then feel like their mom is a nag and a bitcher who is “always on us to pick up our clothes.”
“NATURAL CONSEQUENCES” of the kids not being enabled would be for the mother to tell the children. “It is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PICK YOUR CLOTHES UP AND PUT THEM IN THE WASH ROOM. I will not wash your clothing if it is lying on the floor.”
Then, the mother does NOT pick up the clothing or wash it, and there comes a day when the kids do not have clean clothing for school. (Which is something they want) so there is a CONSEQUENCE to them not doing their responsibilities.
The enabling also goes along with the VICTIM-PERSECUTOR-RESCUER, as the enabling (picking up the clothes off the floor when it is not her responsibility to do so) by the mother, “rescues” the children from the consequences of their failure to be responsible. So they will not get consequences for their irresponsible behavior.
The mom resents doing this though, so she starts to accumulate anger and the stress builds until she has an angry outburst at the children. At that point, she starts to feel guilty because she had the angry outburst, and the cycle continues.
This kind of cycle can be as Minor as picking up the clothes off the floor, to as MAJOR as going bail for a person who has committed a terrible crime.
I convinced myself because I didn’t mortgage my house to pay an attorney or go bail for my psychopathic son’s crimes that I was NOT ENABLING him, but I was ENABLING him none-the-less by giving him chance after chance to “reform” even when he blew the last one, and the one before that, and before that. By sending him money for commissary while he was in prison.
There is a big difference between “being supportive” and “enabling” but I didn’t see it. I realize too that I enabled my son C when I tried to “help” him after he had used by “help” previously over and over and never really PROFITED FROM IT. He went back to the same bad financial choices he had made before.
I had seen other parents continually and repeatedly use their last resources to bail out a child from jail or drug problems and set them up with a place to live, over and over and send them to rehab and so on and convinced myself that I was NOT doing the very same thing those parents were doing—LOL! Isn’t denial a great tool for staying in bad behavior? LOL—When I worked with the women at the DV shelter I actually felt superior to them because I would NEVER have gone back to a man who hit me, (and that’s true I think) but I had a son who hit me, and who stole from me and I allowed him back into my life, so DUH???? I was “superior” to those women HOW? I now look back on those times when I felt so “superior” to those women with utmost shame at my own attitude, because I was sure “THE POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK.”
I’m re-reading a book now called “In broad Daylight” by Harry N.. Maclean, about psychopathic abuser in a small town in Missouri who abused not only the women in his life, but the entire town, and continually over a period of ten years terrorized the town, shot people, beat people, and the law was literally terrified of him. Eventually in 1981 he was killed in BROAD DAYLIGHT on the main street of the town by two or more shooters, with 50 witnesses to the killing and NO ONE SAW A THING. Even the FBI could not get the people of the town to tell who killed Ken McElroy. The story of this man’s abuse of others is almost unbelievable.
One passage in the book that struck me though is this one.
“McElroy, the expert on techniques of fear and intimidation, had overlooked one important point: If you push someone hard enough, if you corner him, his fear will turn into hate, and hate, a powerful emotion, can be a source of strength.”
One of the parts of the story that particularly interests me is the Trauma bonding of McElroy’s wife, Trena that he first raped and molested when she was 12, then later at 14 she had had his baby, but been rescued from his clutches, only to go back later, and eventually he married her (in order to stop prosecution for the molestation of her at age 12) and she, though repeatedly abused and beaten, was his biggest supporter. She is a “perfect” example of the Stockholm syndrome.
She “enabled” McElroy AND she was his victim, she was in no way to “blame” for what she endured, yet, she “willingly” participated in his terror campaigns against the towns people, in the thefts and arsons. Where is the “line crossed” from being a 12 year old VICTIM raped by a psychopath more than twice her age to being a CO-ABUSER who participates in a campaign of terror, intimidation, and violence against an entire community?
