How The World Gaslights Aspec People
 |
| Image description: An image from the 1944 film Gaslight. The film is the reason why we have the term "gaslighting" - or the act of someone manipulating another person by making them doubt their own sense of self or perception of reality. It's a very broad and very heavy psychological topic, but today I want to focus on instances I've seen in my own life of gaslighting aspec people, whether in fandoms, in media, or in society in general. |
The term “gaslighting” refers to the act of making someone
question their own reality in often manipulative ways, usually creating a false
narrative to make them doubt themselves, their beliefs, and their abilities. It
often involves telling people that their emotions or perceptions of a situation
are “wrong,” and usually allows the person doing the gaslighting (the
“gaslighter,” if you will) to entrench themselves and their own feelings as
being “right.” Obviously this is a very amateurish description that doesn’t get
into other subtleties, but these are the basics.
I am certainly not a psychologist or an expert on
gaslighting whatsoever; but the term is often used more broadly to refer to
instances of people being made to doubt their own perception of reality, and so
I feel it is actually the perfect way to discuss what I’ve seen in fandoms,
media, and society. While these things may not be intentionally done and can of
course be done in many ways and to many groups or individuals, as an aspec
fangirl, I have seen and experienced more instances of gaslighting than I can
count, and so I think it’s important to acknowledge it for what it is. Today,
I’m going to be breaking down some of the most common and pernicious versions
of gaslighting I’ve seen, discussing where they come from, how they function,
and maybe even how to combat them.
-----------------------------
Where
Gaslighting Comes From and How It’s Used
Although the concept of gaslighting is terrible, I actually
believe the phrase has an interesting origin. The origin of the term can
actually be traced back to a play from the 1930s called Gas Light, as
well as the 1944 film version, Gaslight. I’m not really familiar with
the play, but I did see the film, which stars Ingrid Bergman and is quite good,
so I’ll mostly be discussing that. In the film, Ingrid Bergman’s character
Paula Alquist is the niece of world-famous opera singer, Alice Alquist, who was
murdered years before. When Paula marries a man named Gregory and the pair move
into Alice’s residence, things begin to get very strange indeed.
Among these strange happenings is the fact that the gas-powered
lights in the house will randomly dim and then increase again, an action which
Gregory constantly denies, telling Paula she’s merely seeing things. Over the
course of the film, Gregory continues to tell Paula she’s making things up,
hallucinating, overreacting, etc., all to make her think she’s slowly losing
her mind. The more he isolates her and accuses her of things like
forgetfulness, kleptomania, and a propensity to lie, the more she begins to
actually have the mental breakdown he’s been trying to insist she’s having. This,
of course, leads to him trying to institutionalize her, but luckily for her,
the truth comes out. [Spoilers!]
 |
| Image description: A scene in Gaslight in which Gregory psychologically menaces Paula |
As it turns out, Gregory is the one who murdered Paula’s aunt Alice and married Paula expressly to gain access to Alice’s house, where her jewels are still stored. The gaslights dimming were indeed real, caused by Gregory entering the attic secretly and turning the lights on upstairs, causing the downstairs lights to dim. Eventually, through the help of a detective who admired Alice, Paula is able to assert herself and regain her power in a truly terrific scene, and Gregory is brought to justice.
While many of us may not experience any gaslighting as extreme
as Paula experiences in the movie, I think her example shows us the struggle of
having people try to dictate our reality to us. Likewise, while the instances
of gaslighting I’m discussing are relatively mild compared to what people who
do experience more pernicious gaslighting may have to contend with and may not be
done with nearly as much malice, the act of being made to doubt our own
thoughts and feelings is problematic, no matter how it’s done and what the
intentions are.
In the case of gaslighting aspec people, I think brushing
these things aside as unimportant leads to bigger issues than it might seem,
but I also think we need to define them a little. After all, gaslighting is a very
broad term, so how exactly are aspec people gaslit and by whom? What are the
reasons, whether intentionally or unintentionally, that people might gaslight
aspec people, people with aspec vibes, or even allosexual people who don’t
prioritize sex and/or romance in their lives? I think this comes down to a few
things that often overlap in fandom spaces and the media that inspires them, as
well as society more broadly. They get reproduced precisely because people
don’t see them as gaslighting or as particularly harmful, which leads me to the
first example.
