This was “originally” updated (not published) on my husband Maus’ personal blog on August 4th, 2025. I put originally in quotation marks because the original URL has already changed once. The new URL is:
https://bywordofmaus.com/old-articles/on-manipulation/
The original date is currently unknown, so that’s the closest I got. This is important because of the following information:
This was written around the same time we first encountered Saige Alexis (of The Vivid Fae Garden system1), and her then-girlfriend (now wife) Audrey Crawford on BlueSky after I had tagged Saige, which, I explained, I did to identify her to readers while I wrote about my situation. She demonstrated for me, without announcing such, that this is, indeed, one reason to tag someone through “self-sabotage”: she manipulated the DNS entries and such so that her tag link on the service (or some such) wouldn’t properly resolve quite right.
I know this is most likely related to this situation because it seemed to happen around that time, and, when I was later suspended permanently, it started working again.
*mysterious*
Saige, as well as Audrey, like so many before from this particular social circle, decided that I didn’t write what I thought I wrote, and, replaced what I wrote with their new version that somehow “spoke over” victims and diminished their experiences. This was performed for the public complete with ableist/stigmatizing/overreaching statements that seem popular among their friends (though they themselves admonish it as well, as long as they’re on the receiving end), sexism, and even racism.
Saige, somehow as someone else (see footnote 1), told my husband, who’s not White, that he “should know better” than… they didn’t complete that part explicitly, so I will for them: than to support the “manic-episode” induced (Audrey) self-serving “deranged” (Audrey) “gibbering” (as Saige’s former friend Annie might put it) I was doing as a White person; it’s that, if I may, I don’t have actual problems worthy of any inconvenient discord, unlike Saige, who, by her own assertions, is the most harmed person in the entire world.
I will be writing another post at some point to explain why I say she asserts that and why it’s important to point it out, but that’s not this post.
By the way, Saige is very White (at least from the looks of it), and also has Borderline Personality Disorder, exactly like the object of her derision: me. Self-sabotage appears to be the go to strategy for conflict resolution.
This post is about manipulation and the various ways that people manipulate others. It was written by both Maus and me, in collaboration.
At this time, as well, there was another chaotic actor in the midst who was hellbent on trying to orchestrate (like Bugs Bunny, *shudder*) the downfall of my “failed-straight” alleged-pedophile “sociopathic” lolcow ass (all false claims), and of course, failed miserably, being shunned out of Kiwi Farms so hard even *I* cringed.
As loathsome self-hating trolls are prone to do, it’s been circulated that I’m some sort of avid Kiwi Farmer because they need as many friends as they can get to fuck over. And so, I must also state that I do not use Kiwi Farms, or participate in any way2, so, I’m not a Kiwi Farmer.
I mention this chaotic actor because one of the things they latched on to was this post (or, the original post). They immediately painted Maus and I as trying to now be “advocates against abuse,” because we wrote this, as if we were whitewashing ourselves to make us look better to everybody.
Since this is a common behavior among those that even get rejected by Kiwi Farms, being the people I’ve been focused on for the past year-and-a-half+, I’ll lay it out one more time:
- I don’t do anything like that just to make myself look better to everyone. Like, ever. You might be able to convince others that’s my motive, but it will only be a temporary illusion as it inevitably becomes clear that I, in fact, don’t ever have that motivation. I do not care what everyone else thinks of me.
- I am not an ‘advocate’ of much of anything beyond my own projects, ideas, philosophies, and services; not LGBTQ+, not mental health, not Objectivism. So, yeah, no.
I don’t know why people try to convince others of my alleged inner turmoil or motivations, as I noted in the list, it’s all temporary. It doesn’t last. Anyone who observes me long enough will realize that almost everyone who tries to do so gets it wrong. But, hey, I guess everyone needs at least one pointless hobby.
Anyway, here’s the article, with some revisions for rhetorical clarity and grammar, not substance:
On Manipulation
What Is It, And How Can You Identify It?
Just as with “boundaries,” the word “manipulation” is freely used online, especially in spaces shaped by surface-level mental health practices from the Mental Wellness Influencer Sphere. (Hassan 2025) Perhaps we could call it the Wellnosphere? Yeah, that’s what we’ll call it.
While both terms are widely used, their full meanings and consequences differ significantly from how they are deployed. Still, “manipulation” is now often used against others in ways that the audience rarely explores, and thus it isn’t explored at all by anyone. It’s just a given. (“Red Flags About Mental-Health Content on Social Media” 2026) However, when challenged, many struggle to clarify why something is manipulative or even define the term. (“Manipulation: searching for an understanding” 2003, 12-14) This exposes the fragile state of current discourse and critical thinking.
Consider this, if you will, a shorthand guidebook into what manipulation is, how to spot manipulative tactics, and, most importantly, why they are, in fact, manipulative. It is not an exhaustive compendium, but hopefully it will be a useful one nevertheless.
The Nature Of Manipulation
The base objective reality is that all communication is manipulation at its core. People communicate for a myriad of reasons to accomplish a vast number of goals in an endless variety of ways. To articulate for the purpose of achieving something, particularly to persuade, is to manipulate. All human beings are capable of manipulative behavior. When a baby cries, it is a manipulation of the parent to care for them.
As children, we are often manipulative as we discover our impact on our environment and seek to influence others around us while being primarily helpless. Babies as young as 15 months old already know their parents will pick them up if they cry.
In a 2018 article published in Psychology & Clinical Psychiatry, Olga V Kozachek (Associate Professor of Pedagogy, Early Childhood Education, Volgograd State Pedagogical University, Russia) recounts a 2010 encounter in which professionals identified 160 common manipulative tactics in preschool-aged children.
The age and the psychological conditions of the manipulative behavior of preschool children, referencing ‘Kozachek OV. Psychological manipulation of pre-school age children in the family and preschool. Pre-school education in the XXI century: materials Intern. Scientific and practical. Volgograd; 2010:170−173.’
I quote, at times editing for linguistic clarity (English not being Dr. Kozachek’s native language), “during … 2009-2018 … professionals directly related to the education of preschool children” were invited “to discuss the current state of the problem of children’s manipulations.” The study “involved 188 teachers, music educators, and instructors in physical education in preschools across Volgograd and the surrounding region” in Russia.
“According to their reflections and examples from personal experience, teachers could list more than 160 tricks children use” in daily interactions. Among the most popular methods were the assertions of a contagion by which to judge others: “lies, hysteria, using other people’s weaknesses, flattery, insincere promises, references to their own, sometimes feigned, weaknesses, and manipulations of affection.” Common themes framing these strategies were “the use of someone else’s authority, a setup pitting people against each other, and deliberately creating a sense of [imposed or artificial] guilt.”
These are academically published descriptions of observed preschool dynamics in Volgograd, Russia, from 2009 to 2018, written by professional educators.
As we grow and our understanding of the world and its social dynamics becomes more sophisticated, we will ideally adapt to other, less coercive strategies. That being said, an attempt to move a third party will always remain the core of social interaction: we share common interests in the hopes of forming meaningful bonds; we communicate causes to move others to join our fight; we express our needs and wants in the hope that they will be met, just as others hope that theirs will be met by disclosing them to us.
This is all well and good, necessary even. However, this abstract, scientifically linguistic perspective may obscure my focus: manipulation becomes coercive when driven by ulterior motives and sustained by dishonest realities. Differentiating healthy, appropriate interactions from such manipulation means identifying the latter as manipulation rather than persuasion.
When discussing manipulation, I—and numerous mental health influencers, podcasters, and YouTubers—am referring specifically to manipulation, not persuasion. Yet, most discussions merely label someone or their actions as manipulative (‘this person is manipulative’ or ‘their actions are manipulative’) without clarifying what makes them so.
