Harassment, Slander, and Other Distractions
Another wave of harassment and slander has come my way. Long story short: one very angry individual sent my assistant a flurry of vicious emails expressing their disapproval of me, and posted numerous critical comments on my blog (which have since been removed). It appears they have also made an effort to contact others they believe I am affiliated with to voice their opinion of me.
When something so extraordinarily negative occurs, the anxiety it induces is naturally quite distracting. But I can’t allow events beyond my control to consume my life.
“You have to find a way to become kind of Zen about it all,”
my angel of a partner has told me more than once since I entered the public arena. This is great advice, but easier said than done. The way my mind works, sometimes I need to map out the breadth and depth of numerous relevant concepts in order to make peace with distressing situations. Toward that end, here are the concepts and principles that are helping me stay centered.
Know your priorities and practice emotion regulation accordingly
“If it costs you your peace, it’s too expensive.”
-Paulo Coehlo
Wellbeing is a hard-won top priority in my personal values hierarchy. Protecting my priorities and honoring my values therefore means I should attend to the needs of my physical and mental health; important relationships; and the resources that support my desired way of life. I would recommend this to anyone.
When something throws off my sense of peace, wellbeing takes a blow, and my emotions become dysregulated. This has a cascading negative effect through all areas of my life. I cannot afford to let that happen, so I cultivate emotion regulation skills.
Emotion regulation requires an inner locus of control: a sense that I — not other people, nor my external environment or other circumstances — am the one that determines how I feel, see the world, interpret and respond to events, and conduct my affairs.
Knowing how you want to generally approach and feel about life is like finding north on a compass and determining the direction of your destination. Along the way, you may encounter various roadblocks, obstacles, and detours, as well as interesting roadside attractions and side trails, and perhaps some unexpected travel companions. You may get a flat tire, or a sprained ankle, or have to camp somewhere for the night that you weren’t expecting to find yourself. But you know where you’re going; can usually approximate whether you are heading in that direction; and will course-correct as necessary in order to remain on track.
In dealing with my most recent unexpected obstacles, it has been helpful to remember that I want to feel at ease, and to live my life with grace, dignity, peace, wellbeing, and vitality. Knowing these general intentions helps guide my next steps to ensure I am continuing to move in the desired direction.
Draw on personal rules of engagement and exercise healthy discernment
Establish, maintain, and resolve to strengthen an unwavering sense of dignity that governs how you will treat yourself and others, regardless of circumstances.
In living in accordance with my value of dignity, I strive to avoid unscrupulous behaviors such as cognitive distortions, logical fallacies, verbal abuse, or manipulation tactics. I do not attack other people, name-call, make negative character over-generalizations, engage in smear campaigns, single people out, threaten, demand, blackmail, distort, hold hostage, shift goalposts, make veiled insinuations or accusations, rapidly escalate situations before I have all the information, or undermine anyone else’s aspirations.
I believe that if there is something I need to accomplish interpersonally, there are more effective and gracious ways to go about attempting those changes. I try to understand others through an insightful and compassionate lens, and use nonviolent communication skills.
If that is not possible, I may step away and determine that the situation is one of many that is beyond my control, then focus my efforts on where I can be effective. We can’t always have what we want, or get others to do our bidding. Sometimes we have to just step away and move on, even if that means living with the uncertainty of what others might do or think of us.
I am not perfect, and I’m sure I have strayed from each of these principles many times before. I do try to self-correct and mature over time. If someone were to respectfully point out a way in which I could have done something better, I would like to believe that I would make a sincere effort to reflect on their feedback, and apologize or clarify when and where I’ve determined it seems appropriate after reflecting.
However, my willingness to consider criticism is not a guarantee that I will agree with it, or do exactly what my critic asks of me. I may, in the end, simply have differing perspectives and priorities. Or, I may not have the emotional capacity to subject myself to too much scrutiny, especially considering what else might be happening in my world at the time. We all have our limits.
Furthermore, we all have to have boundaries to protect ourselves. We cannot be open to any and all kinds of criticism, regardless of who it is coming from or how it is presented. That would open us up to being hurt and taken advantage of. So it’s important to…
Know what constructive and non-constructive criticism look like. Have principles for dealing with each.
