Um, where did you get that story? Or are you just trying to gaslight Gaslight (1944) like MGM tried to gaslight Gaslight (1940), except with less money and more defamation?
You might as well give up, because there was also Gaslight (1958), so there’s a lot of targets to go after.
Wikipedia is my friend, but clearly not yours – at least not in this instance.
There was also an earlier version, which sticks much closer to the text of the play, meaning that in the first 90 seconds or so of dialogue the word “queer” is used at least six times in its original sense (“It’s a very queer house, that,” “queer goings-on indeed,” that sort of thing). which it turns out is about as many as I can take in that short a span of time before no longer being able to keep a straight* face.
I loved the version of Gaslight with Angela Lansbury! That was the second one made. It might not be my fave movie, but I’d be happy to talk about it in the context of the Bechdel Test, gaslighting, and/or feminism! It had such a cathartic ending and was well ahead of its time.
Meh. I have a SEP, and did even back when I had a Hawaiian t-shit. The shirt threw off the field. I could wear bunny slippers and a velociraptor mask and people would *still* notice me.
Though, to be fair, the velociraptor mask did hide my medusa-like hair, which seems to be what my SEP usually banked on. But the Hawaiian shirt threw off the field without the mask, too. It’s possible what didn’t work for me would work for Joe, because he’s starting from a different baseline, with his fundamentally neat hair versus my fundamentally trying-to-escape hair. (Update: my fundamentally trying-to-escape hair has mostly escaped. The SEP doesn’t work as well now.)
They’re a relic of a time long past! Down with loudly colored shirts! Long live beige!
(Just to be clear, I was mostly joking in the original comment as well. I do hate the style, but that’s a matter of personal preference rather than quality.)
It’s often used ironically. Like a nice button down flower print tucked into black slacks. If you are otherwise very clean cut and suave, it contrasts to make you look more so.
You’re thinking of Magnum P.I., starring Tom Selleck.
Incidentally, Selleck was up for the role of Indiana Jones at the time, and even did some test photos in costume, but he turned it down because of schedule conflicts.
This, Chip and Dale’s Rescue Ranger outfits were both based on Tom Selleck characters.
Yeah, Sonny Crocket wore a lot of pastel suits and complimentarily colored t-shirts and Henley style.
Magnum and his pilot sidekick (don’t remember the name) mostly wore Hawai’ian shirts.
I have always been happy about that. Tom Selleck got a great TV series, Harrison Ford created an iconic character. I’ve always felt that Tom would have been wrong for Indy, because he was TOO “heroic.” It’s far more impressive that “Everyman” Ford play the hero.
That’s exactly what it means. If I go to a bank with the intent to rob it, but the teller has a big iron on his hip and stops me, I haven’t robbed a bank.
He’s about one panrl away from breaking DARVO out.
“I’m not crawling along the floor to escape, that’s preposterous! You came up with that accusation, so YOU must be the one who’s REALLY crawling on the floor!”
I thought that was attempted gaslighting, but they keep changing their narrative so now there’s a dozen versions of every story. that all sound “pLaUsIbLe” enough in a vacuum (to fool the rubes with soundbites) but conflict with each other.
That’s not exactly it, but you’re on the right track and I agree here isn’t gaslighting here. It’s not gaslighting if the speaker’s intention is not to deceive. He doesn’t want wanted to believe he’s not there, he just wants to do his joke bit or be ignored.
I would say it does count only technically in the sense that this ‘could be’ the start of such a pattern (like how people refer to it as verbal abuse when someone screams names at them even if it is the only time they have done so as abuse only exists when it is a pattern, not a one off) but obviously we know it won’t be and this is just one instance of him point-blankly denying reality to Leslie’s face and he’s not going to come back to do so to Leslie over and over and over again until she does start to actually doubt her own memory, perception and sanity.
It’s still best not to use gaslighting too lightly as a word considering how often people rampantly misuse it just to mean ‘lies’ though when it is more specific and malicious than just lying to someone at random and has a specific intent.
I agree with that. Making light of words and phrasings like ‘triggered’ and ‘intrusive thoughts’ and other such terms causes people real distress as they aren’t taken seriously when it matters then.
Because most of these things do occur on a milder scale for normal people. But they are maladaptive, more frequent and exist to a more severe degree when they are a symptom or used by affected people.
If someone made light of flashbacks as an experience, I would be obligated to throttle them as I have only experienced ONE but it was not a fun time. My foot got caught so I fell on a mini-trampoline, winding myself, but which triggered an instant recall of a near death experience and flooded in feelings that I couldn’t breathe and was going to die. With none of the acceptance that came with actual oxygen deprivation, so it was in fact, even worse somehow!
And then I couldn’t bring myself to go near the mini-trampolines again in case it somehow happened again. I will confront my fears of heights, snakes and spiders, but you can’t make me go near one of those trampolines again.