At its most basic definition, manipulation differs from other forms of influence by requiring the manipulated party to act against their own volition, usually for the manipulator’s benefit. (Sheikh, 2022) Manipulation can be distinguished by its methods, not by its presentation: indirect and subtle techniques contrast with more self-evident and forceful approaches, but both equally qualify.
The salient difference between persuasion and manipulation is that persuasion’s mechanics are not covert or coercive. Persuasion allows individuals the freedom to accept or reject our influence. It often consists of an argument that directly appeals to the individual’s beliefs, religion, motivations, reason, or behavior, without subterfuge. (L. & I., 2023)
Conversely, manipulation seeks to target an emotional core, exploit an irreplaceable value, or obscure reality to bypass our critical thinking and informed judgment, placing us in extremely unfair situations. Each tactic differs: targeting emotions evokes strong feelings, exploiting values undermines self-worth, and obscuring reality distorts perception.
Manipulation is always coercive.
The Core Dynamics
In The Narcissist’s Playbook, psychotherapist Dana Morningstar lays out that very core dynamic in manipulative relationships: “Manipulation is a slow and steady imbalance of power. This imbalance is created when one person leverages the emotions of fear, obligation, or guilt against another with the ultimate goal of getting their way.” (see also Lancer 2017)
Five Common Vulnerabilities
In the realm of social interactions, George K. Simon, author of In Sheep’s Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People, identifies five common vulnerabilities that are targeted by manipulative tactics in interpersonal relationships:
- Naïveté or Immaturity: Someone’s lack of experience or unwillingness to believe people can be deceitful and manipulative.
- Over-Conscientiousness: Someone’s tendency to be overly self-critical, excessively willing to give others the benefit of the doubt, and habitually quick to shoulder blame.
- Low Self-Esteem: People who doubt themselves, lack confidence, and aren’t assertive are said to have low self-esteem. They often wonder if it’s right to want or need things. This can make them give in too easily to forceful people.
- Over-Intellectualization: People who believe that others are hurtful only when there’s a legitimate or understandable reason will tend to be convinced that simply revealing motivations and understanding them will create lasting change. This intellectual exercise ignores the reality that one can never truly know someone’s motivations. People are often irrational, and cause-and-effect may not apply.
- Emotional Dependency: Those with submissive or dependent personalities are more vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation, as their emotional reliance on others leaves them wide open. They lack a self-defined, self-controlled regulatory center and rely on others for stability. Unfortunately, that need doesn’t automatically translate into a trustworthy caretaker. (see Simon 2010)
A manipulator, Morningstar writes, “attempts to control or exploits others because this is how they navigate life,” and achieves this by “continually creat[ing] chaos.” She makes a point to observe that manipulators may do so consciously or unconsciously, and their anti-social behavior is often rooted in unresolved childhood trauma or emotional wounds. There’s a good chance the person being manipulated will never truly know the origin of the manipulator’s behavior, as manipulators often misrepresent their true motivations.
That’s why it’s manipulation.
Malignant Narcissists And Where That Phrase Comes From
Malignant Narcissists, as well as Emotionally Immature Persons, often resort to manipulative tactics. However, it is important to avoid the generalization that every manipulative individual is a Malignant Narcissist. Even if the same caution and decoupling techniques are necessary to disengage from manipulative behavior, these patterns do not directly correspond to a specific non-diagnostic subtype. References to such subtypes appear primarily in alternative models of personality disorders:
The notion of malignant narcissism originates in the self-help and law enforcement communities, not in psychiatry. These communities have focused on malignant narcissism as a behavioral judgment and a specific form of abuse rather than a mental health diagnosis.
[ED: Emphasis mine.]
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/malignant-narcissist (“Malignant narcissism: Definition, signs, and more” 2025)
[ED: ACAB Right? … RIGHT!?]
To assume as much is to employ stereotypes, effectively reducing the real complexities of humans to unrealistic mechanical systems. This is a harmful reduction because it strips away essential context in the process of granting the user a false sense of safety, with knowledge that appears complete due to its superficial objectivity. Clever manipulators exploit these blind spots by fostering a self-righteous us-versus-them mentality, making it easier to target individuals within their communities.
Why Manipulators Manipulate
According to Morningstar, manipulators routinely coerce others to advance their agendas, secure and keep power, assert control, and boost their egos. Each of these reasons comes with carry-on psychological patterns of thought and behavior:
- To Advance An Agenda: The manipulator wants a particular outcome, such as accepting an ordinarily taboo behavior or eliminating a perceived threat. To do so, manipulators often disguise their motives to get their way. They usually present a front of benevolence, interest in others, honesty, and a caring attitude, for the sole purpose of earning others’ confidence and trust in their cause. Their actions will center on a concern for their target or the target’s interests, which may be external to the situation, making them a valuable ally in achieving the greater good.
- To Get And Maintain Power Over Others: Manipulators operate under a zero-sum fallacy, where any empowered individual is seen as diminishing the manipulator’s power. Self-assertiveness and attempts to exercise your agency are perceived as taking power away from the manipulator, tagging you as an enemy who needs to be retaliated against and brought back under control.
- To Feel In Control: Due to an unsteady sense of self or chronic paranoia, manipulators constantly need to exert control over their emotions—and everyone else’s. What better way to maintain safety and reduce the ever-present paranoia that someone will figure it all out than to have no one feel like something’s wrong? They have an intense, pathological need to always be right, and their egos become deeply unsettled and go into a tailspin when they are proven wrong, faced with disagreement, or challenged.
- To Feed Their Egos: Manipulators are deeply insecure, though they may not always see themselves this way. Their dishonesty creates a social environment that is extremely fragile, enslaving them to maintaining others’ false beliefs. This creates a need to feel superior as a form of self-soothing comfort or validation. To be as exceptional as they feel, they undermine others’ sanity and spread chaos, sometimes even boasting about their ability to lay traps for people and maneuver them toward self-indulgent outcomes. To satisfy this ideal self, which can never be satiated because it’s false, they work to ensure that they are desired, adored, acclaimed, or, failing that, feared.
When a manipulator sets course to coercively influence a third party, they resort to several well-observed techniques. The works of Simon, Morningstar, D M Buss, M Gomes, D S Higgins, K Lauterbach, and Maggie Holland were consulted to compile the list for this section.
Ordered by increasing sophistication, manipulation often happens via:
A Non-Exhaustive List of Methods of Manipulation
- Denial
- Shifting Blame
- Isolation
- Vilification
- Threats of Self-Harm
- Passive Aggression
- Guilt-Tripping
- Shaming
- Lying, By Commission or Omission
- Bandwagon Effect or Threatened Ostracism
- Playing The Victim
- Spinning or Rationalization
- Love-Bombing, Instant Intimacy, or the Intimacy Rush
- Seduction
- Poisoning the Well
- Brandishing Anger
- Pantomimes of Virtue
- Diversion
- Encouraging Self-Doubt
- Feigning Innocence
- Projection
- Invalidation
- Double Standards
- Shifting Context
- Feigning Confusion
- Leveraging Obligations
- Intentional Vagueness
- Gaslighting
- Intimidation
- Triangulation or Pot Stirring
- References
1. Denial
These are outright denials of wrongdoing. It usually remains unaccompanied by supporting facts or observations; if they are present, they are indirect, vague, distracting, or loosely connected. This is the D in the acronym DARVO, which stands for Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender. (Freyd n.d.)
“That never happened! You’re making things up. They’re lying.”
2. Shifting Blame
The person at fault deflects blame onto the other party, portraying them as guilty or responsible for the perpetrator’s actions. This is the R, for reversal, in the DARVO acronym.
“You really shouldn’t have said anything to provoke me. This could’ve all been avoided if you just stayed quiet.”