Constructive criticism is gracious and earnest, respecting the dignity and sovereignty of the subject being criticized. It is usually presented as an offering or as a request that the subject listen, not a demand or a threat.
The subject being criticized is allowed the opportunity to consent to receiving the feedback or not, while the critic is free to have their boundaries and clarify reasonable consequences of not taking the feedback into consideration. For instance, “this hurt me, and if you won’t take the time to hear me out, I might not want to be friends anymore.” Or, “you made a mistake that cost our company money, and the consequence of not correcting this mistake would be losing your job.”
Specifying appropriate consequences is different from making threats: “I’m going to tell everyone what a terrible friend you are,” or “you’ll never work in this town again.” Threats like these are far less frequently necessary than they are manipulative and overblown.
Constructive criticism often seeks to understand the subject’s behavior and what might be driving it. It is charitable, avoiding making negative assumptions or over-generalizations about the subject’s motives or character. Rather, it offers the benefit of the doubt that others mean well and are capable of improving.
Constructive criticism is specific, addressing the subject’s actions in a particular context and proposing solutions that would more effectively meet their aims. It is therefore manageable, digestible and actionable.
Non-constructive criticism lacks grace, earnestness, and respect. It is not a request, but a demand. It does not seek to understand, nor does it offer the benefit of the doubt; it casts the subject’s entire character and motives in a negative light.
Non-constructive criticism is not concrete, specific, actionable, or solution-oriented. The critic neglects to offer any vision of a mutually agreeable resolution, and in fact may be deliberately or unintentionally impossible to please. Their aim may be simply to vent their anger, or to hurt, frighten, or diminish the other person.
A mature response to constructive criticism involves a spirit of general openness and willingness to contemplate, whereas an appropriate response to non-constructive criticism is to establish boundaries and distance oneself from the critic.
Be proactive, not reactive. Defense is the first offense.
When being attacked, the natural reaction is to get defensive, but that just adds fuel to the fire. Getting defensive consumes a lot of emotional energy, and plays into the idea that there is indeed something we have to prove, thus diminishing our confidence and resolve. Better to remember: to the best of my knowledge at this time, I have done nothing wrong, I am not on trial, and I have nothing to prove.
Reacting is a sign we have lost our balance. When we are centered, strong, and peaceful, we are proactive — focusing our efforts on what we want to create, not on what someone else is doing.
At times like this, it can help to have ways to revisit our intentions, overarching goals, and the steps we have already planned to take to help us get there. People who know and love us can help by reflecting who we are, where we are going, what matters to us, and how insignificant these anxiety-provoking distractions are relative to the bigger picture of our lives.
Discern character as needed. Disengage from undesirable characters.
Many good-hearted people are afraid of being judgmental, but discernment is a friend. People’s behaviors can provide us a lot of information as to whether we share similar values, goals, and approaches. Verbal abuse and emotional manipulation indicate that our values are not in alignment, and any attempts to communicate are likely to be fruitless if not altogether counterproductive.
Sometimes it helps to ask, “would I ever treat someone that way?” Or, “have I ever seen someone act that way toward someone else and thought they were right to do so?” Or, “what would someone have to do in order to justifiably warrant this kind of reaction from a reasonable person? Have I done something that bad? Would people I trust and respect agree that this treatment of me is appropriate?” Or, “if I had an issue with someone that was similar to the issue this person is having with me, how would I approach them about it?”
While it’s important to be cautious about diagnosing others, some behaviors are nearly dead give-aways that we are dealing with someone with a personality disorder. For instance, the person who targeted me recently showed numerous warning signs of Borderline Personality Disorder, including splitting and rapid swings from idealization to devaluation. While people with BPD deserve understanding and support, when they lash out cruelly without insight, we have to protect ourselves first, and usually that means stepping away.
Argue principles, not people. Avoid engaging with ad hominem attacks.
When I show up to the public forum and engage via blogging and social media, I am here to play a role in solving problems we face collectively. A vast number of fellow humans each play their own roles, too. We come together with kindred spirits around shared values and principles, and debate which strategies we believe might be most productive toward our goals.
