Can this be done? Remove "foes" from notifications.

[Age]

You guys are weird. Gaslighting is when someone tries to manipulate you by saying things they know to be untruths, but Age 100% believes what it says.

I think there can be unconscious gaslighting. But in any case 1) continuously expressing beliefs about many of us, in post after post, then saying he does not have beliefs. Once calling his beliefs 'views'. LOL. 2) Expressing his beliefs in absolute terms, when he must know they are not absolute: "you never do X.....'When he has experienced me doing X.' 3) Denying he ever said X. You find a quote where he said X. And he maintains his denial. 4) Denying that he ever gets irritated, when it's obvious in the way he changes his relation to people. I've seen this happen with you a number of times. 5) How about calling atophi (sp) a pedophile and when the latter gets irritated, Age tells him he is naive or some other judgment becaues the word originally meant a lover of children. 6) Judging people (often with the phrase like 'at the time this is being written' and then when it is pointed out that he has many judgments of people, he denies it.

There are many more instances and types of gaslighting activities on his part. As I said to him once, I don't know if he is conscious that he is gaslighting, but he is gaslighting. And it's intentional, even if it is unconscious. It is self-serving and not random.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/bl ... at-they-do

That's not really gaslighting, he (she) tries to force you to realize the "absolute truth", and the tricks he uses and mistakes he makes along the way don't matter.

'I', for One, would LOVE see some examples of this.

But, KNOWING this one ABSOLUTELY NONE will be provided, nor given.

Which, once more, this one will prove me absolutely True, and Right, AGAIN.

[Age]

I think there can be unconscious gaslighting. But in any case 1) continuously expressing beliefs about many of us, in post after post, then saying he does not have beliefs. Once calling his beliefs 'views'. LOL. 2) Expressing his beliefs in absolute terms, when he must know they are not absolute: "you never do X.....'When he has experienced me doing X.' 3) Denying he ever said X. You find a quote where he said X. And he maintains his denial. 4) Denying that he ever gets irritated, when it's obvious in the way he changes his relation to people. I've seen this happen with you a number of times. 5) How about calling atophi (sp) a pedophile and when the latter gets irritated, Age tells him he is naive or some other judgment becaues the word originally meant a lover of children. 6) Judging people (often with the phrase like 'at the time this is being written' and then when it is pointed out that he has many judgments of people, he denies it.

There are many more instances and types of gaslighting activities on his part. As I said to him once, I don't know if he is conscious that he is gaslighting, but he is gaslighting. And it's intentional, even if it is unconscious. It is self-serving and not random.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/bl ... at-they-do

That's not really gaslighting, he (she) tries to force you to realize the "absolute truth", and the tricks he uses and mistakes he makes along the way don't matter.

If we change the words 'force' and 'tricks' and 'mistakes' what you just expressed might fit with his own views. The article I linked to talks about some gaslighters not knowing what they are doing. Sometimes they are called self-deceiving gaslighters. To me the moment someone regularly denies reality through a variety of devices AND presents negative views of you (and others) supported by doing this, they are gaslighting.

And, if the actual Truth is be made KNOWN, it is these ones here, in this thread and forum, who keep regularly denying 'Reality', like, for example, the Universe did not begin, was not once smaller, nor is expanding, or, like there is only One Mind, through a variety of devices, WHILE attempting to present negative, but False, views of 'me'.

As this thread is just another one of the number of threads created in order to also just talk ABOUT 'me'.

I think it can be a valid definition that one must be consciously trying to manipulate people and mess with their minds.

1. Once again, you people do not have minds.

2. Just so to remind you 'I' am NOT 'trying to' manipulate you human beings here. 'I' am actually DOING IT.

3. you all here are probably holding a definition of 'manipulate' 'now', and so have already begun PRE/ASSUMING things that have absolutely NOTHING AT ALL in regards to what I am actually saying, and meaning. But, th E very reasons WHY you are doing this, and keep doing THIS, I have ALREADY EXPLAINED and POINTED OUT.

Given that I don't always know what is really going on in the other person's mind and in a sense it doesn't matter - what I call gaslighting is happening - I include people who may not be aware of what they are doing. I think that's also valid. But in discussion with you, hey, I can work with your definition and avoid it. But in general the use in psychology and every day life seems to include both kinds of patterns. And, of course, there can be mixtures of awareness. Some awareness, some degree of fooling oneself. For non-psychopaths it's pretty uncomfortable to notice what one is doingt, unless you have some kind of justification for trying to break someone else down.