The
Unintentional Poison of “Nice” Comments
The first form of gaslighting I’d like to discuss is one
that happens both in fandom and in society more broadly: the idea of dressing
up dismissive attitudes as niceties. In my own personal experience, some of the
most debilitating moments of aphobia I’ve ever experienced have been from
people who thought they were being nice, kind-hearted, or, at the very least,
fair. I’ve read plenty of comments that have turned my stomach and have been
called plenty of names during my day – virulent instances of aphobia, some of
which happened years ago and yet are still fresh in my mind. I’ve been called a
prude and a freak, I’ve been laughed at, I’ve been accused of having something
wrong with me. You name it, I’ve probably heard it. But somehow it’s worse when
people patronize me and dismiss me, all while thinking they’re actually being
nice to me.
Sometimes this takes the form of someone believing that
they’re offering comfort or inspiration. I’ve experienced this when (presumably
allosexual) fans tell me not to worry about aphobic attitudes and instead focus
on parts of the fandom I love and can interact with. Other times this takes the
more curious form of someone trying to “set the record straight” about a
certain issue. For instance, if you try to point out to people that not
everyone experiences sexual and/or romantic attraction or that not everyone lives
the same type of life, they may fire back with some attempt to justify aphobic
attitudes as being more relevant to the conversation. This usually takes the
form of people assuring you that they’re not specifically talking about you,
they’re just talking more generally.
This, to me, is why these “nice” attitudes can be so
troublesome and problematic. Many times on the blog, you’ve seen me take and
share screenshots of staggeringly aphobic attitudes that are so obviously
aphobic that they can be easily discussed and analyzed as such. But the people
who engage in niceties often have no idea that they’re being dismissive, rude,
or downright aphobic; in fact, they may even know about aspec identities or may
have gone through similar struggles themselves, but they unconsciously
reproduce aphobic attitudes all the same. Because these people don’t see what
they’re doing as aphobic, it’s even harder to have conversations with them and
it’s even more difficult to define what they’re doing as problematic.
In fact, sometimes their “advice” may even be somewhat
solid. In the above example I gave about being told by allosexual fans to not
listen to the haters, that’s great advice, certainly, and something I generally
advocate. I’m the first person to acknowledge not everything in a fandom is
meant for me and I generally try to stay in my lane when it comes to such
issues. But what these allosexual fans doling out this often-unsolicited advice
don’t understand is that being aspec in fandom often means having your lane
taken away. When you try to stay in your lane and repeatedly have allosexual
fans come into that space and make it unsafe – whatever that may mean in a
given circumstance – it sometimes necessitates something being said. When your
words and experiences as an aspec person are then “kindly” shut down, it
further underscores the idea that this fandom isn’t a place where you’re
allowed to be, and there’s absolutely nothing kind about that.
Furthermore, if you’ve ever heard the term “mansplaning” –
the act of a man explaining something to a woman, especially something that the
woman herself has more experience in – something similar can happen to aspec
people, especially in fandom spaces. In fact, for a more fandom relevant
example, I think of what the Dragon Age fandom termed “elfsplaning” to
refer to a writing issue in a specific quest of the video game Dragon Age:
Inquisition. If you have made your player character an elf, there’s a scene
where a human character ends up explaining elven history and religion to you,
despite the fact that it’s your own culture and religion. While this was
described by the writers as an accidental oversight (since the dialogue would
be fine if you were playing any other race), many elf-players found the scene
extremely off-putting and for good reason.
To me, having allosexual people try to “explain” things to
aspec people has this same type of vibe, and I feel like these attitudes would
not be tolerated when it comes to other minority identities trying to find safe
harbor in fandom. When aspec people try to point out aphobic attitudes that are
poisoning a fandom, these things are problems whether or not they’re directed
at any one specific person, just like other forms of general bigotry should be
unacceptable too. Therefore, having fans justify this aphobia with flimsy
excuses about the context of a statement, all while ignoring the underpinnings
of the comments, is not only insulting and preachy, but it turns a blind eye to
what makes everyone’s experience worse – not just the experience of aspec
people.