If we are to be effective, we must also seek common ground with those we disagree with. Sometimes this means zooming out and identifying universal principles. Perhaps we can all agree that children need to be protected, for instance. Finding this place of agreement is a necessary foundation before any productive discussion can be had about our differing views on how to best go about protecting children.
I find myself developing a genuine fondness for some fellow humans I find myself alongside at this moment in time. I’ve befriended people from around the world and stayed up late into the evening engaged in riveting conversations, sometimes holding back from telling people I’ve never met face-to-face, “I love you guys!”
But naturally, we all find some personalities more likable than others. And were I to actually meet my online mutuals in some different “real world” context, some of us might not get along. Perhaps we can philosophize swimmingly on adolescent development over group audio calls at 10pm. But would we enjoy the same music on a long car ride, or keep pace with each other on a hike? (Do they even enjoy hiking? What kind of monster doesn’t enjoy hiking?!) Who knows. The point is, it’s not important. We’re here to connect around what brings us together, and leave the rest alone.
When it comes to making friends, interpersonal chemistry is important. But when it comes to collaboratively discussing ideas and attempting to solve problems with fellow humans, my baseline for personality compatibility is low. We don’t need to enjoy each other, only to tolerate each other. If for some reason either of us finds the other’s personality so grating that we cannot stand being in the same physical or virtual room together, then someone needs to leave. But barring such extremes, if we’re gathering to explore ideas or solve problems, it doesn’t really matter how much we like each other. We respect and cooperate with one another; that is enough.
The recent attacks on my character come across as a distraction from real problem-solving. I never said I was perfect, and I don’t need this person, or anyone in particular, to like me. I have the love and support I need to get by; besides, no one can please everyone. The way I see it, we would all do best to accept the inevitable fact that some people are bound to find our unique quirks, vibe, or tone unappealing; this is beyond our control, and therefore shouldn’t consume too much of our attention. The way I see it, people who dislike me just aren’t meant to be my friends, clients, or audience. They’re meant to connect with others who are more their style. When we have to cross paths, we will keep it brief and polite. That’s what adults do.
The world is a huge place. In our lifetime, the number of people we will truly connect with or learn from in any significant manner is infinitesimal compared to the number of humans on the planet. I cannot see a sound argument for why it is a good use of anyone’s time and energy to fixate their attention on people they find despicable.
So, if I can tolerate someone’s personality, and have no reason to assume they are not acting in good faith, I will treat them with basic courtesy and engage with them about ideas that matter to us, until doing so ceases to be productive, at which point we will respectfully part ways. This is how I expect to be treated as well.
Anyone who engages in ad hominem attacks is playing by a different set of rules than I am. As most of us should have ideally learned by the end of elementary school, if you can’t agree on a shared set of rules, then you shouldn’t play together.
Familiarize yourself with common manipulation tactics and logical fallacies.
Ad hominem attacks are but one of many logical fallacies, cognitive distortions, and manipulation tactics. In this situation, I also observed straw-manning (the person misrepresented my views and mis-quoted me), projection (they made inaccurate assumptions about my motives), black-and-white thinking (their way = right, my way = wrong), fortune telling & catastrophizing (my way = bound to fail horrendously), triangulation and splitting (me = evil, some other party = good).
It can be helpful for the sake of our own sanity to be able to recognize these tactics and fallacies for what they are. I like these resources on cognitive biases from YourBias.is, and this article by Shahida Arabi on manipulation tactics.
Recognizing these tactics and fallacies at work doesn’t mean we diagnose, label, or accuse others. We certainly don’t use these labels to fight back, insult, or gain the upper hand. We simply make mental notes, observe, proceed with caution, and disengage when necessary.
Don’t get lost in the FOG (Fear, Obligation and Guilt)
Fear, obligation and guilt are emotions that can powerfully drive behavior. As such, they are excellent tools for manipulating people, for those who seek to do so.
Whenever a given person makes you feel a strong sense of fear, obligation, and guilt, this may be a clue that they are emotionally manipulating you. To find your way out of the fog, ask yourself if you have really done anything to warrant feeling so fearful, obligated, or guilty. Seek outside perspectives from trusted sources if needed.