And, what 'I' AM DOING HERE, is absolutely JUSTIFIED. As will comes-to-light, and 'crystal clear', soon enough.

[Age]

That's not really gaslighting, he (she) tries to force you to realize the "absolute truth", and the tricks he uses and mistakes he makes along the way don't matter.

If we change the words 'force' and 'tricks' and 'mistakes' what you just expressed might fit with his own views. The article I linked to talks about some gaslighters not knowing what they are doing. Sometimes they are called self-deceiving gaslighters. To me the moment someone regularly denies reality through a variety of devices AND presents negative views of you (and others) supported by doing this, they are gaslighting.

I think it can be a valid definition that one must be consciously trying to manipulate people and mess with their minds. Given that I don't always know what is really going on in the other person's mind and in a sense it doesn't matter - what I call gaslighting is happening - I include people who may not be aware of what they are doing. I think that's also valid. But in discussion with you, hey, I can work with your definition and avoid it. But in general the use in psychology and every day life seems to include both kinds of patterns. And, of course, there can be mixtures of awareness. Some awareness, some degree of fooling oneself. For non-psychopaths it's pretty uncomfortable to notice what one is doingt, unless you have some kind of justification for trying to break someone else down.

Yeah but Age isn't denying reality, he/she thinks we are denying reality.

LOL you could not be MORE Wrong, AGAIN, here, "atla".

If only they KNEW.

[Atla]

And, what 'I' AM DOING HERE, is absolutely JUSTIFIED. As will comes-to-light, and 'crystal clear', soon enough.

Dream on

[Age]

If we change the words 'force' and 'tricks' and 'mistakes' what you just expressed might fit with his own views. The article I linked to talks about some gaslighters not knowing what they are doing. Sometimes they are called self-deceiving gaslighters. To me the moment someone regularly denies reality through a variety of devices AND presents negative views of you (and others) supported by doing this, they are gaslighting.

I think it can be a valid definition that one must be consciously trying to manipulate people and mess with their minds. Given that I don't always know what is really going on in the other person's mind and in a sense it doesn't matter - what I call gaslighting is happening - I include people who may not be aware of what they are doing. I think that's also valid. But in discussion with you, hey, I can work with your definition and avoid it. But in general the use in psychology and every day life seems to include both kinds of patterns. And, of course, there can be mixtures of awareness. Some awareness, some degree of fooling oneself. For non-psychopaths it's pretty uncomfortable to notice what one is doingt, unless you have some kind of justification for trying to break someone else down.

Yeah but Age isn't denying reality, he/she thinks we are denying reality.

Those aren't mutually exclusive. Plus, I don't think his view is the default.
Further his view of reality isn't really the focus of his gaslighting. Much of his gaslighting has to do with what he does in interactions with others and what he claims they are doing interpersonally. All his mindreading, denials, etc.

And 'this' coming from 'the one' who TELLS 'another' the 'feelings/emotions' that 'they' ARE HAVING. But, when INFORMED that those GUESSES were and/or are Wrong the 'same one' DENIES that.

LOL this one human being actually BELIEVES, ABSOLUTELY, that it can TELL 'another' what they 'are' feeling but when it is TOLD that it is Wrong it just completely and utterly DENIES this. Which is, EXACTLY, what I have been saying, and claiming, about the POWER of 'BELIEF', itself.

The POWER that the 'beliefs' in this one make it feel so much MORE SUPERIOR than 'others' that it actually BELIEVES it KNOWS how 'others' feel, while also BELIEVING that 'the other', "itself", does not KNOW how "its" own 'self' feels.

Which, besides being a great example of 'gaslighting', itself, it is also a SIGN of this one's BELIEVED 'superiority' over 'others'. Which is totally understandable and expected from one like 'this one' IS

In any case, I would guess he doesn't think he is gaslighting.
He might think it's fair tactics given his incredible knowledge. He might not. I lean towards him not being able to look at what he is doing, so not knowing about it.

So, has this one ADMITTED that it has been 'gaslighting' here? Especially considering how many actually examples I have provided if it 'gaslighting'?

But, then again, one would have to, FIRST HAVE, the COURAGE to 'look at', and 'discuss' things here, which this one has already proved ABSOLUTELY that it DIES NOT

But I don't care if he is conscious of it. He is likely repeatedly ignoring discomfort and flickers of awareness that something is going on he doesn't want to look at. The edges of cognitive dissonance. He's responsible for that. It takes word for someone unconscious to stay unconscious when there are constant clues. That holds for all of us.