3. Isolation
Manipulation is most effective when the target lacks someone nearby to ground them or alert them that what they’re experiencing is problematic. (Brichag et al. 2026) The manipulator will seek to isolate the target from family and close friends, making themselves the center of their world. (“Coping with the Isolation Associated with an Abusive Relationship” 2022)
“Your friends just don’t understand you the way I do. Maybe you should spend less time with them. They don’t seem to be a good influence, and isn’t your life better now?”
4. Vilification
This tactic effectively puts the victim on the defensive while masking the manipulator’s aggressive intent. When the victim defends themselves or their position, the manipulator counters by falsely accusing them of being the abuser. This is the ultimate goal of DARVO: Reverse Victim and Offender.
“It’s amazing how you can twist every little thing I do into something negative. Maybe you should look at your own behavior before pointing fingers.”
5. Threats of Self-Harm
The manipulator leverages their well-being as a weapon, making others feel responsible for their safety or emotional stability. This tactic can create a powerful sense of urgency and emotional turmoil, often forcing the target to comply to avoid perceived harm or responsibility. (“Emotional Blackmail” n.d.)
“If you break up with me, I don’t think I’ll be able to go on.”
“If you keep talking about me, it’ll make me start cutting again.”
6. Passive Aggression
Aggression is forcing a situation to go your way. Passive aggression is trying to get things to go your way without seeming to do anything, hence the name. (“Passive-aggressive behavior” 2023)
The most straightforward way to do this is to imply something without explicitly stating it. This behavior forces the target to be constantly vigilant, guessing, and adapting to the manipulator’s moods and responses. It’s most apparent when the manipulator says things they don’t mean to emphasize what’s left unsaid. (Buss et al. 1987, 1219-1229)
But what’s the payoff? Because the manipulator never explicitly says what remains unsaid, they more easily shirk responsibility for their implicit demands or the act of coercion.
“Don’t worry about me. I’ll just handle everything on my own, like always. There’s no real need to inconvenience yourself.”
7. Guilt-Tripping
This one’s relatively straightforward and easily recognizable, but that quality doesn’t make it any easier to defend against. Very few of us want anyone to significantly suffer, and if we think we might be the cause, we’ll do whatever we can to stop it. However, such a strong reaction is ripe for abuse, and manipulators will often use guilt to control and influence others.
“All the girls have been preparing for months and are so excited to meet you, but you can say no if you want; it’s all up to you. I just know everyone will be really disappointed if you don’t come.”
8. Shaming
No one likes feeling ashamed, especially if it happens unexpectedly. There’s always the fear of being shunned, not measuring up, or suffering other destructive consequences. Many of us instinctively try to reduce negative attention. Manipulators exploit this by using put-downs to instill fear, self-doubt, and unworthiness, shaming victims into submission and fostering inadequacy.
“If you keep acting this way, I’m honestly not sure how anyone could take you seriously. People are already starting to wonder what’s wrong with you.”
9. Lying, By Commission or Omission
These are subtle deceptions made by manufacturing a narrative or omitting a substantial portion of the truth. (“Psychological Manipulation Tactics” 2022) Claiming, for example, that someone gave you a sarcastic and harsh reply to something you said while omitting an entire section of the conversation that would reveal the larger context: the remark resulted from prolonged provocation. Because it’s sarcastic and appears malevolent when taken out of context, its sole purpose is to unfairly paint the subject in a negative light.
This performance omits parts of the evidence that make the manipulator look bad. When the manipulator doesn’t reference the original facts, and others are discouraged from finding them out, this technique will go unnoticed and lie outside immediate awareness, making it highly effective. (“Information manipulation theory” 2024) No one thinks something might be wrong if they aren’t aware of why.
10. Bandwagon Effect or Threatened Ostracism
The manipulator pressures the victim into compliance by suggesting, truthfully or not, that many others have already done something or think in a particular manner. Thus, the victim should too.
This doesn’t always manifest negatively toward the target, as it may be a way to simulate the victim’s acceptance of what they’ve always been too afraid to do. The danger lies in the artificiality of that acceptance because reality will fail to meet inaccurate expectations.
“Everybody I’ve talked to agrees with me, it’s really okay. You’re the only one who has an issue with it, so you must be the one who’s wrong. We all want to do it.”
11. Playing The Victim
The manipulator pretends to be a victim of circumstances or of someone else’s actions to evoke pity, sympathy, or compassion, thereby manipulating others into giving them what they want or to excuse otherwise unacceptable behavior. (“Manipulation strategies in interpersonal relationships and their psychological impact” 2024) The most significant sign that it’s a play is that the manipulator is only a victim, per their own invention; it usually isn’t readily noticeable until they announce a novel framing of it. Compassionate and conscientious individuals who struggle to see others suffer are especially vulnerable to this tactic, making it an effective tool for gaining support and cooperation.
Partner A: “I’ve been struggling, and I really needed you to be there for me.”
Partner B: “You’re always making everything about you. I’ve got so much on my plate, and now you’re acting like I’m a bad partner? Maybe if I didn’t have to deal with your constant complaints, I could actually focus on what’s important.”
12. Spinning or Rationalization
A rationalization is an explanation that manipulators give to justify their inappropriate behavior. It’s meant to evoke sympathy, sound reasonable, or otherwise appeal to others’ biases. The least sophisticated and most frequent form is one of excuse. Something about them, or the circumstances, created a lack of choice.
One recent variation in some circles is an invocation of trauma responses or triggers, effectively displacing the responsibility for actions towards a psychological mechanism rather than the individual’s own willful choices. However, more sophisticated forms will repackage the victim’s objections into broader, more acceptable language. This strips the target of legitimate considerations involving their comfort or interests.
“Look, I know I lashed out, but I’ve been under so much stress lately, and you don’t understand what it’s like dealing with all this. When I feel triggered, I just can’t control myself. You should know that’s not really me-it’s my past messing with me. I shouldn’t have said what I did, but you have to understand where I’m coming from.”
13. Love-Bombing, Instant Intimacy, or the Intimacy Rush
In love-bombing, the manipulator showers the target with excessive attention, compliments, and affection. This is usually done inappropriately early in a relationship, often to quickly gain control and trust at the expense of detail or the truth. It can also manifest in an established relationship to regain lost trust or minimize a violation. These eventually lead to devaluation and emotional abuse when it can’t be sustained because it’s not meant to be sustained. (Thorne 2024)
“We’ve only been together for a month, but I feel deep down we’re meant to be together forever. It’s like I’ve always known you, and you’ve always known me. I’ve never felt so understood by anyone, and I’ve never loved anyone more than I love you.”
14. Seduction
Complementing love-bombing, the manipulator employs charm, compliments, flattery, or overt support to lower others’ defenses and secure their trust and loyalty. When someone is presented with a remarkably high interest in things regularly overlooked by others, it can be very exciting, even intoxicating. We don’t want to believe it isn’t true because of the painful disappointment that would incur.
Seduction is characterized by special, and oftentimes unique, appeal. For example, the manipulator may assist the target with something seemingly ignored by others to gain trust and access without raising many suspicions.
15. Poisoning the Well
An unfavorable portrayal of a target is strategically presented to an audience in advance, aiming to discredit or ridicule the target’s upcoming statements and to avoid scrutiny that those statements might invite. (“Smear campaign” 2025) Whatever is judged negatively is a weapon that cuts down the target’s reputation, even if it’s not true, or, worse, is founded in irrational bigotry, stereotypes, faulty thinking, stigma, or other unfair prejudices.