This person who attacked me recently attempted to trigger fear by making veiled threats and insinuations. They also seemed to be looking for any possible insecurity I might have about myself or any aspect of my life by projecting a heap of accusations at me, like throwing spaghetti at a wall to see what sticks. This person had no possible way of knowing whether or not there was any truth in the many things they made up about me, but it is likely they hoped that I did actually feel fear or shame about some of those things, because if I did, their words would have really hurt, and it seems that hurting me is what this person wanted.
Skilled manipulators have learned to seek out people’s deepest insecurities beneath their greatest strengths. This seems counter-intuitive to a naive observer: who would try to make an exceptionally attractive person feel ugly, an impressively intelligent person feel stupid, a hard-working person feel lazy, or a generous person feel selfish? Who would fall for that? Why not go for people’s actual weaknesses? But manipulative people understand that we often work hardest at the things we are most insecure about, and that what we care deeply about indicates where we are most vulnerable. So they tell their targets they’re bad at the thing they excel at, and even if anyone else would see that the opposite is true, the victim might actually believe them — and feel far more deeply hurt than they would if their attacker had pointed out a flaw they care less about.
I have learned this from observing how manipulative people have treated my friends and clients, and from personal experience as abusers have, in the past, tended to go after my areas of strength. Among other things, emotionally abusive people have insulted my communication skills and my compassion for others — traits that most non-abusive outside observers would highlight as some of my finest qualities. In this case, my recent attacker focused their insults on my talent as a writer, my ability to help people with useful advice, my concern for protecting youth, the legitimacy of my intellect, and the earnestness of my motives. Presumably, they saw that these are life domains that I pour a lot of effort into, and therefore may harbor some deep-seated insecurities about, even if other people find me impressive in these departments. They then used the fear-spaghetti-throwing tactic, insulting from several different angles anything they had reason to believe I cared about.
My critic also attempted to trigger obligation by baiting me to engage, while also being impossible to please, thus setting up a trap that, if I fell for it, would leave me endlessly at their disposal, working harder and harder as the goalposts kept shifting. They insinuated that I wasn’t doing enough to help, my strategies were off, my motives were corrupt… or, worse, that I was actively harming people.
They also attempted to trigger guilt by bringing in the subject of money, which for many people is laden with guilt. Their assumptions about my financial means and motives were too wildly off-base to have any power to hook me; claiming, for instance, that I am profiting off of a podcast that hasn’t even launched yet, is plainly absurd. However, that is beside the point. I have as much of a right to make a living and pursue my dreams as anyone else. So, too, do we all have our rights to privacy, dignity and sovereignty. So no matter how my finances evolve over time, I will never owe an explanation about them to someone with a vendetta against me.
Perfectionism, an abuse history, and a strong inner critic can leave a person especially vulnerable to being manipulated by the FOG. I have all those traits, and I’ve been lost in the FOG plenty of times before. Fortunately, I learned to see my way out of it, and now I help others find their way out, too.
Don’t respond to straw-man arguments
Straw-manning is a common emotional abuse tactic in which the manipulator deliberately misrepresents their target’s point of view so as to make it easier to tear down.
If someone misconstrues your perspective and then argues with the “straw man” effigy of your perspective that they have built just to burn down, and they have displayed a pattern of behavior that gives you reason to believe they are not making an earnest effort to understand what you really mean, it is best to stand back and let them argue with themselves. This thing they are arguing with is, after all, not you, but a figment of their own imagination. They are simply attempting to bait you into a bad faith argument that will not lead toward the mutual understanding and respectful resolution you would seek.
As long as they misrepresent you, they have not touched you yet; they are trying to gain access to you. If you engage, though, you implicitly endorse their misrepresentation of you. Then you take on the projection and get wrapped up in the drama.
Instead, protect your inner sense of knowing your own mind. Conserve your energy for people who will make a good faith effort to understand you and to represent your viewpoints fairly.
Use cognitive behavioral therapy tools to manage anxiety
Watch out for the negativity bias
Our minds have a tendency to notice the bad more than the good. The negativity bias has helped us stay attuned to danger cues so as to further our survival, but its value often comes with a cost to our mood.