That’s so sad. So sorry that happened to you, and that you won’t be able to go on trampolines again!
Speaking of gaslighting, diminishing the seriousness of psychological and self help terms through such misuse could also further enable leveling by manipulative people and groups.
Leveling is a psychological manipulation kind of like gaslighting where one party who’s conduct is significantly worse than the other on any objective analysis of the situation will attempt to assert that they are on equal moral standing by adding bogus elements to their opponent’s side while denying awkward elements in their own.
One recent example of this (fitting well with the themes of this comic) is how religious conservatives claimed that recent bills protecting LGBTQ+ rights were “prejudiced against people of faith”. Here, they attempt to draw a false equivalence between objecting to prejudice and being prejudiced.
Joe has taken the Venom Snake school of Sneaking I see.
Also. . I kind of like what Leslie just did there. Naturally turning a odd scene into a jumping off point for a discussion. That’s really really cool actually.
All of the lessons last semester I can remember that aren’t hilariously/dramatically derailed, Leslie does a pretty good job. She really is a good egg, she just has terrible choice in partners on top of all the other fallibility your average human has in their possession.
Then you’d have a few to choose from. Two movies, ’40 and ’44, and a T.V. series in 2019. Plus an anthology series started 2020, and new feature in 2021.
So Scorcese may not have delivered, but many others have.
That’s not gaslighting. That’s being a dork, with misconceptions based on pop culture… though I guess it might work for metaphorical purposes; “notice bow we saw him RIGHT THERE?”
I hope Leslie’s next sentence is that this isn’t gaslighting, it’s just straight up (weak) lying and that gaslighting is an abusive pattern of manipulation OVER TIME where one person makes another person question their perception of time/reality/their own sanity on purpose
I thought about making a similar comment. This term is way overused these days to basically mean disagreement or seeing a situation differently from someone else, which I think is really effed up considering the original meaning. This situation isn’t even either of those, it’s obviously a (very common and cliche) joke.
THIISSSSSS. For this to be gaslighting, Joe would have to, e.g., get everyone in the class to tell Leslie in the upcoming days that he hadn’t been there, or get video footage of this moment with himself edited out.
Yeah, it is an unfortunate thing that happens when a concept becomes better known. More people are aware it exists, but it starts getting watered down and misapplied. See paranoid, which used to be a real mental illness, but now means a slightly more intense form of “worried” or “anxious.”
I think your commentary might help me feel a little better about this social phenomenon, actually, like that it’s not unique to this one word. I’ve just had particularly tragic and traumatic experiences with this word’s meaning being distorted, when someone kept telling me I was gaslighting them when we had different perspectives on a situation. It was like the only way they would agree I wasn’t gaslighting them was if I capitulated and said I agreed with their point of view, even though I didn’t.
That person is the hugest of assholes and has taken a heaping helping of irony. If it helps, then yes, I’ve seen this happen with many words, especially once they escape the academia/social subset that initially coined it. Like how ‘roast’ used to be ‘funny mean’ to someone or something you cared about (or at least knew about it) and now some people just use it for any mean thing that’s said whether it’s funny or not. The word “hopefully” is another one. It doesn’t actually mean ‘I hope this happens’ it’s a way of describing someone’s demeanour.
Obviously those are less serious examples, but yeah, as words become more widely used, the way that they’re used sometimes gets distorted or overly simplified. That said, it’s valid to have bad experiences with the way it happened to this word and to dislike that. If it helps, I’m sure Leslie is joking.
Only if you’re actually trying to make them beleive it or otherwise doubt wheather or not they saw you. “You didn’t see me, I was never here.” Is 9,999,999 times out of 10,000,000 the same meaning as “Don’t tell anyone else I was here.”
Tomorrows strip might improve the reading of this one, but right now? The punchline of the joke is to equate Joe being a dork with a serious form of psychological abuse that at least two users of the comment section have experienced. This isn’t being taken seriously enough.
It’s a joke. Leslie saw Joe’s poorly-executed attempts at denying his presence and lightly compared it to an act of psychological manipulation. It’s really not that deep, it’s a Joke.
Well, that’s what he was hoping would be the outcome but I’m pretty sure that there was no nefarious purpose here, just Joe revealing his own vulnerabilities (which seems to generally be ‘Joyce’).
I looked up whether gaslighting was the day two topic of discussion last semester (since Leslie’s probably using the same lesson plan), but it looks like the ‘favorite movie’ discussion was intended to segue into discussing the Bechdel test last time.
He’s telling her to doubt her own senses. That’s kind of the definition of gaslighting, although usually it’s more sinister than this. And involves an 18-year-old Angela Lansbury.
