Tuesday, May 21, 2019
Monday, May 20, 2019
Saturday, May 18, 2019
A Perception Of Injustice AKA Gaslighting.
If you have ever made a complaint about a public body the chances are your valid complaint will be referred to at some point as a ‘perception of injustice’ as if your experiences are just illusionary. Gaslighting is commonly used to deflect criticism and deter persistent complaint. So when you are up against authorities in collusion to deny the facts, knowing that others can validate your experiences with their own life events is vital to maintaining your mental stability.
Tactic #1: Gaslighters override your reality.
At its heart, gaslighting is overriding your reality to the point that you question your own judgment. Like most things, there are degrees. It can be as small-scale as telling a child, “You can’t be hungry—you just had a snack,” or as large-scale as denying fully obvious facts, such as this 2015 story about a man who got married, posted the wedding photos on Facebook, and then told his long-distance girlfriend it was a figment of her imagination. To sum up, if the gaslighter had a mantra, it would be, “If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes truth.”Tactic #2: Gaslighters aren’t out to destroy you; they’re out to make things easier for themselves.
Unlike in the movie, most gaslighters aren’t pursuing anything as concrete as a treasure chest of jewels. What they want is more psychological. The gaslighter wants control of the target on a specific set of terms, with the gaslighter in charge. For the same reason, gaslighting isn’t always conscious. Indeed, gaslighters don’t sit around stroking their goatees or petting a white cat while plotting to undermine your sanity. Instead, gaslighting comes from the need—conscious or unconscious—to control. Gaslighters work to undermine you so you can’t challenge them. Then the relationship can go the way they want. They get to have their cake and eat it, too, without the inconvenience of having to discuss things, compromise, or work together.Tactic #3: Gaslighting is often fueled by sexism.
Of course, gaslighting can be used by anyone against anyone—it’s not always gendered. But it’s often used as a form of emotional abuse against women. It “works” in part because it feeds off sexist stereotypes of women as crazy, jealous, emotional, weak, or incapable. For example, in an excellent 2014 paper published in Philosophical Perspectives, Dr Kate Abramson of Indiana University details a story where a female grad student discovers the male grad students have made a list ranking the female grad students by attractiveness. When she expresses that such a list is inappropriate, she is told she’s overly sensitive, that she’s policing innocent conversation among male friends, and really she’s just insecure about her ranking on the list, isn’t she? By not allowing their sexist behaviour to continue unchecked, the male students suggest she is acting like the stereotypical “crazy woman.”What just happened there? If a woman rings the alarm on sexist behaviour, gaslighters use sexist stereotypes to undermine the woman’s complaints. Instead of taking her seriously, each of her complaints might be refuted as a silly misinterpretation or dismissed as her being too sensitive. In this way, the sexist stereotypes are used to reinforce themselves—an uninterrupted pattern of circular logic: “See, she’s just another insecure, overly emotional woman we don’t have to listen to.”
Tactic #4: Gaslighters make disagreement impossible.
Once you are discredited, any argument you may have is casually written off. When credibility is undermined — you’re crazy, a liar, unstable, a failure, or have lost your mind—anything you say is automatically suspect and builds the case against you. Therefore, you can’t disagree or protest. And the louder your objections, the more your gaslighter can smile smugly and say, “See, I told you so.”Tactic #5: Gaslighters make you agree with their point of view.
Gaslighters need the world to conform to their standards. And they need the very individuals they gaslight to agree with them. Therefore, it’s not enough for gaslighters, for example, to insist that sexual harassers were just having a little fun. They need the target of the harassment to agree that it was all just a little fun. Ideally, the target would not only agree but also believe that she deserved to be undermined because she was being crazy, overly sensitive, or imagining things. Now, refusing to witness or substantiate your reality is invalidation. But gaslighting means getting you, the target, to invalidate yourself as well. Not only does no one take you seriously, you wonder if you can take your own experience seriously: your common sense, your feelings, your memory, even what you’ve seen before your very eyes. In other words, gaslighting not only invalidates your experience, it also makes you question your capacity to trust your experience in the first place. At this stage, your gaslighter has you right where they want you: beginning to doubt yourself and your ideas even when they’re not there to continue enforcing the message.As for Ingrid Bergman as Paula, she is validated in the end and Gregory is arrested, but not before she dishes out some gaslighting revenge of her own as he sits tied to a chair. In a final attempt to manipulate her, Gregory tells her to get a knife and cut him free, but as she pulls his knife from a drawer she proclaims, “There is no knife here; you must have dreamed you put it here,” before tossing it away and quipping, “I am always losing things.”