I’m not saying that aspec people should be allowed to say or
do whatever they want just by virtue of being aspec. That would be both absurd
and completely counterproductive. Not every aspec person is automatically an
authority on the things they’re talking about, nor should they be treated as
such. Even someone like me is just an aspec person talking about my own
experiences and my own feelings, sometimes with research and examples to back
my opinions up and sometimes not. I’m definitely not an authority. As such, not
every aspec person’s word should be taken as gospel, nor should it ever be
uniformly applied to every instance. There are definitely instances where I’ve
seen aspec people jump to conclusions or get unnecessarily defensive about
things that they’re clearly misconstruing. All that to say, aspecness alone is
not a qualification to comment on a situation.
However, all that being said, I think it’s safe to say that most aspec people don’t really need a presumably allosexual stranger to explain to them how the world is or to play devil’s advocate. Being aspec in a hyper-sexualized environment means being only too aware of the differences between yourself and other people, and so having those things explained to you by someone else is not productive, helpful, or comforting, it’s upsetting. And, to be honest, it’s also a bit ironic. People often have no issue dismissing or denying a character’s aspec vibes, but if an aspec person voices their opinion about a character or a situation, allosexual fans are very quick to take exception with it. One of the best examples I can think of comes courtesy of a screenshot I used in a previous post, in which fans are discussing the character of Josephine Montilyet, a romance option in Dragon Age: Inquisition.
.png) |
| Image description: Content warning for sexual language. This screenshot was taken from the comment section on a video of Josephine's romance in the video game Dragon Age: Inquisition. |
Many fans (aspec fans in particular) view Josie as an aspec character due primarily to her romance not having a sex scene, but in the screenshot we see a fan say that they think Josie and the player character “definitely are” sleeping together… but then this same person gets bafflingly irked by another person saying they “definitely aren’t.” They tell the second fan that it’s all right to have their own headcanon, but that saying “definitely” is a bit strong, despite the fact that they used the term first!
This is a prime example of what I’m talking about. This
person had no problem claiming that Josie certainly must be an allosexual
character, but the minute someone suggested she might not be, they seemed to be
offended by the mere idea of such a thing. Essentially, allosexual (or
presumably allosexual) people are fine with “explaining” things to aspec ones
or dictating terms to them, but when aspec people try to turn around and do the
same thing back to them, it irks them. As an aspec person watching this happen,
it feels like the ultimate form of gaslighting: “It’s okay if we do it,
but don’t you dare do it.” It essentially feels like aspec people are
being forced into the role of being told how to live, think, and act, but may
never assert their own opinions in return.
Society’s
Aphobic Attitudes and How We Uphold Them
Recently, a good friend and I were spending an evening
watching old Mystery Science Theater 3000 and RiffTrax shorts,
many of which are goofy public service announcements from the 1950’s. However,
one of the RiffTrax shorts turned out to be unintentionally upsetting
rather than funny. Called “The Snob,” it was about a young woman who was seen
as a cold and standoffish person due to her committing the great sin of…
*checks notes* wanting to do her schoolwork instead of going out on dates. We
actually couldn’t finish the short because, while the riffs were terrific, the
original substance of the short was so off-putting to us. I made the remark to
my friend that I think I could see where some of the aphobic attitudes we’re
still experiencing to this day come from, and I can’t help but think how true
this is.
When we talk about aphobia, I certainly don’t think we can
point to one specific era of time or a specific place as the root of these
attitudes. But I think media like this proves that aphobia – even if it wasn’t
called as such – and other similar attitudes have been present for a long time.
While this isn’t exactly surprising, what is surprising is the idea that we in
the modern day so effortlessly fall into attitudes that should otherwise be
seen as archaic. Of course, it’s an unfortunate fact of life that some people
will doubtless always hold archaic attitudes at best or downright bigoted ones
at worst, but in my experience, there are plenty of people who otherwise
consider themselves tolerant and open-minded who – whether knowingly or
unknowingly – continue to uphold aphobic attitudes.
It’s funny how often people are willing to look upon the
past with amusement or derision, but in my experience, a lot of these same
people’s attitudes are no better than those in “The Snob.” This doesn’t just
happen in fandoms that otherwise like to see themselves as tolerant, but in
media itself; this is something I’ve mentioned in numerous posts about Star Trek, for instance, which takes place in the supposedly enlightened and
tolerant future, but which still entrenches very archaic attitudes about sex and/or
romance. Also as I’ve said before, I find these instances of aphobia to be
among some of the worst and they can so effortlessly cross into gaslighting
territory because the people involved in these fandoms or pieces of media can
end up dressing aphobic attitudes up as tolerance.