I remember when Patty Hearst had been kidnapped and held captive for months and then “willingly” participated in the bank robbery with her captors. That was the first time I had heard about “Stockholm Syndrome” and how a captive could become a participant with their captors. Patty was sent to prison for her part in the robbery, but eventually pardoned.
How many other people (especially women like Trena McElroy) have become criminals due to Stockholm Syndrome and where is the “line”? I’m not sure. Look at the woman married to Jaycee Dugard’s kidnapper. Where does being a victim end and being an abuser begin? There are lots of questions about this in my mind.
I do not “blame” myself for what the psychopaths in my life did to me or others, but I accept responsibility for allowing it to continue by the choices I made to “forgive” them (pretend it never happened) over and over and over and continue the relationships with them. It may be a “fine distinction” between “blame” and “responsibility” but actually I think it is a BIG difference between the two. JMHO
Jeannie812 says:
“Jim called me a thief and a liar in court and the judge seemed to believe it. Jim totally trashed me at court. …..I can’t get it out of my head! ”
Jeannie, mine trashed me in court too and two judges in a row at two court hearings, seemed to believe it and ruled incorrectly in their judgements because of that. I didn’t think I would be able to get it out of my head either, but I have done and it’s gone now. I know it’s painful – and just such a horrific insult on top of all of the injury we have already suffered at their hands! – but the angst will fade; just give it time. xx
Nottoolate –
“As if we could just be friends, like he says all “government booklets on divorce and separation” advocate. He keeps quoting on literature that is meant for “normal” people. And the trouble is, that is the kind of advice that counsellors have told him, and keep giving him ”“ advice that enhances relationship between two NORMAL people. ”
This is SUCH a good point – so important for those of us who are or who have been involved with ABNORMAL people. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by attempting to apply any of the “good advice” that was designed to cover situations between normal people.
It really just shows how important it is to get that message out there to the rest of the world – especially to those who are doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, judges, police, sheriffs, lawyers, whatever…. the ones who mostly deal with the garbage these monsters spew out and who make decisions that affect OUR lives based on THEIR level of knowledge, or their lack of it.
Not too late,
I’m with OZ about your quote below! GREAT to point this out! They are NOT normal people.
“As if we could just be friends, like he says all “government booklets on divorce and separation” advocate. He keeps quoting on literature that is meant for “normal” people. And the trouble is, that is the kind of advice that counselors have told him, and keep giving him ”“ advice that enhances relationship between two NORMAL people. ”
My egg donor (formerly called my mother) actually told me “Let’s just pretend none of this happened and start over.” My mouth flew open and I really couldn’t believe what she was saying. PRETEND IT NEVER HAPPENED!
Yes, that is exactly what they want us to do! Because it was NO TRAUMA FOR THEM they can pretend it never happened.
I just remembered what I told the egg donor, and if I say so myself, it was quite witty for on the fly! I said “Well let’s also just set a place for daddy and (my husband) at the table and pretend they are not dead!” (My step dad and my husband had died just a few months before all the chaos with the P-son and the other psychopaths. The psychopaths had not caused their deaths though.)
I think, come to think of it at all, that they don’t experience our TRAUMA so it is OK with them to “just pretend none of it happened.” Answers a lot of questions for me of WHY they can just “get over it” or “pretend.”
Oxy, I agree that co-dependants enable, but they also deny and try to control, which, in turn makes them crazy and miserable.
I am a double winner, which is to say I’m both an addict and a co-dependant. I was raised in an alcoholic home and am 3rd generation. I consider myself fortunate that I was not abused either verbally or physically, but I learned to deny, and to tolerate confusion and disfunction. There were some very abnormal things going on like emotional incest, and infantalizing that I’m sure still affect me today. But I digress…
The furthar I get down this road of recovery from unhealthy relationships, the more convinced I become that the two greatest factors in my staying in those relationships were denial and my unfounded belief in my ability to control him…For instance, I thought if I talked rationally to him he would see the error of his ways and change. This belief ran it’s course through rational to lunatic. It ended up in absolute rage…and all this trying to control is rooted in denial. Denial that I wasn’t all powerful. Denial that there was just nothing I could do, and denial that I couldn’t fix it and make it work, because it was what I wanted. (I’m a very stubborn person, as well.)