Whether in Hollywood or your own household, gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse. Isolation is a key ingredient to gaslighting, so if this article spoke to you, reach out. Having just one person validate your experience can be a lifeline that begins the process of reeling yourself in from all the lies to believing your own truth again.
Thursday, May 16, 2019
Wednesday, May 15, 2019
Monday, May 13, 2019
Thursday, May 09, 2019
Police to take no further action against former council leader over perjury allegations.
Police investigating allegations former Rochdale council leader
Richard Farnell committed perjury when he appeared at the Independent
Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse (IICSA) say there is ‘insufficient
evidence’ to take any criminal action against him.
The first report from the inquiry found Councillor Farnell had ‘lied under oath’ when giving evidence about the town’s notorious Knowl View school, where children were abused over a period spanning more than 25 years.
The document branded Councillor Farnell – who has always strongly denied he misled the inquiry – as ‘shameful’ for refusing to take responsibility for the abuse that happened under his watch when he was leader of the council between 1986 and 1992.
And it added that it ‘defies belief’ he was unaware of the events involving the school.
The findings prompted Richard Scorer – the lawyer who represented Knowl View abuse victims – to call for perjury charges to be considered against Councillor Farnell.
In May 2018 the Metropolitan Police received a referral from Greater Manchester Police requesting the force reviewed an allegation of perjury by a witness to the IICSA.
But following a lengthy investigation the Metropolitan Police have written to Councillor Farnell to inform him they will not be taking matters any further following a ‘full review’ of the evidence.
The letter, signed by Acting Detective Chief Inspector Gail Granville states: “Having carefully considered all the material gathered that was subject to review, I have concluded there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate to the criminal standard that you wilfully, that is to say deliberately and not inadvertently or by mistake, made a statement that you know to be false or did not believe to be true.
“As a result, no further action will be taken by the Metropolitan Police in relation to the allegation.”
Councillor Farnell, who stood down as council leader just weeks after giving his evidence to the inquiry, has welcomed the decision.
He said: “I am really pleased that following a thorough 12 month investigation by the Metropolitan Police they have decided not to prosecute me for perjury.
“I have always maintained I told the truth to the inquiry and the Metropolitan Police’s decision vindicates this.
“There is not one scrap of evidence that I knew about the failings at Knowl View almost 30 years ago. The council’s most senior officers at the time – the chief executive and directors of education and social services – all told the inquiry they did not inform me.
“The inquiry examined over 100,000 pages of letters, reports and documents and not a single one was addressed to me or informed me about Knowl View.
“Several leading councillors at the time all told the inquiry that they too were kept in the dark by officers about Knowl View. “
Referring to Operation Clifton – an investigation into the alleged cover-up of child sexual abuse at Knowl View – Councillor Farnell added:
“ A previous two-year inquiry by Greater Manchester Police into allegations of a cover-up of Knowl View found there was absolutely no evidence to support this.
“The inquiry was handed a 16 page report of evidence proving beyond any doubt I was not informed about Knowl View which, bizarrely, they ignored.”
Councillor Farnell, who continues to represent the Balderstone and Kirkholt ward, said it has been ‘extremely stressful’ to have the allegation hanging over him for twelve months, but thanked the police for a ‘thorough investigation’.
He added: “I was always confident it would come to nothing because I told the truth to the inquiry and all the evidence supports this.
“However, we must never, never forget the victims in this tragedy. It was only under my leadership that the council apologised for its failings at Knowl View.”
When he stood down as council leader Councillor Farnell blamed a ‘small minority’ of Labour members for ‘undermining’ his leadership following the hearing.
He was later suspended by the Labour party and is yet to be reinstated.
But he has now been backed by his successor, current council leader Allen Brett.
Councillor Brett said: “I am delighted that, after examining all the evidence, the police have dropped the case.