Much like the above example of dressing aphobia up as
niceties, when media that is otherwise seen as diverse and tolerant rejects
aspec people, it invalidates them and their experiences all the more by making
this rejection seem inevitable. It thus allows these attitudes to not be seen
as bigotry or discrimination, and makes it easier for them to keep being
reproduced. For the aspec people to whom this is happening, it makes it seem like
they’re the problem and that they don’t deserve to be accepted. Using Star
Trek as an example, for instance, having aphobic attitudes exist in the
utopic future makes it seem like aspec-ness doesn’t belong either in the future
or the present.
This doesn’t just affect aspec people, but also attacks allosexual
people who aren’t living in a way that society considers “normal.” In some
instances, even the idea of demanding that people meet a certain standard of
“normal” can be used in a gaslighting sense, and we see this happen all the
time to both real people and fictional characters, as I frequently discuss on
the blog. For instance, I often discuss the concept of amatonormativity on the
blog – the societal pressure to make romance a priority in one’s life, much
like we see happen to the main character of “The Snob.” There are a lot of very
outdated reasons why this happens, but these attitudes are not content to stay
in the 1950’s. We may laugh at them and riff on them as if they are gone, but
they’re very much alive today.
Even modern ideas of sex and sexuality can have a dark side.
While the more modern standards of sexual frankness and openness are often very
good things for people – especially people who belong to historically marginalized
groups – they can lead to the entire world being painted with this brush. In
fact, I tend to see both the 1950’s style amatonormativity and the modern era’s
sex focus as being two sides of the same coin; they may seem like they’d be at
odds with one another, but in the end they can both be used as societal
sticking points that can haunt aspec people of all kinds depending on the
circumstance.
If characters or real people present any type of
aromanticism and/or asexuality – even if they don’t identify as such but just
aren’t at a point in their life where they prioritize sex or romance – they
will fall into this trap. This is something I discuss in regard to my favorite
band, BTS, all the time. While of course no one knows what the members of the
seven-member Korean band do in their personal lives, there are many people who
claim they surely must be dating in secret, simply because they’re of a certain
age and ostensibly they “can’t live without romance.”
This is often couched in very heteronormative language,
insisting that all the members should specifically be seeking girlfriends with
the hopes of seeing them get married and have children. This has even extended
to members of the group who have said they don’t want to get married or have children, such as the
group’s leader, RM. Many fans (dressing up their attitudes as niceties as
usual) try to say that they’re sure he’ll find the right person to change his
mind someday, entrenching a very archaic attitude on life.
On the other side of that coin, we have the people who are
eager to sexualize the members no matter what. For a recent example of this,
I’d like to point to a comment I received on my YouTube channel, where I
discuss BTS’s work, the meanings behind it, and my own theories regarding these
things. In a recent video, I discussed the 2017 song “Pied Piper,” a song which
many people discuss through the lens of “calling out toxic fandom culture.” In
the video, I pointed out that this interpretation does not fit BTS, and used
the legend of the Pied Piper of Hamelin – the song’s namesake – to draw
alternate meanings instead, not of toxic fan culture or simple allure, but of
something far deeper. While I got dozens of lovely comments where fans shared
their own experiences with how BTS’s music led them out of depression or sorrow
and into something better, one comment in particular disliked that I tried to analyze the song rather than just treating it as “sexy.”
 |
| Image description: A comment I got on my own video. There is so much aphobic content within this short comment that it's actually almost impressive how much aphobia this person was able to cram into such a few words. |
Naturally, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and while I don’t begrudge this person their focus on the sexy elements of “Pied Piper” or other songs, I do wonder why my attempt to look into deeper meanings for the song bothered this person enough for them to comment on it. Referring to my analysis as “purifying” BTS points directly to many of the attitudes I often discuss and dissect on this blog. The assumption seems to be that seeing a deeper meaning behind the song is “pure,” an attribute that is often used against aspec people as an unfair accusation, and which is often treated as automatically worthy of suspicion. Furthermore, why is their belief that the song has no greater meaning than just sex appeal more valid than my belief that it speaks to deeper issues and themes?
While I never mentioned anything related to asexuality or
aspec identities, the fact that this person viewed my analysis and took offense
to me not sexualizing the narrative mirrors the aphobic gaslighting I’ve
experienced in places where I do bring up aspec issues more explicitly. I
believe this just goes to show how deeply these attitudes can be ingrained in
people and the world around us. Seemingly, these attitudes are only upheld
because this is what these people themselves experience, and they assume that
everyone else must do likewise.