You’re on the right track, however as SuperZero pointed out, Joe isn’t even actually lying (despite being untruthful). Unless he is actually insane, he can’t possibly think Leslie would believe him.
But by serving as a concrete example of what is not gaslighting, it may help Leslie show the class what is. (and yeah, since Joe’s been here, there may be some shade too. 😉)
Proper gaslighting is not (typically) so blunt as to tell someone they don’t perceive something that is immediately apparent, but rather is about progressively undermining their faith in their own perceptions and in recalling their perceptions.
However, the source of the term, Gas Light, specifically did use observed changes (literally dimming/flickering gas lights) to try and induce self doubt in the observer. The disputed observations though, all exist in, or compare with the past, not solely the immediately observable. (You didn’t see me vs. You don’t see me). The term, if it had evolved today, might have been “Dimmer Switch”. Also, while I refered to “proper gaslighting” above, it should be noted that the APA doesn’t consider it a clinical term. It is more commonly used in self-help books to assist those, who are being corralled into cognitive dissonance by an abuser, to identify an abuse pattern.
Yeah, it is using it a bit too lightly for my tastes (might be fine when paired with the next one but a bit too light on its own) as while Joe is denying reality to Leslie’s face, and it comes across as ‘comedic’ from an outside POV because she flatout knows it is untrue and it very easily COULD remind her of the topic due to the set up of it. But that is kind of how gaslighting can look when it starts and rapidly becomes a lot less funny. We know Joe isn’t about to keep doing it as a pattern, but I can imagine it being uncomfy for people that have been through it the way it is framed in this strip as the butt of the joke.
I find it kind of awkward myself as I’ve helped someone who has been gaslit, and reassured them for validation and self-acceptance reasons that no, someone cannot in fact, ‘accidentally’ gaslight you. It is in fact, *not* an accidental pattern, if someone systematically lies to you until you doubt your own memories, perceptions and sanity. You can’t drive someone into thinking they are insane but #softly I didn’t actually mean to. If you didn’t mean to, you wouldn’t have, gaslighting requires concentrated effort and repetition to do!
But you know, an abuser isn’t usually going to come clean like an Ace Attorney or Scooby Doo villain and say ‘you know what, you’re right, I did gaslight you on purpose for control reasons, you got me!’
Joe remember me a cat with his “If I don’t see you, you don’t see me” idea. Seems that Ruth and Jennifer have end their fight. Or maybe is just a pause…
Gaslighting is when someone thinks they can tell you something that is obviously not true and against your senses but that they will be believed anyway.
(And yes, I know he’s been doing the “I’m not here” thing for the past three strips, but I — and I think others — were interpreting this as specifically “I’m not here at Becky’s desk trying to talk to her about Joyce.”)
I see the misuse of the term “gaslighting” has snuck into the comic. It bugs the hell out of me to see it getting misused in yet another place, and in-story being misused by a teacher in an instructional setting no less.
A lot of similar comments have been made. Leslie (Willis) has had one panel to introduce the topic. I’m going to give it some time to see where they goes with this.
It’s a joke i doubt she’s actually going to do a lesson about gaslighting today.
I mean you can think it’s a bad joke or even tasteless (I’d disagree but you can totally think that) but, it’s not the term being misused genuinely, it’s a joke
Likening goofball shenanigans to serious abuse… I guess it doesn’t land for me at all as a joke.
Like, if Dina playfully pounced on Becky and Leslie said “OK class, this brings us to the topic of domestic abuse,” I would find it to be a similarly inappropriate and unfunny joke/lesson plan segue.
I guess it’s just not to my taste if that’s the intent. Clearly plenty of folks aren’t bothered by it, so maybe it’s just me.
Leslie has not misused the word gasslighting. She has not said that that Joe is gasslighting her or attempting to do so. Rather she has seen a teachable moment and is using it.
It seems to me that there is limited value in reacting to things which have not happened..
I thought everyone got this but no??? There’s like a bunch of posts saying “omg that’s not gaslighting leslie” like no shit it isn’t she isn’t saying it is, god.
Good segue, but that’s not gaslighting, that’s plain lying. Gaslighting is a specific pattern of behavior, by someone who has a close relationship with or power over the target, intended to make them doubt their senses and/or understanding of reality. If Joe had a pattern of consistently trying to make someone believe he had never actually been somewhere he was, that would be gaslighting. Also, I’m pretty sure anything that isn’t remotely meant to be believed, and will not be believed, will never count as gaslighting. A lie that’s not meant to be believed is a joke.
I wouldn’t even call it lying. I consider lying to carry an intent to deceive. It’s not like he’s trying to convince her he isn’t there. He’s trying to convey to her that he doesn’t want anybody (or more specifically just Joyce, but he didn’t clarify) to acknowledge he was there. It’s more like….A creative plea for confidence.