I might receive words of encouragement from thirty different people and yet find myself fixating on memories of the one person who said something unkind. I might have had many successes and yet catastrophize about one potential failure. The human mind just works that way, and for some of us more than others.
Neuroticism — the tendency toward anxiety and depression — tends to be a fairly stable personality trait across the lifespan, and is highly influenced by genetics and upbringing. The higher one’s level of neuroticism, the stronger the negativity bias.
With my family history and genetic predisposition to depression and anxiety, as well as a significant degree of trauma in my past, I do not take my hard-earned optimism for granted. It takes conscious effort to counterbalance the negativity bias by focusing on all there is to be grateful for, and recalling what gives us comfort and encouragement. Exercise, psychotherapy, mindfulness practices, gratitude journaling, healthy relationships, fulfilling hobbies, good nutrition, and for some people, antidepressants, can all aid neuroplasticity and support efforts to cultivate a more positive and relaxed disposition.
Beware the spotlight effect
You know that feeling like you are under a spotlight, or perhaps a microscope? Perhaps you have felt a sense that all of your flaws are on display and exposed to scrutiny. You feel as though everyone is watching you; perhaps it seems they even know what you are thinking.
The spotlight effect is another common cognitive distortion that we all experience to some degree or another from time to time — all the more for those who are higher in neuroticism, or who have a generalized or social anxiety disorder. Again, it’s a cognitive error we need to correct for.
Sometimes it’s enough just to observe the thought pattern and put a label on it: “oh, that’s the spotlight effect again.” We might also reassure ourselves, “everyone feels that way from time to time. But don’t worry, most people are too busy worrying about themselves to worry about you.” Or, “if anyone is that busy scrutinating your every flaw, maybe they’re the one who’s got a problem; that’s a creepy thing for them to do.”
Sometimes it is appropriate turn toward a friend, loved one, therapist, or other trusted companion to help ground our sense of reality with an outside perspective. “Was that joke out of line? Did she look offended to you?” Or, “do you think anyone noticed that I wore the same outfit two days in a row?” It’s important not to over-rely on outside perspectives, but we can approach trusted others with a humble request to engage their support in correcting for our negative mental filters.
When I am being attacked by one person, my natural human neuroticism would compel me to believe that every possible onlooker has joined my critic in scrutinizing my character. Recognizing the spotlight effect for what it is helps me correct for that cognitive error. The truth is, most people spend far more time worrying about themselves and how they are seen than they could ever spend analyzing my flaws. And anyone who is spending that much energy identifying the worst ways they could possibly interpret my every move? Well, maybe they’re the one with the problem. I prefer to live and let live. When someone bothers or confuses me, I try to interpret their behavior in more charitable, compassionate, and insightful ways. I choose the company of those who would treat me similarly.
Establish helpful visualizations, metaphors, and other ways of thinking
One image I find useful is that of the projection screen. I am standing behind the screen, untouched, while a variety of words and images are projected onto the screen. Some of those words are my own; some are the messages people associate with me, which may be distorted by their own imperfect ways of thinking and remembering, or their assumptions about what I might have meant. Some of those images reflect parts of me, from various angles. Some of them are blurry, or dim, or distorted… or perhaps they are not me at all, but someone I remind the viewer of.
What people see on the screen resembles me in myriad ways and to varying degrees, but it is not me. At best, it is a fairly accurate collection of aspects of my personality and public creative expression. At worst, it has very little to do with me at all. But none of it is me, and it does not touch me. The whole of who I am as a person is too complex to be known to more than a small handful of people, and I choose that handful carefully. I am fortunate to be known by people who see the best in me.
This visualization helps me remain centered and detached from what others might have to say about “me.”
Use decatastrophizing tools
When another person intimidates us into fear, it is natural for the mind spiral into a cascade of catastrophic worries and what-if’s. Decatastrophizing is a practical cognitive behavioral therapy tool that helps us break down our worries step by step and address them in a rational manner to soothe our anxiety.
