"Read this if…" you repeatedly leave conversations questioning what happened, whether your feelings are reasonable, or whether you can trust your own judgement — especially when another person keeps dismissing your concerns or changing their account of events.

Two people can remember a conversation differently. Someone may deny something because they genuinely do not recall it. They may also lie to avoid consequences. These experiences can be upsetting, but they do not automatically amount to gaslighting.

Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which someone repeatedly undermines another person's confidence in their memory, perceptions or judgement. It can happen through denial, distortion, blame and persistent attacks on credibility. Over time, the person targeted may find themselves relying increasingly on the other person to decide what is real or reasonable.

The term is widely used and sometimes stretched to cover almost any dishonest or dismissive behaviour. Understanding the distinction matters: it helps us take genuine manipulation seriously without turning every disagreement into an accusation of abuse.

What gaslighting can look like

Gaslighting often involves several behaviours that reinforce one another rather than a single unmistakable phrase.

Examples include:

• Repeatedly denying events. Someone insists that a conversation or incident never happened, even when there is strong reason to believe that it did.
• Attacking your memory or judgement. Instead of addressing what happened, they repeatedly tell you that you are confused, unstable or incapable of remembering correctly.
• Rewriting an earlier account. Their version changes when you ask questions, but they insist you are the one who keeps changing the story.
• Turning the concern against you. You raise hurtful conduct and the discussion shifts to how unreasonable, irrational or ungrateful you supposedly are for mentioning it.
• Using other people's opinions to undermine you. Someone claims that everybody agrees you are imagining things, whether or not that is true.
• Dismissing your responses as proof that you cannot be trusted. Your distress becomes their evidence that your account is unreliable.

Any one of these behaviours can happen in a difficult interaction without establishing gaslighting. Look at how they recur, how the person responds to reasonable questions and whether they gradually make it harder for you to trust your own understanding.

For a related explanation, see **Understanding Gaslighting**.

What gaslighting is not

A different memory is not automatically manipulation. Human memory is imperfect, and two people can honestly recall different parts of the same event.

Gaslighting is also not necessarily:

• Someone disagreeing with your interpretation of an event.
• A person correcting a factual error, provided they are acting in good faith.
• Constructive feedback that makes you uncomfortable.
• Someone admitting they forgot a promise or conversation.
• A disagreement that remains unresolved because neither person has enough information.
• A single lie, even a serious one, without evidence of a wider attempt to undermine your confidence in your perceptions.

A lie can still breach trust. Dismissive comments can still be cruel. A serious threat or abusive incident can require action even if it is not part of a gaslighting pattern. You do not need the label “gaslighting” to take harmful behaviour seriously.

An example of the difference

Imagine two people disagree about whether they agreed to attend a family event.

One says, “I thought we decided to stay home.” The other replies, “I remember agreeing to go. Could we check our messages?” Both might genuinely remember differently, and both are willing to examine the question.

Now imagine one repeatedly responds, “You never remember anything properly. You're making this up again. No one can trust you,” and refuses to address available evidence. If this is part of an ongoing pattern that leaves the other person doubting their own judgement, gaslighting may be a more useful description.

The difference is not whether two people disagree. It is the repeated effort or effect of discrediting one person's ability to perceive and judge their own experiences.

How repeated distortion can affect someone

When conversations repeatedly end with your memory being attacked, you may begin checking yourself more than the facts of the situation.

You might notice that you:

• Rehearse conversations in your head because you are afraid you remembered them incorrectly.
• Apologise simply to end a discussion, even when you remain uncertain what you did wrong.
• Stop raising concerns because you expect to be mocked or dismissed.
• Ask other people to confirm ordinary events that you previously felt confident remembering.
• Become reluctant to make decisions without the other person's reassurance.
• Find yourself defending your sanity or credibility instead of discussing the original concern.

These experiences are not a diagnostic checklist. Anxiety, stress and other circumstances can also affect memory and confidence. What matters is whether another person's recurring behaviour is contributing to that loss of confidence or limiting your choices.

Specialist domestic-abuse guidance describes gaslighting as a way psychological abuse can reinforce power and control. It can occur without physical violence.

Where it can happen

Gaslighting is commonly discussed in intimate relationships, but similar reality-distorting behaviour can arise in families, friendships, workplaces and other unequal relationships.