Leslie, this is the kind of shit that makes me honestly dislike you. As many people have pointed out, that’s not gaslighting, and you know that. It’s not even a teachable moment, really.
CONVENTION APPEARANCES
probably not anywhere for a while 'cuz the world is covered in death
Loading ...
sequence breaking ALL THE LESSONS
unless someone’s fave movie (play) is Gas Light
There was a 1944 movie called Gaslight based on the play, so it could still be someone’s favorite movie.
No, there wasn’t. They had to cancel that version after Gary Cooper stabbed that one guy.
did he put all the blame on the guy he stabbed? because that’d be kinda ironic lol
Um, where did you get that story? Or are you just trying to gaslight Gaslight (1944) like MGM tried to gaslight Gaslight (1940), except with less money and more defamation?
You might as well give up, because there was also Gaslight (1958), so there’s a lot of targets to go after.
Wikipedia is my friend, but clearly not yours – at least not in this instance.
Damn, I’ve been gaslit by Gaslight. Looks like real gaslighting was the friends we manipulated along the way.
+1 Internets
There was also an earlier version, which sticks much closer to the text of the play, meaning that in the first 90 seconds or so of dialogue the word “queer” is used at least six times in its original sense (“It’s a very queer house, that,” “queer goings-on indeed,” that sort of thing). which it turns out is about as many as I can take in that short a span of time before no longer being able to keep a straight* face.
*So to speak.
I loved the version of Gaslight with Angela Lansbury! That was the second one made. It might not be my fave movie, but I’d be happy to talk about it in the context of the Bechdel Test, gaslighting, and/or feminism! It had such a cathartic ending and was well ahead of its time.
Poor Joe. He unwittingly engages in all the behaviors he thinks he’s not engaging in.
quiet as a worm
flawless plan rosenthal
If Joe isn’t doing meme Solid Snake grunts while he’s trying to “stealth” his way out of the classroom he doesn’t deserve Joyce.
Where’s a cardboard box when you need one?!
!
text you can hear
“Colonel, I’m trying to sneak around, but I’m dummy thicc and the clap from my ass cheeks keeps alerting the guards.”
Otokon, this hawaiin shirt seems to have a really low Camo index.
You get me. <3
“Otacon, I’m trying to sneak around, but the twang of my lap steel keeps alerting the college professors.”
Camo has to be tailored to the environment. I’m not sure a Hawaiian shirt would provide effective concealment anywhere outside of a tiki bar.
Not coincidental that so many spies end up in tiki bars, I guess.
It would work really well, if only he had a Somebody Else’s Problem Field.
Meh. I have a SEP, and did even back when I had a Hawaiian t-shit. The shirt threw off the field. I could wear bunny slippers and a velociraptor mask and people would *still* notice me.
Though, to be fair, the velociraptor mask did hide my medusa-like hair, which seems to be what my SEP usually banked on. But the Hawaiian shirt threw off the field without the mask, too. It’s possible what didn’t work for me would work for Joe, because he’s starting from a different baseline, with his fundamentally neat hair versus my fundamentally trying-to-escape hair. (Update: my fundamentally trying-to-escape hair has mostly escaped. The SEP doesn’t work as well now.)
But how does it taste?
Good job, Joe, you’ve managed to be dramatically more noticeable, memorable, and suspicious than if you’d just walked out.
Unless Ruth and Jennifer are still fighting, in which case staying out of their line of sight is 100% reasonable, I agree.
I know, right? No getting in view of THAT fight.
I mean, the dirt could really only improve that shirt. What was he thinking when he bought it? That he would be guest-starring on Miami Vice?
(Might be thinking of the wrong show, I’m not really up to date on my 80s television; I just vaguely remember a design like that.)
I refuse. I mean I refuse, to stand idly by while people insult a quality hawaiin shirt.
They’re a relic of a time long past! Down with loudly colored shirts! Long live beige!
(Just to be clear, I was mostly joking in the original comment as well. I do hate the style, but that’s a matter of personal preference rather than quality.)
It’s often used ironically. Like a nice button down flower print tucked into black slacks. If you are otherwise very clean cut and suave, it contrasts to make you look more so.
Never! Bring back Hawaiian shirts! Viva la jimmy buffet!
Hawaiian shirts are so comfyyy
You’re thinking of Magnum P.I., starring Tom Selleck.
Incidentally, Selleck was up for the role of Indiana Jones at the time, and even did some test photos in costume, but he turned it down because of schedule conflicts.
This, Chip and Dale’s Rescue Ranger outfits were both based on Tom Selleck characters.
Ah, looking up the pictures online, I’m pretty sure you’re right! Thank you for the correction.
Yeah, Sonny Crocket wore a lot of pastel suits and complimentarily colored t-shirts and Henley style.