'Projection' is a word that some would use here

[Age]

Yeah but Age isn't denying reality, he/she thinks we are denying reality.

Those aren't mutually exclusive. Plus, I don't think his view is the default.
Further his view of reality isn't really the focus of his gaslighting. Much of his gaslighting has to do with what he does in interactions with others and what he claims they are doing interpersonally. All his mindreading, denials, etc.

In any case, I would guess he doesn't think he is gaslighting.
He might think it's fair tactics given his incredible knowledge. He might not. I lean towards him not being able to look at what he is doing, so not knowing about it.

But I don't care if he is conscious of it. He is likely repeatedly ignoring discomfort and flickers of awareness that something is going on he doesn't want to look at. The edges of cognitive dissonance. He's responsible for that. It takes word for someone unconscious to stay unconscious when there are constant clues. That holds for all of us.

Umm but absolutely everything he writes is because of his experience of reality? I don't think it's a good idea to downplay the level of his insanity by calling it gaslighting.

Is this one here implying that it does not write everything that it does because if its experience/s of 'reality'?

I wonder what 'my level' of 'my insanity' is, exactly, to 'this one', and to 'its level' of 'its insanity', precisely?

[Age]

Those aren't mutually exclusive. Plus, I don't think his view is the default.
Further his view of reality isn't really the focus of his gaslighting. Much of his gaslighting has to do with what he does in interactions with others and what he claims they are doing interpersonally. All his mindreading, denials, etc.

In any case, I would guess he doesn't think he is gaslighting.
He might think it's fair tactics given his incredible knowledge. He might not. I lean towards him not being able to look at what he is doing, so not knowing about it.

But I don't care if he is conscious of it. He is likely repeatedly ignoring discomfort and flickers of awareness that something is going on he doesn't want to look at. The edges of cognitive dissonance. He's responsible for that. It takes word for someone unconscious to stay unconscious when there are constant clues. That holds for all of us.

Umm but absolutely everything he writes is because of his experience of reality? I don't think it's a good idea to downplay the level of his insanity by calling it gaslighting.

I'm not saying everything he does is gaslighting, just that he's gaslighting.
I once had a perfectly lovely conversation with a homeless woman who thought there was a giant conspiracy to kill a B-movie star in the 40s. She was kind, and asked me nice questions about me. She answered questions about her life - I'd come in to late on a flight for the interstate bus I needed so I was just walking around in a city in the middle of the night. We walked together. She had a number of delusions and seemed to be referring to hallucinations also. But she didn't gaslight a bit. She seemed relieved that I didn't make a fuss about her theories and she was a nice coversation partner. She made her pitch about the star. I thought it and some of her other beliefs were very unlikely and said so. She didn't start telling me about me and my supposed problems. It was all rather pleasant, for both of us, I think. She was a nice lady and I hope she managed to get a home later.¨

Obviously this one has a very strong issue and/or dislike 'looking at'' its 'problems'. But, then again, as it has been showing and revealing here it is also one of those ones who believe, absolutely that it has NO 'problems' and it is always 'the other' who does.

For example just 'look at' its little story above here about how "she" has the issues, the problems, the hallucinations, and the delusions, and not one mention if its own ones.

But, this one has proved throughout this forum that it has a huge tendency to only 'look at' 'others' and not at "itself".

As far as Age being insane, I have no idea. Depends on what he can manage to do. Insanity, to me, goes beyond the content of beliefs and means hygeine, getting one's own food, work, relationships are all severely damaged or taken care of at all. He may be. I don't know.

Have you not been LISTENING TO "atla"?

According to "atla" 'I' am nothing more than a 'dribbling mess' who relies on carers 24/7, and I you tax payers solely

But regardless you can be very sane and gaslight. Nuts and gaslight. They are two different types of issue.

And both of neither of you pair have AT ALL. Well according to you two anyway

[Age]

Umm but absolutely everything he writes is because of his experience of reality? I don't think it's a good idea to downplay the level of his insanity by calling it gaslighting.