For example:

• At home: A family member repeatedly denies hurtful events and tells you that your recollections show something is wrong with you.
• In a friendship: Someone repeatedly changes the account of a shared incident and persuades others to question your honesty rather than consider what happened.
• At work: A person in authority repeatedly denies instructions they gave, then uses the resulting confusion to undermine an employee's competence.

These are illustrative examples, not automatic findings of gaslighting. Workplace misconduct, family conflict, bullying and coercive control have different definitions and procedures. Evaluate the behaviour in its own context rather than applying one label everywhere.

When threats, isolation, monitoring or restrictions on everyday choices accompany repeated manipulation in a domestic relationship, read **Coercive Control and Unequal Power**. South African domestic-violence law recognises emotional and psychological abuse as well as coercive and controlling behaviour, although the term gaslighting is not itself a separate statutory test.

Questions that may help you reflect

Rather than using a quick online quiz to diagnose another person's intentions, consider the wider pattern:

• Can we compare memories or evidence without one person being humiliated?
• Does the other person ever acknowledge uncertainty or admit a mistake?
• When I raise a concern, do we discuss what happened, or do I repeatedly end up defending my competence or sanity?
• Are their explanations consistent, or do they change while I am blamed for noticing?
• Do I increasingly avoid asking questions because I fear the reaction?
• Am I becoming less confident in my own choices and perceptions around this person?

You may not have clear answers. You might even be wrong about some individual facts. That does not mean you must accept ridicule, intimidation or pressure to abandon reasonable concerns.

What you can do if you are worried

There is no single correct response. What is appropriate depends on the relationship, the level of risk and the support available to you.

• Seek an independent perspective. A trusted person or qualified support professional may help you think through particular interactions without deciding what your experience must mean.
• Separate observations from interpretations. For example, “The appointment was moved three times” describes an observable event; “They moved it to make me feel foolish” is an interpretation that may need more information.
• Keep records only when safe. Dates, messages or notes may help clarify a recurring pattern. But if someone monitors your phone, accounts or belongings, keeping records could expose you to retaliation. No app or password should be assumed safe in every situation.
• Avoid endless arguments about proving your memory. You do not have to obtain the other person's agreement before seeking support or setting a boundary where doing so is safe.
• Choose help suited to the situation. A trusted adult, appropriate workplace channel, counsellor or specialist abuse-support service may be relevant depending on where the behaviour occurs.

See **When Should You Ask for Help?** for broader guidance.

If there are threats, surveillance or danger at home, prioritise a personalised safety approach rather than confronting the person to prove that they are gaslighting you. Read **Early Warning Signs of Gender-Based Violence** and **Leaving Safely**. If you are in immediate danger, contact local emergency services using a safe means of communication.

If you recognise this behaviour in yourself

Perhaps you have denied events to avoid responsibility, repeatedly told someone they are imagining things, or attacked their memory when they challenged your behaviour.

It may be difficult to admit that. But someone else's imperfect recollection does not give you permission to humiliate them, and your embarrassment or fear of consequences does not justify undermining their confidence.

Consider whether you can:

• Acknowledge what you do remember honestly, including uncertainty.
• Stop using insults about someone's intelligence, stability or memory to win arguments.
• Address the original concern rather than changing the subject to the other person's supposed defects.
• Accept evidence that contradicts your preferred account.
• Respect another person's boundaries and their right to seek outside advice.
• Seek professional help if denial, blame or controlling behaviour is becoming a recurring pattern.

Taking responsibility is about changing conduct consistently, not securing forgiveness or persuading someone to trust you immediately.

Final thought

You can be mistaken about something and still deserve respectful treatment. Two people can disagree about what happened without either being abusive.

But when someone repeatedly distorts events and attacks your ability to know what you experienced, that behaviour deserves attention. You need not prove every memory perfectly, or settle on a label, before asking for help.

A healthy disagreement leaves room to examine the facts. It should not require you to surrender confidence in your own judgement.

Sources

• National Domestic Violence Hotline — *What Is Gaslighting?*. Describes gaslighting techniques and how repeated manipulation can undermine confidence in one's perceptions.
• Cleveland Clinic — *What Is Gaslighting? Here's What To Do if You Think It's Happening to You* (2025). Explains common behaviours, effects and the risk of using the term too broadly.
• South African Department of Justice — *Domestic Violence*. Explains the South African framework for coercive, controlling and related abusive behaviour. This source does not define gaslighting as a separate offence.