Magnum and his pilot sidekick (don’t remember the name) mostly wore Hawai’ian shirts.
T.C.
(And I didn’t have to look that up.)
I have always been happy about that. Tom Selleck got a great TV series, Harrison Ford created an iconic character. I’ve always felt that Tom would have been wrong for Indy, because he was TOO “heroic.” It’s far more impressive that “Everyman” Ford play the hero.
I’m not sure why, but I somehow had the idea that Joe’s father might have bought him that shirt.
Pfffft, the shade. Professors are always good at that.
Something about this scene seems really familiar, somehow.
*plays the theme for the Alfred Hitchcock TV series on the hacked Muzak*
Followed by The Love of Three Oranges by Prokofiev
Why is it the theme from Alfred Hitchcock Presents always morphs into the theme from Leave it to Beaver in my head?
Because it reveals a hidden truth?
“Move along, nothing to see here.”
“These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”
Why is Joe tagged in this strip? I don’t see him.
Joe’s not tagged. He’d have ro be there to get tagged.
I’m not sure it counts as gaslighting if no one believes you….
Just because it’s not successful doesn’t mean you didn’t do it.
That’s exactly what it means. If I go to a bank with the intent to rob it, but the teller has a big iron on his hip and stops me, I haven’t robbed a bank.
[looks at Gabriel Iglesias and his Indian Bank Robber skit]
You still committed a crime though.
Yeah, but the crime was “attempted” robbery, which is distinct from robbery in that the only thing taken was my freedom.
“A big iron on his hip”
That’s exactly what Joe is going to need to use on that shirt after all this crawling.
He’s about one panrl away from breaking DARVO out.
“I’m not crawling along the floor to escape, that’s preposterous! You came up with that accusation, so YOU must be the one who’s REALLY crawling on the floor!”
Also known as the preferred grammatical tense of conservatives everywhere, am I right.
I thought that was attempted gaslighting, but they keep changing their narrative so now there’s a dozen versions of every story. that all sound “pLaUsIbLe” enough in a vacuum (to fool the rubes with soundbites) but conflict with each other.
That’s not exactly it, but you’re on the right track and I agree here isn’t gaslighting here. It’s not gaslighting if the speaker’s intention is not to deceive. He doesn’t want wanted to believe he’s not there, he just wants to do his joke bit or be ignored.
My autocorrect had some fun there! I meant to say “He doesn’t want them to believe he’s not there…”
Unfortunately, it doesn’t count at all. Success is irrelevant.
gaslighting (verb): to cause (a person) to doubt his or her sanity through the use of psychological manipulation.
It’s not just a synonym for lying to someone.
Not just sanity; gaslighting is also used to incubate distrust in one’s own memories, emotions and cognitions.
I would say it does count only technically in the sense that this ‘could be’ the start of such a pattern (like how people refer to it as verbal abuse when someone screams names at them even if it is the only time they have done so as abuse only exists when it is a pattern, not a one off) but obviously we know it won’t be and this is just one instance of him point-blankly denying reality to Leslie’s face and he’s not going to come back to do so to Leslie over and over and over again until she does start to actually doubt her own memory, perception and sanity.
It’s still best not to use gaslighting too lightly as a word considering how often people rampantly misuse it just to mean ‘lies’ though when it is more specific and malicious than just lying to someone at random and has a specific intent.
As for the last part, I hold the same view in regard to ANY psychological term, whether professionally recognized or only a tool for self-help.
I agree with that. Making light of words and phrasings like ‘triggered’ and ‘intrusive thoughts’ and other such terms causes people real distress as they aren’t taken seriously when it matters then.
Because most of these things do occur on a milder scale for normal people. But they are maladaptive, more frequent and exist to a more severe degree when they are a symptom or used by affected people.
If someone made light of flashbacks as an experience, I would be obligated to throttle them as I have only experienced ONE but it was not a fun time. My foot got caught so I fell on a mini-trampoline, winding myself, but which triggered an instant recall of a near death experience and flooded in feelings that I couldn’t breathe and was going to die. With none of the acceptance that came with actual oxygen deprivation, so it was in fact, even worse somehow!
And then I couldn’t bring myself to go near the mini-trampolines again in case it somehow happened again. I will confront my fears of heights, snakes and spiders, but you can’t make me go near one of those trampolines again.
That’s so sad. So sorry that happened to you, and that you won’t be able to go on trampolines again!
Speaking of gaslighting, diminishing the seriousness of psychological and self help terms through such misuse could also further enable leveling by manipulative people and groups.
Leveling is a psychological manipulation kind of like gaslighting where one party who’s conduct is significantly worse than the other on any objective analysis of the situation will attempt to assert that they are on equal moral standing by adding bogus elements to their opponent’s side while denying awkward elements in their own.