“I have known Richard for over thirty years and he is a man of integrity and honesty. I am worried political opponents have been trying to make him a scapegoat in all of this.
“I know Richard has a lot of friends and supporters in the Labour Party who will be really pleased with the decision. I will be pressing for his suspension from the Labour Party to be immediately lifted.”
And he also received support from the leader of Rochdale Council’s Conservative group, Councillor Ashley Dearnley.
More – https://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/127700/police-to-take-no-further-action-against-former-council-leader-over-perjury-allegations
Nick Statham, Local Democracy Reporter
The first report from the inquiry found Councillor Farnell had ‘lied under oath’ when giving evidence about the town’s notorious Knowl View school, where children were abused over a period spanning more than 25 years.
The document branded Councillor Farnell – who has always strongly denied he misled the inquiry – as ‘shameful’ for refusing to take responsibility for the abuse that happened under his watch when he was leader of the council between 1986 and 1992.
And it added that it ‘defies belief’ he was unaware of the events involving the school.
The findings prompted Richard Scorer – the lawyer who represented Knowl View abuse victims – to call for perjury charges to be considered against Councillor Farnell.
In May 2018 the Metropolitan Police received a referral from Greater Manchester Police requesting the force reviewed an allegation of perjury by a witness to the IICSA.
But following a lengthy investigation the Metropolitan Police have written to Councillor Farnell to inform him they will not be taking matters any further following a ‘full review’ of the evidence.
The letter, signed by Acting Detective Chief Inspector Gail Granville states: “Having carefully considered all the material gathered that was subject to review, I have concluded there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate to the criminal standard that you wilfully, that is to say deliberately and not inadvertently or by mistake, made a statement that you know to be false or did not believe to be true.
“As a result, no further action will be taken by the Metropolitan Police in relation to the allegation.”
Councillor Farnell, who stood down as council leader just weeks after giving his evidence to the inquiry, has welcomed the decision.
He said: “I am really pleased that following a thorough 12 month investigation by the Metropolitan Police they have decided not to prosecute me for perjury.
“I have always maintained I told the truth to the inquiry and the Metropolitan Police’s decision vindicates this.
“There is not one scrap of evidence that I knew about the failings at Knowl View almost 30 years ago. The council’s most senior officers at the time – the chief executive and directors of education and social services – all told the inquiry they did not inform me.
“The inquiry examined over 100,000 pages of letters, reports and documents and not a single one was addressed to me or informed me about Knowl View.
“Several leading councillors at the time all told the inquiry that they too were kept in the dark by officers about Knowl View. “
Referring to Operation Clifton – an investigation into the alleged cover-up of child sexual abuse at Knowl View – Councillor Farnell added:
“ A previous two-year inquiry by Greater Manchester Police into allegations of a cover-up of Knowl View found there was absolutely no evidence to support this.
“The inquiry was handed a 16 page report of evidence proving beyond any doubt I was not informed about Knowl View which, bizarrely, they ignored.”
Councillor Farnell, who continues to represent the Balderstone and Kirkholt ward, said it has been ‘extremely stressful’ to have the allegation hanging over him for twelve months, but thanked the police for a ‘thorough investigation’.
He added: “I was always confident it would come to nothing because I told the truth to the inquiry and all the evidence supports this.
“However, we must never, never forget the victims in this tragedy. It was only under my leadership that the council apologised for its failings at Knowl View.”
When he stood down as council leader Councillor Farnell blamed a ‘small minority’ of Labour members for ‘undermining’ his leadership following the hearing.
He was later suspended by the Labour party and is yet to be reinstated.
But he has now been backed by his successor, current council leader Allen Brett.
Councillor Brett said: “I am delighted that, after examining all the evidence, the police have dropped the case.
“I have known Richard for over thirty years and he is a man of integrity and honesty. I am worried political opponents have been trying to make him a scapegoat in all of this.
“I know Richard has a lot of friends and supporters in the Labour Party who will be really pleased with the decision. I will be pressing for his suspension from the Labour Party to be immediately lifted.”
And he also received support from the leader of Rochdale Council’s Conservative group, Councillor Ashley Dearnley.
More – https://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/127700/police-to-take-no-further-action-against-former-council-leader-over-perjury-allegations
Nick Statham, Local Democracy Reporter
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)