Most people aren’t aware of their biases, especially those that stem from protection and fear. The presumed justifications nullify their ugly nature. Layer on the need to not be wrong or immoral so much that they’re blind to any consequence of their actions that would illustrate such, and you get an impenetrable but pliable darkness. (Dovidio 2021, 545-547)
“I think the reason they’re saying all of that is because they’re looking for attention. They’ve been acting really erratic lately, and honestly, it seems like they might be going through something. It might be better for them to get some help before things spiral out of control.”
16. Brandishing Anger
The manipulator intentionally displays intense anger, instilling uncertainty in someone’s mind to influence their actions or decisions, often as a response to a decision. Someone else’s anger is scary to most people, especially when directed at them. It’s an immediate sign of trouble that must be rectified or defended against. The tendency, then, is to prevent the anger from being expressed, especially among individuals who’ve suffered previously from angry abuse.
The anger may be unexpected, a total surprise for maximum uncertainty. Or it may be threatened as an intimidating unknown. However, this anger is frequently feigned as a calculated tool to gain leverage or force compliance. It’s not actually present, but it’s impossible to tell at that moment. It may as well be real.
Anger brandishment often works not because it’s explosive—but because it makes the other person anxious enough to avoid escalation, even if it means sacrificing their needs or voice.
Teenager: “I don’t want to go to that college. I want to apply somewhere else.”
Parent (smiling tightly, hands trembling slightly): “You have no idea what I’ve sacrificed for you. You’re really going to throw away everything? Is that what you’re saying?”
The room is immediately heavy. The teenager is shocked and confused. There is an absence of yelling, but a shouting match hangs pregnant in the air. The parent used implied anger to control the child’s choices through fear, not open discussion.
17. Pantomimes of Virtue
For the purpose of this article, I have avoided the term ‘Virtue Signaling‘ here because it’s become muddied after countless misapplications. ‘Virtue Signaling,’ as might be explained by Ryan Holiday at The Daily Stoic, being the public support of something that you deem good and moral to rally others to your cause, is not a tactic of manipulation. Virtue Pantomime, however, is different. It isn’t simply expressing support for something good or moral. It consists of an outward display of moral righteousness or alignment with socially praised values, but it’s a hollow pantomime to counterfeit approval, trust, or influence. (“The Manipulationist Threat to moral responsibility” 2024)
The manipulator often emphasizes their “goodness” not as a genuine expression of belief but as a strategic move to mask ulterior motives, deflect criticism, or pressure others into compliance by implying they lack similar virtues if they disagree or fail to comply with their demands. (“The Armor of Moral Superiority: Protecting Pain, Avoiding Healing” 2024)
The manipulator not only emphasizes their own moral stance but also implicitly claims authority by suggesting that their way of acting is the correct or necessary course of action. They set themselves up as someone who has “learned the hard way,” making their opinion seem more experienced or valid, and subtly pressure others to follow their lead if they want to see change.
18. Diversion
This manipulation tactic has two variations. One involves intentionally diverting the conversation, steering it toward a different topic to center it as the focal point, especially during an argument. Whataboutism is a classic example:
“Why are we even talking about my mistake? What about all the times you’ve messed up?”
The other involves redirecting the target’s, or the larger situation’s observers’, attention away from anything that poses a danger to the manipulator. Prime substitutional candidates include, but are not limited to, a common enemy, a gripe, a cause, or a more egregious offense by someone else, even one outside the problem. Distraction, any distraction, is the goal so the manipulator can keep others from examining things too closely or inferring inconvenient conclusions.
“Forget gas prices! Your kids are being taught they can change genders before they can drive a car!”
19. Encouraging Self-Doubt
People are generally unsure of themselves in complex situations or unfamiliar environments. Add social anxiety or the goal of doing something different, and one has a constant fear that they’ll be seen as out of place, rejected, or even do something inappropriate. (“Vulnerabilities in social anxiety: Integrating intra- and interpersonal perspectives” 2024)
The manipulator will endeavor to take advantage of any opportunity or invent opportunities to plant these seeds of doubt and insecurity in someone else’s mind. The goal is to make them question their own discernment or judgment without any intervention, doing the manipulator’s work for them.
This occurs frequently, both personally and on many-dimensional surfaces of greater society, and each is as treacherous as the manipulator’s aims.
“You’re so confident right now, but I just can’t help but wonder—are you really thinking clearly? It’s almost like when you’re so certain, you tend to lose track of what’s important. You’ve done that before, right? Sometimes I think your mind doesn’t allow you to see things the way others do.”
20. Feigning Innocence
This tactic is aimed at the manipulator but affects the target. Manipulators will actively downplay any harm caused through various means, as outlined in this list. A popular one is feigning innocence, where they contend that everything was unintentional or the result of ignorance, emphasized by pretenses of surprise or, if unbelievable, indignation.
This tactic causes the victim to question their conclusions and, at times, their sanity by adding subtle hints to undermine the target’s judgment. It also offers outsiders reasonable motivations to discount the target’s grievance. How can you hold someone accountable for something they didn’t mean or know about? (“Undue Influence” 2024)
“Wait, what? You think I meant to hurt you? That’s ridiculous! I didn’t even realize it was affecting you like that. I would never do something like that on purpose! I didn’t know I was causing any harm. I’m really surprised you’d think I was capable of something like that.”
Victims of manipulators may show signs of this strategy. The difference between these and the manipulator’s lies relies on factual observations of ignorance. The manipulator may keep the target in the dark, only to reveal something they would’ve wanted to know later. Unfortunately, it was most likely in the manipulator’s hands, and it was always apparent to everyone else. This makes the victim’s claims of ignorance pale compared to the manipulator’s stated ‘good intentions.’
21. Projection
The manipulator shifts their uncomfortable thoughts or actions onto another to ease their own discomfort. The exceedingly insecure will do this pathologically because they cannot confront the shame they might feel.
At first, the mechanics of projection can seem nonsensical, but there is an emotive logic. Emotional projection uses the target as a neutral psychological canvas to work through issues without suffering the negative consequences of ownership. Instead, they are inflicted upon the disposable canvas. (“Psychological Projection” n.d.)
Projection can be fairly compelling, making it highly chaotic, causing confusion, and forcing the target to question their recollection of events. An example of projection can involve one partner blaming the other for their own flaws, such as disorganization or messiness. Projecting insecurities can also manifest as accusing a partner of flirting with others. The person may feel guilty about being attracted to someone else, so they turn to emotional projection to protect their psyche while still attempting to work through the issue internally.
This is a doomed endeavor; unfortunately, even when attempted in good faith, it never works. The original issues remain unresolved because the consequences weren’t experienced, and the manipulator repeats the process, at best, unaware of its maladaptiveness.
22. Invalidation
Validation can be tricky and complicated to pin down, as it looks different to different people, relationships, and circumstances. However, its core is simple.
Validation and invalidation rest on a common perception of implicit proto-approval, not agreement, predicated on an external recognition of existence. It’s not an endorsement of something, but an acknowledgment that something ‘can’ or does exist, despite no one ‘allowing’ it to exist. It’s psychological and a purely social construct. It’s most observable in cultural power dynamics over what is considered ‘normal’ and thus appropriate. (“The who and what of validation: an experimental examination of validation and invalidation of specific emotions and the moderating effect of emotion dysregulation” 2023, 1050-1061)
Validation is recognizing that someone has thoughts and feelings that deserve consideration, while invalidation dismisses them as unworthy of consideration. A sign of validation is when someone feels heard, and a sign of invalidation is when someone feels ignored or like they don’t exist.
Invalidation isn’t always intentional, but manipulative invalidation is. It consists of denying or discounting a person’s concerns, often through the erosion of justification and a war of attrition. Implications that the target is ‘too sensitive,’ ‘crazy,’ and ‘unreasonable’ are typical go-tos. There is a constant downplaying of the person’s emotional importance compared to everyone else, even when it remains unsaid and is conveyed through sarcasm. These are the manipulator’s favorite insults because they plant insecurities built to seek revalidation, but it is a reassurance that only the manipulator’s approval seems to deliver.