One recent example of this (fitting well with the themes of this comic) is how religious conservatives claimed that recent bills protecting LGBTQ+ rights were “prejudiced against people of faith”. Here, they attempt to draw a false equivalence between objecting to prejudice and being prejudiced.
Joe has taken the Venom Snake school of Sneaking I see.
Also. . I kind of like what Leslie just did there. Naturally turning a odd scene into a jumping off point for a discussion. That’s really really cool actually.
All of the lessons last semester I can remember that aren’t hilariously/dramatically derailed, Leslie does a pretty good job. She really is a good egg, she just has terrible choice in partners on top of all the other fallibility your average human has in their possession.
Should’ve brought a cardboard box, Joe.
Hmm, that Hawaiian shirt seems to be moving across the floor of its own free will.
It’s fine. Metal Gear Solid has told me that this exact form of stealth leads to your enemies forgetting you exist in about 30 seconds.
But what if your favorite movie was Gaslight?
That’s impossible, Gaslight never came out because of Scorcese’s flipout.
Then you’d have a few to choose from. Two movies, ’40 and ’44, and a T.V. series in 2019. Plus an anthology series started 2020, and new feature in 2021.
So Scorcese may not have delivered, but many others have.
Where did Leslie come from before this? Did she jump ship? What’s with the life preserver?
Roxas, that’s a
stickvest.I believe that Leslie is the star of Back to the Future 4: A Lesbian Love Story.
That’s not gaslighting. That’s being a dork, with misconceptions based on pop culture… though I guess it might work for metaphorical purposes; “notice bow we saw him RIGHT THERE?”
No no, you see, Joe is Gaslighting HIMSELF, and by disappearing from his own POV has become truly invisible.
Isn’t that just what happens if you eat the wrong magic mushrooms?
I hope Leslie’s next sentence is that this isn’t gaslighting, it’s just straight up (weak) lying and that gaslighting is an abusive pattern of manipulation OVER TIME where one person makes another person question their perception of time/reality/their own sanity on purpose
He’s not even really lying. It’s not like he expects her to believe that he’s literally not there.
Oh he’s lying all right. You are correct that he can’t possibly intend to deceive her like this, but
heart ascends his mighty tor
brain objects this changing more,
fail’d legs drag he through the door
so he’s lying, on the floor
I’m 99% sure she’s just throwing shade.
You mean insisting that Joe’s there? Not cool, Leslie.
Joe forgot he needed a cardboard box to make his sneaking out undetectable.
Never underestimate the box strategy.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9PZ_Tt4FT-M
You can’t see what doesn’t want to be seen.
Isn’t that right Caboose? How about you Mr. Cena?
Ooooh, I’m sure Becky’ll be awesome at this!
gaslight and gatekeep, young Girlboss.
Good form on keeping the butt down
Probably the least offensive gaslight example ive ever seen.
It’s his ninja way, Leslie!
Don’t ruin it with trying to tie a lesson to it, dattebayo!
Joe is already out, but Becky and Ruth (at least) need to learn A) what gaslighting is and B) how to stop doing it to the people around them.
And C) That this isn’t an example.
Is it really gaslighting if you’re telling someone they’re seeing things just to get out of an uncomfortable situation?
I thought about making a similar comment. This term is way overused these days to basically mean disagreement or seeing a situation differently from someone else, which I think is really effed up considering the original meaning. This situation isn’t even either of those, it’s obviously a (very common and cliche) joke.
THIISSSSSS. For this to be gaslighting, Joe would have to, e.g., get everyone in the class to tell Leslie in the upcoming days that he hadn’t been there, or get video footage of this moment with himself edited out.
Yeah, it is an unfortunate thing that happens when a concept becomes better known. More people are aware it exists, but it starts getting watered down and misapplied. See paranoid, which used to be a real mental illness, but now means a slightly more intense form of “worried” or “anxious.”
I think your commentary might help me feel a little better about this social phenomenon, actually, like that it’s not unique to this one word. I’ve just had particularly tragic and traumatic experiences with this word’s meaning being distorted, when someone kept telling me I was gaslighting them when we had different perspectives on a situation. It was like the only way they would agree I wasn’t gaslighting them was if I capitulated and said I agreed with their point of view, even though I didn’t.
That’s a bit ironic, don’t you think?
That person is the hugest of assholes and has taken a heaping helping of irony. If it helps, then yes, I’ve seen this happen with many words, especially once they escape the academia/social subset that initially coined it. Like how ‘roast’ used to be ‘funny mean’ to someone or something you cared about (or at least knew about it) and now some people just use it for any mean thing that’s said whether it’s funny or not. The word “hopefully” is another one. It doesn’t actually mean ‘I hope this happens’ it’s a way of describing someone’s demeanour.