We were the gasoline and fire type you so often speak of. We were perfect for eachother in a really sick way. The rocks in his head fit the holes in mine.
Anyway, my point is that co-dependancy hurts. It usually arises in childhood as a reaction to an out of control environment. And it isn’t contradictory to anything Dancing said, or what you said about Stockholm syndrom. I think all these models compliment each-other, and all are true.
Also, Ox, I read somewhere that if you associate with a Psychopath there are only two possible out-comes: you become a victim or an accomplice.
I think the spaths have an uncanny ability to use subtle brainwashing techniques to their advantage. First they distroy a persons sense of identity, then take away any support system she might have, then gas-light til she doesn’t trust herself, then desensitize her to moral outrage, minimize, minimize minamize. They manipulate with fear and after making you utterly dependant on them, they use that fear against you.
So for me, co-dependancy treatment was sort of like being deprogrammed….or maybe reprogrammed LOL…from discovery to recovery….it wassn’t my fault I was programmed, but If I wanted to live a successful life I had to get unprogrammed.
And, I think the more of these relationships I had the more damaged I became. I had to look at who I was attracting and why. I had to look at who I was attracted to and why. I understand those things pretty well, today, but I don’t think I will ever change the fact that I am attracted to a certain type that isn’t good for me.
I have been out of my last spathy relationship for over three years, and haven’t even been interested in dating. I don’t trust myself to date. I get emotionally involved in about 20 seconds. I scare men off. Unless they’re disordered. I don’t want to find myself feeling rejected and crazy, and I don’t want another horrible relationship that I can extricate myself from. So, I avoid the problem all together.
Sigh. I wish I could snap my fingers and make all these issues go away, but I can’t. I’m doing my best to function in my disfunction.
I think that diagnosing victims of sociopaths as having “codependency personality” is erroneous and potentially hazardous. I think within the framework, the dynamic of the sociopath-victim involvement, it could be possibly detrimental to the victim’s healing given they focus on this “codependency” idea … and I just think that there’s a lot of potential abuse in the hands of the codependency theorists and diagnosticians..
Oxy mentions enabling- i think the term ‘enabler’ is a valid construct.. esp within the context of a sociopathic involvement ( such as Oxy mentioned- her “egg donor” ) But the dynamic of a sociopath-victim involvement makes it so that it is very easy to latch on a term such as “codependent” without any genuine basis in reality.. I can’t in all honesty give it much merit from a personal standpoint and from what I’ve seen. It runs too close to this FALSE construct that’s become used in some places around the internet- this “echo personality disorder” ( In the mythology of Narcissus- Echo having been the nymph who grew fond of Narcissus ) it comes much too close to pathologizing the victim, who by all accounts may have issues to work on, but is likely undeserving of such a label such as “codependent”.. I disagree with the premise of such a theory. On wikipedia it is described as “inverted narcissism” and I am not fond of such terminology.
That said, I don’t mean to negate your experience with therapy, these are just my personal feelings/thoughts on the matter.
I can understand that someone who comes from a background of abuse may be likely to rely less on their own intuition and judgement and more on those others- and it would be helpful for that individual to do some self-work, on being able to listen to one’s own voice and rely on it more. But I just think the codependency theory itself is a bit offensive and begins to veer off into places that I don’t necessarily agree with… such as presumptions and premises… such as codependents “seeking out” narcissists/sociopaths. That is absolutely wrong and I refuse to give any merit to such an argument. It is too akin to the phrase “they’re just a glutton for punishment”… it takes one notion ( compliant personality, low self confidence ) and makes a whole nother demon out of it.