“You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. It’s really not worth all this drama. I don’t know why you’re so focused on it when everyone else has already moved on.”
23. Double Standards
The manipulator will apply different rules or expectations to others or themselves in similar situations. Ironically, this is often done to undermine someone’s argument, position, or credibility by highlighting perceived inconsistencies in their behavior or standards, even though they themselves permit the same thing. It fits snugly within the projection and punishment framework regarding their insecurities when they do the same things. This often makes it subconsciously relatable to their supporters.
Confronting double standards can be exceptionally challenging. It’s near-impossible for an objective standard of fairness to cut through group alliances.
This is because they immediately create a power imbalance, as the accuser has already committed the same offense. And yet, it doesn’t seem to matter. But it should matter! A sense of injustice is aroused in the target, who may respond indignantly, or, inversely, they may resentfully rise to the one-sided standard. Unfortunately, either path tends to weaken the target’s perceived position in the conflict by sowing doubt and ridicule among those who’ve already judged the target through the manipulator’s eyes.
The manipulator’s supporter, possibly recalling what the manipulator has done, is convinced by the target’s reaction that the manipulator possesses greater wisdom or power, having been justified or left unchallenged. This confirmation bias reinforces the manipulator’s superiority over the maligned target’s scrambling.
A manager constantly criticizes an employee for taking too long on a project, while the manager themselves frequently misses deadlines or procrastinates on critical tasks. When the employee tries to address this inconsistency, the manager accuses them of being “too sensitive” and “not understanding the pressure they’re under,” even though the manager holds them to a stricter standard than they do themselves.
A friend consistently bails out of group plans, leaving others to adjust at the last minute. However, when another friend does the same thing on one occasion, they’re publicly scolded for being unreliable and “selfish,” despite the manipulator regularly doing the same thing without consequence. The manipulator downplays their own behavior, creating the perception that only the other person is at fault.
A parent criticizes their child for skipping an extracurricular activity, even though the parent often skips social or family events for personal reasons. The parent accuses the child of being disrespectful and irresponsible, while their own similar behavior is overlooked or justified as “different” due to a number of excuses.
A partner frequently criticizes their significant other for not being emotionally open or for needing space, while they themselves regularly shut down emotionally or distance themselves when facing stress. When the partner confronts them about it, the manipulator insists that the other person is “too needy” or “unreasonable” for expecting the same openness from them.
24. Shifting Context
This one’s a doozy. It’s complicated, nuanced, and hard to portray faithfully due to its overwhelming, disorganized nature. The manipulator creates an ever-shifting context of chaos, making the situation so fluid and volatile that no correct or beneficial action is available to the target. This is generally intended to wear down the target’s defenses and make them more prone to remain quiet and compliant because they cannot predict what context will come next.
Partner A: “I feel like you’ve been really distant lately. We barely spend time together.”
Partner B: “Oh, so now you’re saying I’m a terrible partner? What about all the times I’ve been there for you?”
Partner A: “I’m not saying that; I’m just trying to talk about how I feel.”
Partner B: “You always do this. Every time I have a stressful week and have to be elsewhere, you make it all about you instead of supporting me. I’m actually about ready to fall apart because of this.”
In this exchange, Partner B shifts the conversation from Partner A’s genuine unease about an impending emotional distance to an artificial crisis about Partner A’s supposed lack of support. By constantly moving the focus, Partner A is put on the defensive and never gets to address their original concern.
Sometimes, this seemingly topsy-turvy atmosphere is unintentional. The suspected manipulator may be surrounded by a cloud of confusion because they are unaware of subconscious mechanisms at work and act out of habit, or, worse, out of pure, unmitigated instability and uncontrollable, erratic behavior. (Göçmen 2025)
25. Feigning Confusion
This is another façade that manipulators will quickly adopt, even nonsensically. Who can prove it’s not accurate? They’ll pretend to be confused or unaware of what the victim is talking about. This tactic aims to confuse the victim, causing them to question the accuracy of their own perceptions or over-explain out of obligation or frustration.
It also influences others observing the exchange, if present, to doubt the victim’s credibility and motivations. Additionally, it provides immediate cover for the manipulator when the tides start to turn against them. They were confused and required understanding and pity, not explanation or beratement.
But how can one detect fraudulent confusion? Its self-evidence directly correlates to its unbelievability or convenience. The more outrageous or convenient the inability to understand, the more likely it is feigned.
If the target uses the same terms as the manipulator in the same context, and yet their question remains incomprehensible, at what point can it be concluded that the manipulator simply can’t read? It’s just too unbelievable.
Suppose the manipulator employed adequate comprehension until a contradiction painted them into a corner. Suddenly, they don’t know how to do anything because everything is overwhelming and confusing. In that case, it’s a safe bet it’s a performance.
Conversely, if they can’t understand you, but when you point out you used the exact words they did, what else could it mean? They suddenly have an appropriate answer. You clearly weren’t the source of confusion.
“Wait, what? I honestly don’t know what you’re going on about. I don’t know how that relates to anything I have said.”
A subset of this tactic is pretending to be confused about someone’s clearly stated motivation, actions, or statements, upon which the manipulator is often quick to comment. This allows the manipulator to impose their own context on the situation as a subtle strawman argument, recontextualizing the target’s original intent to suit the manipulator’s messaging.
A person confronts someone for consistently disregarding their grievances. The manipulator focuses on a comparison the person made between their actions and a character from a TV show they both watch. The manipulator ignores the actual criticism and focuses on the fact that the comparison was made to a TV show they both like. They reframe the argument as hinging on the idea that the comparison mocks their enjoyment of the show, and then dismiss the situation as invalid because it does not add up, since the other person also enjoys the show.
26. Leveraging Obligations
The manipulator disguises pressure to act in their own interests as an expression of care or duty, often alluding to a past service or favor, regardless of their current bad behavior.
This is obvious in more intimate relationships, eventually appearing as unspoken threats of endless rehash if the partner doesn’t comply. It’s also clear when there is a power imbalance and the alleged benefactor controls your, or the endeavor’s, future.
“I raised you, put food on the table, and now you can’t even visit me once a week?”
But it’s harder to spot in other, less binding relationships. It’s especially tough when the obligation concerns an abstraction, such as an unspoken, undefined social contract, rather than a particular person. This variation is commonly in the inverse, which centers on the idea that the target owes everyone the benefit of the doubt, even if none is afforded to the target. In these cases, the target is usually told that they must always be “the better person,” granting a perverse grace to their abusers.
27. Intentional Vagueness
Vagueness is the most insidious strategy employed by manipulators because it allows them to hide behind many acceptable defenses. People are often vague for good reasons: privacy, protection, politeness (particularly around embarrassing topics), and more sophisticated purposes like informing others of important information without further instigating unnecessary attention or conflict. The takeaway is that vagueness doesn’t directly translate to manipulation, and that’s a problem when dealing with manipulators who have an audience.
Vagueness serves its purpose as a manipulation tactic by intentionally keeping information unclear and ambiguous. This enables the manipulator to control the narrative, evade accountability, and craft statements that could apply to multiple individuals, particularly those known for volatile interactions. (Travers 2025)
When confronted, they can deny targeting anyone specifically, maintain control over the situation, and reinforce their power, while delivering their message in a way that allows an inner group to easily identify the individuals singled out—even if it is difficult to do so from the outside.
This is most apparent when targets repeatedly face this situation:
If they highlight what the manipulator says as relating to them, they are chastised for their self-importance and are always wrong. But if they abstain, others, less confident in interpreting the situation, inquire if what the manipulator said is about the target.