Obviously those are less serious examples, but yeah, as words become more widely used, the way that they’re used sometimes gets distorted or overly simplified. That said, it’s valid to have bad experiences with the way it happened to this word and to dislike that. If it helps, I’m sure Leslie is joking.
Only if you’re actually trying to make them beleive it or otherwise doubt wheather or not they saw you. “You didn’t see me, I was never here.” Is 9,999,999 times out of 10,000,000 the same meaning as “Don’t tell anyone else I was here.”
Hm, I wonder about Leslie’s though process here.
Whatever made her think of gaslighting?
The definition of gaslighting has gotten completely distorted.
… wait.
…
PEOPLE GASLIT ME ABOUT WHAT GASLIGHTING MEANS???/?
(Yes, I know, I’m doing it wrong on purpose.)
According to the new definition, which seems murky, then yes, they did.
I got your joke, but good to clarify on text since tone can be easily misconstrued.
Well, that and she feels like throwing shade at such a pathetically transparently false thing to say.
Well gaslighting is basically messing with someone’s perception of reality. Making them doubt their memories and senses.
Do you think he was litteraly trying to convince people they hadn’t seen him?
Well the whole strip is a joke so I wouldn’t take it all that seriously.
Tomorrows strip might improve the reading of this one, but right now? The punchline of the joke is to equate Joe being a dork with a serious form of psychological abuse that at least two users of the comment section have experienced. This isn’t being taken seriously enough.
It’s a joke. Leslie saw Joe’s poorly-executed attempts at denying his presence and lightly compared it to an act of psychological manipulation. It’s really not that deep, it’s a Joke.
I feel like it would be funnier if it wasn’t for how often the term is misused in real life.
No and Leslie doesn’t either.
Well, that’s what he was hoping would be the outcome but I’m pretty sure that there was no nefarious purpose here, just Joe revealing his own vulnerabilities (which seems to generally be ‘Joyce’).
I looked up whether gaslighting was the day two topic of discussion last semester (since Leslie’s probably using the same lesson plan), but it looks like the ‘favorite movie’ discussion was intended to segue into discussing the Bechdel test last time.
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2011/comic/book-1/04-the-bechdel-test/movies/
He’s telling her to doubt her own senses. That’s kind of the definition of gaslighting, although usually it’s more sinister than this. And involves an 18-year-old Angela Lansbury.
You’re on the right track, however as SuperZero pointed out, Joe isn’t even actually lying (despite being untruthful). Unless he is actually insane, he can’t possibly think Leslie would believe him.
But by serving as a concrete example of what is not gaslighting, it may help Leslie show the class what is. (and yeah, since Joe’s been here, there may be some shade too. 😉)
Proper gaslighting is not (typically) so blunt as to tell someone they don’t perceive something that is immediately apparent, but rather is about progressively undermining their faith in their own perceptions and in recalling their perceptions.
However, the source of the term, Gas Light, specifically did use observed changes (literally dimming/flickering gas lights) to try and induce self doubt in the observer. The disputed observations though, all exist in, or compare with the past, not solely the immediately observable. (You didn’t see me vs. You don’t see me). The term, if it had evolved today, might have been “Dimmer Switch”. Also, while I refered to “proper gaslighting” above, it should be noted that the APA doesn’t consider it a clinical term. It is more commonly used in self-help books to assist those, who are being corralled into cognitive dissonance by an abuser, to identify an abuse pattern.
As somone who was routinely gaslight as a kid, this is not gaslighting, this is just poorly executed lying. I get it’s a joke, but still bugs me.
Me too.
Sending good vibes your way.
Yeah, it is using it a bit too lightly for my tastes (might be fine when paired with the next one but a bit too light on its own) as while Joe is denying reality to Leslie’s face, and it comes across as ‘comedic’ from an outside POV because she flatout knows it is untrue and it very easily COULD remind her of the topic due to the set up of it. But that is kind of how gaslighting can look when it starts and rapidly becomes a lot less funny. We know Joe isn’t about to keep doing it as a pattern, but I can imagine it being uncomfy for people that have been through it the way it is framed in this strip as the butt of the joke.
I find it kind of awkward myself as I’ve helped someone who has been gaslit, and reassured them for validation and self-acceptance reasons that no, someone cannot in fact, ‘accidentally’ gaslight you. It is in fact, *not* an accidental pattern, if someone systematically lies to you until you doubt your own memories, perceptions and sanity. You can’t drive someone into thinking they are insane but #softly I didn’t actually mean to. If you didn’t mean to, you wouldn’t have, gaslighting requires concentrated effort and repetition to do!
But you know, an abuser isn’t usually going to come clean like an Ace Attorney or Scooby Doo villain and say ‘you know what, you’re right, I did gaslight you on purpose for control reasons, you got me!’
Yeah, it can start this way, but definitely it being the butt of a joke really trivializes it and it’s truly devastating effects.