Given that this is what society and media tend to preach ad
nauseum, it’s hard to blame people for parroting these attitudes and belief
systems. In that sense, I believe society isn’t just gaslighting aspec people,
but people of all kinds, making it seem like there are no other ways of
existing and that everyone’s life must take the same type of path. This is
severely limiting, and I believe has the power to alter people’s perception of
themselves, their lives, and the world around them, which is the very definition
of gaslighting in its purest form.
Ignoring Aspec
Vibes as a Form of Gaslighting
In my previous post, I once again discussed the topic of
sexualizing characters that otherwise have aspec tendencies or characteristics.
In it, I discussed why ignoring these types of character traits can be a form
of aphobia, but I also believe we can view it as a form of gaslighting. This
can take the form of denying a character’s obvious aspec tendencies, which has
the power to make aspec people feel “less than” or “other” within fandom
spaces, or it can take the more insidious form of assuming aspec people are
themselves bigoted for pointing these aspec characteristics out.
Again, like I said earlier, aspec people aren’t
automatically right just by virtue of being aspec. However, fandom often
thrives on people being allowed to headcanon characters as representing a
specific group, and yet trying to do this with aspec identities is often a very
loaded and very dangerous pastime. When fandom – or even media itself – tries
to convince you that aspec headcanons are either bad or just plain wrong, what
does that say about our place in fandom as aspec people?
Not to keep harping on the same issues continually, but this
is why I dislike the recent announcement that the upcoming next Dragon Age
title will not have any canonically aspec characters because it “didn’t feel
authentic.” What exactly does that mean? When will aspec identities be allowed
to “feel authentic” within the world of the game? While there are many aspec
fans in the fandom, I find the Dragon Age fandom is often a terrible
place to be aspec, primarily because so many people are able to belittle aspec
fans and tell them to stay in their lane. But like I said before, when your
lane is less a lane and more a very small path designated as far away from
“normal” players, staying in one’s lane is not only a challenge, it’s actually
somewhat demeaning.
More than that, however, dismissing the validity of aspec
characters being included in a narrative makes it easier for the fandom to do
likewise. When a fandom is empowered to ignore the aspec vibes of a character
or the validity of aspec attitudes, we see things like the examples I discussed
in my previous post. The validity of aspec identities shouldn’t have to wait
until a fandom or piece of media decides to treat them as such. They don’t get
to be circumvented because a person or character is attractive or because
pushing them into a romance would be convenient or because a romantic and/or
sexual relationship is what people want to see.
When a character has aspec tendencies, ignoring these things
feels like gaslighting because it’s telling aspec people they’re not allowed to
identify with these characters, even when their experiences feel authentic to
an aspec experience. And, once again, I believe this does a disservice to
allosexual people too, whether or not they realize it. The world is gaslighting
them too, severely limiting the types of stories they are allowed to interface
with or the characters they’re allowed to come to love and care about, and I
believe that should be concerning for people of all kinds.
------------------
As someone who doesn’t like horror or spooky stuff (ironic,
given we are in the middle of/rapidly approaching Spooky Season), I find my
chills in the real world. Gaslighting is probably one of the scariest
psychological things I can think of, because there’s nothing scarier than
another person trying to manipulate your own sense of reality. While this can
happen in ways as severe as the movie Gaslight, it can happen in more
subtle ways; and, even more chillingly, it can happen in so many ways. Media,
societal attitudes, advertising, etc. all contribute to the way we see the
world around us and in so doing, help to shape our reality. When aphobic
attitudes are baked into this, however, things get very scary as an aspec
person indeed.
However, I believe we don’t have to accept these limiting
attitudes. In the movie, Paula is able to fight back against Gregory and
reassert her own sense of self and her own sense of reality. While aspec people
can do that in our fandom spaces too, I also think the movie proves that it’s
so much easier to do that with help. Just like Paula is given help to
understand that her version of reality is not wrong, I think sometimes we as
aspec people need that same help from those around us. No one – whether aspec
or allo – has to accept the aphobic ways we’ve been forced to see the world. If
we can acknowledge these aphobic attitudes and see the effect they have on
people of all kinds, maybe we can turn the light out on some of these instances
of gaslighting once and for all.
Comments
Post a Comment