The more often this happens, the more obvious the manipulation. A consistent run over a decade could indicate a profound pathology. (“Antisocial Personality Disorder” 2020)
Vagueness can also repackage things under a broader and more persuasive umbrella. A contentious text chat becomes screaming at someone. A sarcastic remark indicates zero empathy. A serious violation becomes a misunderstanding and is thus excusable.
28. Gaslighting
The term gaslighting, or being gaslit, I guess, has become a favorite and popular refrain among many. However, as with all terms appropriated for a trend, broadening its scope to situations where it doesn’t apply has frustrated those who wish to use it appropriately. When gaslighting’s scope is too broad, it becomes a signifier for a defensive emotion detached from its original meaning, despite, unfortunately, not shedding that meaning when employed.
Gaslighting is an opaque denial of reality. It attempts to undermine the target’s sanity by insisting that events that never happened did, or that events that did never happened. It’s executed to avoid the consequences of what did happen, or to intentionally undermine another’s confidence in their own perceptions and reasoning. They are to be replaced by the manipulator’s. (“Public Perceptions of Gaslighting” 2015, 3-22)
“I never called you that. You must be remembering wrong.”
“That book wasn’t there last night. You just aren’t very observant.”
“You’re imagining things. Why would anyone ever do that to you? I think you’re remembering it the way you want to remember it. That’s not how it happened at all, and deep down, you know that.”
However, suppose someone states a perspective that puts you on the defensive, even if it’s simply a different interpretation of the objective facts. In that case, it’s convenient and attractively self-serving to accuse them of gaslighting, even if they are being accurate.
In reality, the opposition isn’t “validating,” or essentially agreeing wholeheartedly, with everything you think or feel. Observers, especially moral supporters, struggle to distinguish this when they aren’t privy to the original context. When everyone’s only concerned with your perspective, it stands to reason the opposition must be manipulating the past or the situation, so gaslighting fits the bill. Unfortunately, gaslighting carries the connotative weight of abuse and evokes memories of malicious intent in many, bypassing necessary critical observation.
In today’s climate of convenient therapy terms that mean what you need them to mean, as put out by your favorite TikTok therapist, it’s no wonder this term and concept are responsible for some of the most complex and sophisticated DARVO deployments. It’s easily packaged into one malleable word, an accusation that doesn’t require explanation. It instantly creates an unexamined, frequently unnecessary topology of conflict that balloons into lengthy, complex theses without anyone realizing that’s what’s happening.
29. Intimidation
Intimidation is the intentional cultivation of fear surrounding the manipulator through bravado, unsaid but understood ramifications of their responses, and plain threats. This strategy is exceptionally straightforward, and almost everyone can recognize it even when they don’t immediately realize it’s happening. And yet, it’s also one of the most complex. What is the difference between intimidation and intimidating?
Unfair false flags occur if we drop context. Suppose someone can easily overwhelm just because they feel like it. In that case, it follows that worse will occur when they are motivated. This is intimidating, but that impression may exist naturally, not intentionally. Otherwise, we could consider the consequences of attacking a Navy Seal as opposed to a child, and end up identifying the Seal’s strength as abuse by virtue of existing.
Intimidation is intentional, and, as a result, it takes the form of threats. It’s a purposeful but surreptitious flex to demonstrate concealed strength that would go unchallenged. It’s a nod that something terrible will happen if the manipulator doesn’t get his way. It’s a veiled threat, like “it’s a shame if something happens to your shiny new car,” or a more direct one, “… or else I’ll be forced to eliminate the problem.” (“Intimidation” n.d.)
They can be general, “I’m capable of incarcerating someone just because I don’t like them,” or specific, “I look forward to ruining your life.” They can even be hints or insinuations, reinforced by it being a reaction or attached to a demand. All threats are usually exaggerated, but they never appear as such because of the unknown possibilities.
Intimidation is qualified by a threat of action whose sole purpose is to silence, oppress, and force others to do what the manipulator wants at the point of a metaphorical or literal gun. It cannot be nullified by stating that a threat of action isn’t a threat. Consenting under duress isn’t consent, but a violation, and intimidation is instrumental in the initiation of violence requiring submission. (Dougherty n.d.)
Even in opposition, a declaration of future action isn’t automatically a threat. Likewise, strength without danger isn’t intimidation; it’s just intimidating and thus requires no special supervision.
30. Triangulation or Pot Stirring
Manipulators position themselves at the center of this dramatic game, playing two or more people, or sides, against each other by spreading lies, half-truths, or gossip. This tactic leads to division and conflict between the parties being manipulated, often resulting in fighting and discord that the manipulator can exploit for personal gain or power.
A classic example is the controlling partner telling their significant other, “Your best friend doesn’t really like me and thinks I’m bad for you.” They subsequently tell the best friend, “My partner said they’re realizing you’re a toxic influence.”
This isolates the partner from their support system while keeping control over the narrative.
Triangulation may seem innocuous, but it can be devastating. Minor misunderstandings or a lack of communication can result in decades-long estrangements over nothing, leaving the parties in tatters with regret.
Triangulation always risks getting out of hand. On every front, in the heart of the situation or from the outside, seemingly insignificant pot-stirring can escalate into a highly charged, incendiary controversy, constantly on the verge of erupting into scandal. But this would be considered a success! (“Triangulation Psychology: What Is Triangulating? | BetterHelp” 2023)
The manipulator wishes for this to be the default irrevocable state. It will never fully recover; the damage is done, and the truth is replaced. Who will double-check or reify any of their beliefs when there isn’t any benefit to doing so, only trouble? Why follow up on terrible claims from horrible haters when they only aim to destroy their now mythic and rallied-around foe, the great manipulator?
In online spaces, manipulators also tend to assume alternate identities, impersonate others, or post under different usernames to create the illusion of, or increase the impression of, an escalation in two parts of a conflict. (Kumar et al. 2017)
Not An Exhaustive List
This list covers the most common manipulation tactics, though it is not exhaustive. Understanding the specific context in which manipulative behavior is alleged is crucial to accurately identifying it.
Unfortunately, like gaslighting and narcissism, accusations of manipulation have recently gained an increased social momentum that makes them attractive. There are countless commentators on unvetted platforms like YouTube and TikTok who continue to peddle listicle-style soundbites of advice on simple tricks for defending your peace of mind against the ever-present ‘black magic’ of vampiric narcissists. The features of these platforms—auto-play and algorithmic recommendations—promote this oversimplified advice to the forefront. (“Normalizing toxicity: the role of recommender algorithms for young people’s mental health and social wellbeing” 2025)
Thus, as the audience is bombarded with these “soundbites,” they find themselves in an environment where engagement is prized above all other factors. It is this underlying issue that creates a purely surface understanding of complex psychological concepts under the guise that it’s much more profound, making misinformation more likely to spread and go unchecked.
Many people with personality disorders or conditions that might cause them to act in a manner considered antisocial face high levels of scrutiny and stigma. (“Stigma and self-stigma in borderline personality disorder: A narrative review” 2023) Instead of naming them as “malignant” or “villainous” narcissists, as this essentially removes them as human beings, we must look to the fears or miscommunications behind this type of behavior. It’s interesting to see how often people make assumptions when they don’t fully understand the actions they see; they often believe there must be some form of manipulation for self-gratification.
Ultimately, we’re living in a mental health Satanic Panic. Much of this content is often coupled with vivid imagery and hellish struggles and battles against an unknown, nebulous cabal on the more overt end, or is alluded to when people discuss how others might see themselves as “evil” or “bad,” with the edge that maybe they really are. This sensationalistic language, as seen in the metaphors “hellish struggles and battles,” is often used to increase the threat to even religious levels and instill fear and alarm.