I'm not saying everything he does is gaslighting, just that he's gaslighting.
I once had a perfectly lovely conversation with a homeless woman who thought there was a giant conspiracy to kill a B-movie star in the 40s. She was kind, and asked me nice questions about me. She answered questions about her life - I'd come in to late on a flight for the interstate bus I needed so I was just walking around in a city in the middle of the night. We walked together. She had a number of delusions and seemed to be referring to hallucinations also. But she didn't gaslight a bit. She seemed relieved that I didn't make a fuss about her theories and she was a nice coversation partner. She made her pitch about the star. I thought it and some of her other beliefs were very unlikely and said so. She didn't start telling me about me and my supposed problems. It was all rather pleasant, for both of us, I think. She was a nice lady and I hope she managed to get a home later.¨

As far as Age being insane, I have no idea. Depends on what he can manage to do. Insanity, to me, goes beyond the content of beliefs and means hygeine, getting one's own food, work, relationships are all severely damaged or taken care of at all. He may be. I don't know.

But regardless you can be very sane and gaslight. Nuts and gaslight. They are two different types of issue.

Ok we seem to be talking two very different languages, I was talking about the experienced reality itself, not merely the content of beliefs.

Once again, what 'we' can clearly seen here are two people 'talking past each other'.

Which, by the way, was just a VERY COMMON HABIT, of the older generation anyway, back in the 'olden days' when this was being written.

[Age]

Ok we seem to be talking two very different languages, I was talking about the experienced reality itself, not merely the content of beliefs.

And I'm talking about interpersonal dynamics with gaslighting.

Of which this one believes, absolutely, that it does not do.

[Age]

Ok we seem to be talking two very different languages, I was talking about the experienced reality itself, not merely the content of beliefs.

And I'm talking about interpersonal dynamics with gaslighting.

But there are no interpersonal dynamics in Age's reality. That's just an illusion our mind creates by filling in gaps, based on its experince with the other 99.9% of humans whose reality does have interpersonal dynamics.

If this one says and BELIEVES SO, then this MUST BE TRUE. Well to this one anyway.

[Age]

I see the narcissistic freak is doing his thing.

And, 'we' see the "narcissistic one", STILL, talking ABOUT 'me', while whinging and moaning that I just make responses to, and in, posts, and threads, ABOUT me.

[Atla]

According to "atla" 'I' am nothing more than a 'dribbling mess' who relies on carers 24/7, and I you tax payers solely

Hm I've never used the expression 'dribbling mess' before. Maybe you picked that one up from the carers.

[Age]

You guys are weird. Gaslighting is when someone tries to manipulate you by saying things they know to be untruths, but Age 100% believes what it says.

LOL

Although this one may have had the first part here Right, it ABSOLUTELY spoke and wrote an UNTRUTH in the second part.

Which if it did KNOW was untrue, and which it SHOULD of, if it had been LISTENING and FOLLOWING here, then what this one has just provide 'us' here with is a prime example of, its own definition of, 'gaslighting'.

And Age should know by now that to me, knowledge of the absolute truth is the prime example of a blind belief.

So, this one BELIEVES, ABSOLUTELY, that there is ABSOLUTELY NO 'absolute truth'.

Which, if it had any actual sense of 'knowing', itself, is a 'blind belief', itself.

LOL How could one, logically and rationally, 'reason' and CLAIM that there is NO 'absolute truth' without realizing that 'that' is 'an absolute claim of knowledge, and if truth', itself?

[Age]

According to "atla" 'I' am nothing more than a 'dribbling mess' who relies on carers 24/7, and I you tax payers solely

Hm I've never used the expression 'dribbling mess' before. Maybe you picked that one up from the carers.

Maybe I did.

But, then again, maybe because you BELIEVE, ABSOLUTELY, that 'they' ABSOLUTELY exist, then this is all you have to explain for what I said, and wrote, here.

[Atla]

LOL

Although this one may have had the first part here Right, it ABSOLUTELY spoke and wrote an UNTRUTH in the second part.

Which if it did KNOW was untrue, and which it SHOULD of, if it had been LISTENING and FOLLOWING here, then what this one has just provide 'us' here with is a prime example of, its own definition of, 'gaslighting'.

And Age should know by now that to me, knowledge of the absolute truth is the prime example of a blind belief.

So, this one BELIEVES, ABSOLUTELY, that there is ABSOLUTELY NO 'absolute truth'.

Which, if it had any actual sense of 'knowing', itself, is a 'blind belief', itself.

LOL How could one, logically and rationally, 'reason' and CLAIM that there is NO 'absolute truth' without realizing that 'that' is 'an absolute claim of knowledge, and if truth', itself?

I didn't. Hey I can also use my right hemisphere, which gives me the ability to cognize infinite regresses. It's not something you can imagine.