influence others:
F—Fear
O—Obligation
G—Guilt
In Forward’s book Emotional Blackmail (New York: HarperCollins, 1997), she describes how manipulators use tactics that elicit these emotions to bend you to their will. They make sure you fear the consequences of crossing them, feel obligated to give them what they want out of a sense of duty, and feel guilty if you don’t comply. The underlying gross factor is that you end up complicit in this dynamic by giving the manipulator what they seeks to take from you. FOG is the shit show trifecta that you will find in any manipulative scenario if you take the time to examine the dynamics at play in the relationships you suspect fall into this category.
Forward goes on to describe the types of manipulators and how each shows up with their own version of FOG.
The Punisher: Seeks a one-sided balance of power and will override you and your desires.
The Self-Punisher: If they don’t get what they want, they will be upset and threaten to mess up their own lives.
The Sufferer: If you don’t give in to what they want, their subsequent suffering is your fault.
The Tantalizer: Make it clear that you will get the prize they offer if you do what they demand.
In each of these archetypes, control is the ultimate goal. The manipulator doesn’t care if the way they gain control is through threat or reward. Here are examples of how each of these operates in the context of the archetypes.
Punisher: Skip the happy hour with your friends or I will hurt you.
Self-punisher: Skip the happy hour with your friends or I will hurt myself.
Sufferer: Skip the happy hour with your friends. I’m so hurt that I wasn’t invited. If you go, it will be your fault that I’m upset and unhappy.
Tantalizer: Skip the happy hour with your friends and I’ll take you to a fancy dinner instead. They’re not good enough for you, anyway.
The reason the person is manipulating you may or may not feel significant to you. What the manipulator demands isn’t the point; the way in which they demand it is. By giving in to demands large and small, you establish a pattern in which the manipulator continues to use FOG to get their way, and over time their demands may escalate from the insignificant to the highly consequential. This is one slippery slope you want to stay far away from.
At times, obligation may be used in ways that don’t quite add up to toxicity but are designed to take advantage of you. A friend may appeal to your sense of duty when they ask you to do something that may be inconvenient for you. They know that, because you are a “good friend,” you may feel obligated to do their bidding. Is there a person in your life who consistently asks for favors? The person who thinks it’s your job to take them to the airport because they don’t want to pay for a ride? Or maybe it’s letting their dog out three times a day for five days while they go on vacation. How can you say no when you live nearby and this person is your friend? Do you ask people for things like this? Sure, maybe sometimes. But not all the time. You can park your car at the airport, catch an Uber, board the dog, or pay a neighborhood kid to help you out. When someone in your life consistently comes to you to make their life easier, pay attention to where else in your relationship elements of manipulation are showing up. When people expect you to do whatever is easiest for them with no consideration for what that means for you, you are in an exchange where you’ve been taught to obey the sense of obligation rather than honoring what you really want to say or do. The person asking you knows this and uses it against you to achieve their own ends.
Another way that toxic people engage you in the cycle of manipulation is referred to as gaslighting: a form of psychological manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. The term originated from the 1944 film Gaslight, in which a husband makes his wife believe she has lost her sanity because only she can see the flickering of the gaslights, when in fact he is the one causing the flickering while denying he can see what she sees. Gaslighters deny, lie, project, confuse, and ultimately wear you down in their pursuit of manipulation (Sarkis, Stephanie. “11 Warning Signs of Gaslighting.” Psychology Today. www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201701/11-warning-signs-gaslighting).
Gaslighting can be exhausting for the person on the receiving end. To be told repeatedly that what you have seen or heard didn’t happen, happened another way, or that your perception of what happened is invalid wears on you, making you question yourself rather than stand firmly in your conviction that you do, indeed, know what you experienced. Gaslighters deny and lie regarding circumstances significant and mundane; the specific subject is of no consequence. It can be tempting to dismiss denials regarding matters that don’t have dire meaning or consequences—but this is precisely when you should be questioning the motive behind the denials. Why deny when not much is at stake and it would be easier in the long run to tell the truth? The allure of logic is strong, but you cannot employ it to understand the operating mode of one who manipulates. It is not logical! It is meant to impact you from an emotional perspective, and emotions aren’t governed by logic. You can’t explain it. Don’t insist on understanding why; instead, accept what this person has shown you about who they are.
In addition to the use of FOG and gaslighting, there are several other common behaviors typical of toxic interactions that may be overt or covert.
•Non-apologies. Beware the person who cannot express true regret. Statements like “I apologize,” “I’m sorry you feel that way,” and “I’m sorry, but—” are not true apologies. A real apology sounds sincere and more like, “I’m sorry I hurt you. It wasn’t my intention and I will be more aware of my words and actions next time.”
•Refusal to accept responsibility. Toxic people are never wrong, which is why they can’t truly apologize. Look for blame-shifting and victim mindset, where they either look to have someone else take the fall or turn themselves into the wronged party in any given situation.
•Controlling behavior. This may be the single most obvious way that toxicity shows up in intimate relationships. Controllers expect you to comply with their rules. Their insecurity demands that they know where you are, what you’re doing, whom you hang out with, why you’re going, and ultimately decide whether or not you have permission to do what you wish to, based on whether they perceive a threat to their position in the who/what/were/why in question.
•Projection. People with toxic tendencies tend to project their own shortcomings by attributing them to others. For example, someone who talks down to people may accuse others of being condescending. Like the refusal to accept responsibility, it seeks to shift blame outward and away from the manipulator.
•Lack of empathy. The experience of the toxic person is paramount. No one else has suffered as much as they have; therefore, they don’t have compassion for others. This can show up as competing for pain: where you might say “I was so sick last weekend,” they will one-up you with stories of their own terrible illness and how they suffered more than you did. Basically, they must be the most anything so you get no compassion for what you’ve experienced.
•Lack of interest in you personally. You can engage in long one-sided conversations in which the toxic person talks incessantly about themselves and may not even remember to ask you how you’re doing. If they do remember, you may notice they don’t really listen, or they jump right back into what they want to talk about instead of what’s