In turn, the influencers invoke power beyond the dreams of avarice, teasing us with rebelliously sexy secrets of the ‘masters in dark psychology.’ Or, on the lighter end, a way to achieve a lifestyle of inner peace devoid of any unwanted conflict, just the psychodrama you already consent to like a video game. Through an analysis of these metaphors, we gain an understanding of the circulation of fear stories, reminiscent of the broader discussion of manipulation.
In this digital, internet-connected world that seems to be on all the time, who would want to be perceived as a manipulator? And who would cast aspersions of manipulation upon someone, considering how serious this charge is? Being a manipulator in this day and age comes with a rather serious stigma attached. Not only do people contribute to this stigma by perpetuating rumors and unjustly accusing others of manipulation, but also, in professional environments, services, housing, and more, manipulation can take a serious ethical toll. The charge of manipulation carries serious weight because of what it implies.
When a situation or dialogue clearly meets several of these criteria, especially in a one-sided way, it is more reasonable—applying Occam’s Razor—to treat the term as an honest observation rather than an unfounded accusation. Expressing such observations can sometimes be necessary.
Claims of manipulation are best supported by the standards of discourse. In these standards, a claim is first made and then supported by arguments explaining why it was made, pointing to concrete actions taken and words spoken.
This leads to the practical question:
Why make the observation at all?
Telling someone they are manipulative isn’t foolish or unnecessary, even if the individual is highly manipulative. It tells the manipulator that you are aware of what they are doing and indicates this awareness to others. This helpfully informs others, like a warning call, that they should be wary. It creates a concrete situation that provides an appropriate motivation for the guilty to stop what they’re doing. Whether they do this is another matter.
As mentioned above, we are all capable of manipulation and of being manipulated at times—the important question is whether a person’s default strategies for conflict resolution and interpersonal dynamics center on manipulation, in which case there is a concrete case for considering them to be manipulative. (see footnote 1)
– Maus Merryjest & Asher Wolfstein
This article is a revision and comprehensive update of the linked original, made on January 23, 2026.
References
Yes, I can also perform research, having paid attention in my purely high school education. My American History essay on Hitler and the Third Reich was considered model small-town scholarship.
- Hassan, Steven A.. “The Hidden Dangers of Online “Wellness Gurus”.” Psychology Today, April 28, 2025. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-of-mind/202504/the-hidden-dangers-of-online-wellness-gurus
- “Red Flags About Mental-Health Content on Social Media.” TIME, January 21, 2026. https://time.com/6307996/mental-health-content-red-flags-social-media/
- “Manipulation: searching for an understanding.” Psychiatric Bulletin 27, no. 1 (2003): 12-14. https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.27.1.12 Accessed January 23, 2026
- Sheikh, Abdurraheem. “Persuasion Versus Manipulation.” Journal of Student Research 12, no. 3 (2022). https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v12i3.4584 Accessed January 23, 2026
- L., Boyarskaya E., and Barkhatova E. I. “FROM PERSUASION TO MANIPULATION.” International Research Journal, no. 12138 (2023). https://doi.org/10.23670/IRJ.2023.138.65 Accessed January 23, 2026
- Lancer, Darlene. “Are You Being Manipulated?” Psychology Today, April 26, 2017. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/toxic-relationships/201704/are-you-being-manipulated/
- Simon, George K. In Sheep’s Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People. Parkhurst Brothers Publishers Inc. https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/in-sheeps-clothing-george-k-simon/1111382844
- “Malignant narcissism: Definition, signs, and more.” Medical News Today. 2025. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/malignant-narcissist Accessed January 23, 2026
- Freyd, Jennifer J. “DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender).” University of Oregon. https://dynamic.uoregon.edu/jjf/articles/hfjiv2023.pdf Accessed January 23, 2026
- Brichag, Sylvia, Vladyslav Papusha, Olena Kholokh, Marat Kuznietsov, and Ruslana Danyliak. “Manipulation Strategies in Interpersonal Relationships and Their Psychological Impact.” South Eastern European Journal of Public Health 15, no. 1 (2026). https://www.seejph.com/index.php/seejph/article/view/834 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Coping with the Isolation Associated with an Abusive Relationship.” Between Sessions. 2022. https://www.betweensessions.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Coping-with-the-Isolation-of-an-Abusive-Relationship_101822_ad.pdf Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Emotional Blackmail.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_blackmail Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Passive-aggressive behavior.” Wikipedia. 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive-aggressive_behavior Accessed January 23, 2026
- Buss, David M., Mary Gomes, Dolly S. Higgins, and Karen Lauterbach. “Tactics of Manipulation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (1987): 1219-1229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.6.1219 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Psychological Manipulation Tactics.” ARTT Research. 2022. https://artt.discourselabs.org/docs/psychological-manipulation-tactics Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Information manipulation theory.” Wikipedia. 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_manipulation_theory Accessed January 23, 2026
- Porter, Tyler. “Manufacturing the Illusion of Epistemic Trustworthiness.” Episteme 22, no. 2 (2024): 576-595. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2024.14 Accessed January 23, 2026
- Thorne, Isabella. “Love Bombing Is a Manipulative Tactic Disguised as Affection.” Psychreg. 2024. https://www.psychreg.org/love-bombing-manipulative-tactic-disguised-affection/ Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Smear campaign.” Wikipedia. 2025. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign Accessed January 23, 2026
- Dovidio, John F. “Implicit Bias Is a Human Condition.” American Journal of Public Health 111, no. 4 (2021): 545-547. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306137 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “The Manipulationist Threat to moral responsibility.” Synthese 204 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-024-04771-0 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “The Armor of Moral Superiority: Protecting Pain, Avoiding Healing.” Authentic Living Therapy. 2024. https://www.authenticlivingtherapy.co/the-armor-of-moral-superiority-protecting-pain-avoiding-healing Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Vulnerabilities in social anxiety: Integrating intra- and interpersonal perspectives.” Clinical Psychology Review 109 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102415 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Undue Influence.” Wikipedia. 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undue_influence Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Psychological Projection.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection Accessed January 23, 2026
- “The who and what of validation: an experimental examination of validation and invalidation of specific emotions and the moderating effect of emotion dysregulation.” Emotion 23, no. 6 (2023): 1050-1061. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000910 Accessed January 23, 2026
- Göçmen, Şefika. “The Psychological Foundations of Manipulation: The Silent Management of Minds.” Psychology Times. 2025. https://psychologytimes.co.uk/the-psychological-foundations-of-manipulation-the-silent-management-of-minds/ Accessed January 23, 2026
- Travers, Mark. “2 Manipulation Tactics To Watch Out For In A Partner, By A Psychologist.” Forbes, June 14, 2025. https://www.forbes.com/sites/traversmark/2025/06/15/2-manipulation-tactics-to-watch-out-for-in-a-partner-by-a-psychologist/
- Antisocial Personality Disorder. StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK546673/
- “Public Perceptions of Gaslighting.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 32, no. 1 (2015): 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075251366643 Accessed January 23, 2026
- Thompson, Sarah, and David Harris. “Social Dynamics of Intimidation: Effects on Group Behavior and Individual Well-being.” Social Psychology Quarterly 83, no. 4 (2020): 456-478. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272520951234 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Intimidation.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intimidation Accessed January 23, 2026
- Dougherty, Tom. “Consent Under Duress.” https://academic.oup.com/book/59000/chapter/495594780
- “Triangulation Psychology: What Is Triangulating? | BetterHelp.” BetterHelp. 2023. https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/psychologists/what-is-triangulation-psychology/ Accessed January 23, 2026
- Kumar, Srijan, Justin Cheng, Jure Leskovec, and V. S. Subrahmanian. “An Army of Me: Sockpuppets in Online Discussion Communities.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.07355 (2017). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1703.07355 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Normalizing toxicity: the role of recommender algorithms for young people’s mental health and social wellbeing.” PMC (2025). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-000000 Accessed January 23, 2026
- “Stigma and self-stigma in borderline personality disorder: A narrative review.” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2023.215215 Accessed January 23, 2026
- My actual, real-life name is Mr. Asher Wolfstein (looking at you Dr. Bourrie (Ph.D., JD), see end of footnote)
That’s not my original name, but it is my name. It’s not a ‘fursona’ like a character, or an alter, or both as some people like to imagine (you heard me, and it’s just my personal opinion), it is me.