I’m just touched that Leslie remembers him. I mean, sure, it was only last semester, but she teaches more than one class.
Then again, Joe… probably left an impression.
Joe remember me a cat with his “If I don’t see you, you don’t see me” idea. Seems that Ruth and Jennifer have end their fight. Or maybe is just a pause…
It might be less a matter of gaslighting and more a matter of humoring him.
He has his reasons for not being there.
Yeah, Joe’s more like the “you didn’t see anything” penguin from that kids’ movie right now.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_SDU6lMZd6s
I love Skipper!!!
It might be implausible for a penguin to get THAT skilled, but if we could teach a chicken to play Magic: The Gathering, now that would be impressive.
ROFL I’m crying. I haven’t laughed at loud at a comic in a long time.
Joe is best boy. A national treasure. He has his faults but I will die on this hill.
Joe you woulda drawn less attention if you just walked out of the class
A clap of hands for teachers like Leslie, who can throw an entire lesson of the day, just to follow a updated, and more interesting subject.
Can I just say that I love first panel Leslie? She looks so happy and upbeat.
*skyrim skill-up music*
*sneak increased to 9*
Gaslighting is when someone thinks they can tell you something that is obviously not true and against your senses but that they will be believed anyway.
So, technically true.
Don’t think Joe thinks he’ll be believed here, though.
Actually, Leslie, I think that this is more about self-deceit than gaslighting.
Well, I guess that answers the “Why is Joe still in this class?” question, anyway.
(And yes, I know he’s been doing the “I’m not here” thing for the past three strips, but I — and I think others — were interpreting this as specifically “I’m not here at Becky’s desk trying to talk to her about Joyce.”)
Ooooooh!
Looks like someone has become a teachable moment https://www.dumbingofage.com/2016/comic/book-6/02-that-perfect-girl/cavemen/
Again. (p.s. nice call-back)
Boffo stuff!
I see the misuse of the term “gaslighting” has snuck into the comic. It bugs the hell out of me to see it getting misused in yet another place, and in-story being misused by a teacher in an instructional setting no less.
A lot of similar comments have been made. Leslie (Willis) has had one panel to introduce the topic. I’m going to give it some time to see where they goes with this.
You’ve seen what we can do with one panel. Hell, what we can do with a few pixels, even.
Indeed. DoA for the comic, comments for the drama.
It’s a joke i doubt she’s actually going to do a lesson about gaslighting today.
I mean you can think it’s a bad joke or even tasteless (I’d disagree but you can totally think that) but, it’s not the term being misused genuinely, it’s a joke
Likening goofball shenanigans to serious abuse… I guess it doesn’t land for me at all as a joke.
Like, if Dina playfully pounced on Becky and Leslie said “OK class, this brings us to the topic of domestic abuse,” I would find it to be a similarly inappropriate and unfunny joke/lesson plan segue.
I guess it’s just not to my taste if that’s the intent. Clearly plenty of folks aren’t bothered by it, so maybe it’s just me.
I am 99.99% sure she’s kidding.
Leslie has not misused the word gasslighting. She has not said that that Joe is gasslighting her or attempting to do so. Rather she has seen a teachable moment and is using it.
It seems to me that there is limited value in reacting to things which have not happened..
So, have any of Leslie’s classes actually kept to the schedule described in the syllabus?
Also, she’s not accusing Joe of gaslighting her. She’s just saying that a man insisting her perceptions are wrong is a good segue into the topic.
I thought everyone got this but no??? There’s like a bunch of posts saying “omg that’s not gaslighting leslie” like no shit it isn’t she isn’t saying it is, god.
When you roll a critical failure on both your stealth check, and your persuasion check.
heh, good one. 🙂
For a moment I thought the untagged person in panel three was Roz.
There is no section on gaslighting. Where’d you see a section on gaslighting?
Good segue, but that’s not gaslighting, that’s plain lying. Gaslighting is a specific pattern of behavior, by someone who has a close relationship with or power over the target, intended to make them doubt their senses and/or understanding of reality. If Joe had a pattern of consistently trying to make someone believe he had never actually been somewhere he was, that would be gaslighting. Also, I’m pretty sure anything that isn’t remotely meant to be believed, and will not be believed, will never count as gaslighting. A lie that’s not meant to be believed is a joke.
I wouldn’t even call it lying. I consider lying to carry an intent to deceive. It’s not like he’s trying to convince her he isn’t there. He’s trying to convey to her that he doesn’t want anybody (or more specifically just Joyce, but he didn’t clarify) to acknowledge he was there. It’s more like….A creative plea for confidence.
Leslie, this is the kind of shit that makes me honestly dislike you. As many people have pointed out, that’s not gaslighting, and you know that. It’s not even a teachable moment, really.