The relevancy may become clear.
I justifiably feel the need to make something very clear given the events of this past year-and-a-half (January, 2026). A narrative positioning me as misogynist, transphobic, stigmatizing, and abusive started circulating in October of 2023. I acknowledge that this is, at best, an interpretation, but it is one I cannot agree with. This is my footnote, at the moment, to address it sans unnecessary denials.
There is nothing to deny. The intent of this footnote is not invalidation, degradation, intolerance, hating, criticizing, or trying to convince or argue with anyone. You might disagree on whether I accomplish this, however, the intent is to make my personal position explicit in order to head off any future misplaced or mismatched expectations; that’s what I believe lies at the heart of this circulated narrative.
I have always lived my life in a way that accepts other people as they are and proactively refrains from imposition or demands. Given how ‘different’ I am, for example being “trans-species,” how could I act otherwise?
I’m a guy that will follow the argument (as in rhetorical argument, or idea, not a fight) to the bitter end, even when I was eight, and even with the adults in my life. It’s what my father would do with me, and, eventually, I came to love it for how useful it was. I cannot abide contradiction within my thought process in a healthy way (assuming that’s even possible). To treat innocent others with the same regard that I feel injured over would be an existential contradiction I would not survive.
And I am dedicated to this. I take everyone at face value when they express themselves until I have a concrete reason not to. If you expect passive-aggressiveness to fly past me or for me not to acknowledge it you will be disappointed.
And I assume everyone possesses good will and intentions in some form (even if we disagree) until I have a concrete reason otherwise. I take everyone “seriously,” no matter where they come from, how they look, or who they are. I am eminently concerned with ideas first, not personal identities.
The key emphasis here is ideas, and the lack of initial identitarian judgment. I treat trans individuals, furries, christofascists, fart lovers, the elderly, liberals, skinheads, anti-vaxxers, transients, spiritualists, BDSM enthusiasts, anime fans, atheists, the disabled, individuals with mental health conditions, nazis, and everything in between, the same.
I respectfully ask that you do not assume things about this stance, such as a paradoxical or ineffective tolerance (Karl Popper is wrong, and most who cite him don’t understand what they’re citing), or a lack of judgment that ends up hurting people, or that I judge everyone the same in outcome. I do not.
You commit a crime, you face the consequence.
You do something shitty, I will judge you.
You hurt someone, I will take action.
You treat me with disdain, trying to bully me into ‘social correction’ for the common good, and I will do the same to you, most likely with far more dedication.
I have no ethical issues mirroring the treatment I receive from someone, something best kept in mind.
The key here is that, in doing so, I expect people to treat me the same way.
Whatever I have going on with me, I would like the same consideration. I don’t want agreement, comfort, support, modulation, politeness, tolerance, or protection from others. I want the same honest consideration.
I have beliefs. I have a philosophy. I have conclusions. I stand for things. I have a way of looking at the world I think is correct for me, and one of my beliefs is moral realism (objective morality) and I will employ that to make judgments about you, your thoughts, and your actions as I see fit whether you like it or not.
I expect the same.
If you do not like this attitude, think it’s self-indulgent, hurtful, entitled, or anything else, please do not directly interact with me.
Talk about me all you want, but don’t interact with me.
I will not mitigate myself for you. You will likely become injured in some way (not physically) and you won’t have anyone but yourself to blame, though you may try. Please, for both of us, believe me the first time because I mean what I say.
Again, I expect the same.
Which means, if we disagree, I’ll let you know if I so desire. Maybe I won’t. I do not owe anyone my beliefs, thoughts, or emotional expression, not even my husband.
My opinions and my beliefs do not impact your life anymore than whatever negative interpretation you have about me affects mine according to you. Yes, part of this is contingent on your interpretation of these impacts, since it is both ways; even and equal.
I am not you, you are not me, and so, your abstaining requires nothing of me. If I feel the need to talk about you, I will.
Always telling the truth, plainly and clearly, helps immensely with this.
If I feel the need to discuss you or your ideas, I will.
If I feel the need to judge you, report you, or point out a danger according to how I see things, I will.
Once more, I expect the same.
It goes both ways.
This is the part that is aggressive, and I don’t like saying it, but, to me, at this time, it’s unfortunately necessary:
If I disagree that your alter is a legitimate alter because it’s a highly-researched set up fictional character that you role-play or ‘front’, quite conveniently in my opinion and so on, the only negative claim I will rightfully acknowledge is your upset, otherwise, in my view, I have done nothing else to you.
Your boundaries aren’t mine to hold or enforce; your feelings aren’t mine to bear or comfort; your sense of reality isn’t mine to fulfill, and none of that will be entertained.
And, if any of that is expected but not also simultaneously given in equal measure, for any reason, all claims otherwise will be treated with extreme prejudice.
This is a purely hypothetical example, and has no correspondence to a compartmentalization that has occurred.
This is one issue in an endless sea of topics.
The above paragraph is to illustrate how every disagreement and conflict will go in terms of how I (and only I) will act. It is applied universally.
That’s how it be. Please, by Lucifur, believe me the first fucking time; nobody’s buying your little Maya Angelou self-pitying video of spiritual growth for fuck sake.
In regards to Dr. Bourrie, you’ll note on the bottom of his website it reads: “I believe that a vibrant and fair press is more important than it has ever been and similarly so is media analysis and critique. A free, fair press is one of the few protections that we have against arbitrary power.” – M. Bourrie
I note this because Dr. Mark Bourrie, Ph.D JD, who believes all of these wonderful sounding maxims, sent this letter without prejudice to my husband and me on September 19, 2025, and despite it being revised by Steven Joel Kerzner on September 8, 2025, he couldn’t be bothered to spell my last name correctly. ↩︎ - I did have some interactions on Kiwi Farms, but not because I wanted to.
Despite what people say, I made three posts on the board (that I won’t link to so as not to tarnish my domain’s reputation), all of which were in my defense after the aforementioned chaotic actor tried to engage in harassing (and false) triangulations, including impersonating me.
Not one of my posts was transphobic, misogynist, trolling, or had any respect for the culture, rules, or ethics of the board, because I’m not a troll or a Kiwi Farmer.
I mockingly adopted the language, but not the spirit.
If “watching” Kiwi Farms to see what potentially dangerous thing they might say about you, or choosing to defend yourself as best you can, counts for being a Kiwi Farmer (as Kiwi Farmer Giancarlo Vanzzini, username Shaneequa, asserted, as well as his former ‘friend’ Liana Kerzner), well, then, there’s a lot of people who are Kiwi Farmers, including Saige Alexis of the Vivid Fae Garden system (see above footnote), and by proxy, Jessica Routhier (Poppy, or Penny, or… shakes head of the Diabolique system).
Also, to note, the only person who will state publicly, with no apology, “Interacting with Kiwi Farms means you play by Kiwi Farms‘ rules…” as if doing so gives full license to the dredges of the cesspool to treat you and your interests immorally, is a fucking Kiwi Farmer.
As well, the only person who will chastise a victim of a Kiwi Farmer’s year-long disparaging abuse for doxxing the Kiwi Farmer is, again, a fucking Kiwi Farmer. ↩︎