When someone makes threats against things as important to me as my career and reputation, decatastrophizing helps me ask helpful questions, such as: how likely is this to occur? If it did happen, how bad would it be? What would the worst possible outcome be, and could I live through that? What would be the next steps in dealing with the problem? Have I dealt with problems like this in the past? Who or what might help me get through it? What resources and knowledge would support me? What would a friend say to me, or what would I say to a friend in this situation?
In this case, the worst case scenarios I fear involve damage to my career and reputation, so it’s helpful for me to review what I know about that.
If this person were to complain to my licensing board, what do I know about the board’s processes for handling complaints? Have I broken any legal or ethical codes? How would I get through the investigation process? How likely is it that I would be found guilty of any violations? If I were found guilty of anything, what could it be, and what type of sanction might the board impose? How long might the whole process take, and how much money could it cost? Do I have the social and financial resources to get through those hurdles if it comes to it? Do I have tools for managing the stress and uncertainty?
In the end, the answers to these questions can be roughly summarized as: nothing is likely to happen, but if something does happen, it will take several months or years in court and a few thousand dollars. If there are any sanctions, they might be things such as working with a supervisor or taking a course, which I could get through with minor inconvenience and perhaps some frustration or chagrin. But I have love, support, money, and psychological resources to see me through those problems if I do have to face them.
As far as threats to my reputation go, again, I can assess the likeliness and severity of any threats. How much power could one person have to destroy my reputation? Who would listen and take those attacks on my character seriously, siding with the attacker? Is their vicious word salad more powerful than my entire body of work? If my attacker mis-quotes and misrepresents me, are people who are already familiar with my work likely to believe that I said and did those things? Would people who don’t know who I am care enough to pay attention to the allegations? If there are any people who would lose respect for me, how important are those people to me? Can I get by without them? Can I tolerate being disliked by some people? Have I faced this before, and will I face this again? Are there people I respect who have survived similar attacks on their reputation? How likely is it that intelligent people I know and respect, and entire institutions dedicated to common causes, could be swayed into avoiding or slandering me by one angry stranger sending them letters out of the blue? Am I likely to be able to maintain at least some important professional connections? Can I make do with those and achieve impacts that I care about even if I am not affiliated with every single institution that I share a common cause with?
In the end, the likelihood is quite small that every single individual and institution I seek professional alliance with will turn against me because of one angry person they do not know. Some people may indeed think less of me or feel more wary about becoming involved with me. Some people may not choose to investigate the issue further, look at what I actually said (I’ve been mis-quoted), or confront me directly. I may feel disappointed, frustrated, or embarrassed by the loss of their respect and affiliation, but in the end, it is beyond my control, and it only has the power to ruin my life if I hand over that power. I can continue to allow my actions to speak for themselves, and respect individuals’ sovereign freedom to make up their own minds. Finally, if it ever does truly happen that an entire community of people wholeheartedly rejects me, that may just be a sign from the universe that I am meant to be somewhere else.
When all else fails, use the legal system
At the end of the day, this person’s behavior constitutes harassment and slander, which are illegal. If I feel I must do so, I can send a cease and desist letter. If they ignore that, there are further steps I can take to use the legal system to protect myself. While I would rather not have to go that route, it’s a comfort to know that it’s there.
In closing…
This blog is not dedicated to any one particular subject. Sometimes it is simply an outlet I utilize to help myself process complex matters, and share with the world in case my process happens to be helpful to anyone else. This is one of those times.
It is possible that there will be some overlap between the people who read this article, and the ones who receive personal messages disparaging my character. If so, I hope that this helps resolve any tension and clarify any questions this may have brought up for them. But I am not counting on that being the case, and that is not the main point.
It is also probable that the person who has been fixated on me will read this article. While they have been blocked from commenting, they may decide to send more criticism to my assistant. Their behavior so far has demonstrated that they are currently dedicated to focusing intently on me as an outlet for their anger and a distraction from the rest of their life that needs tending to, and that they are determined to find the worst possible way to interpret my words and actions, so there is no point in attempting to write anything that could surpass their scrutiny. How long and to what degree they remain focused on harassing and slandering me is ultimately not within my control, although if it continues I will take legal action. If they are reading this, I do hope this helps clarify that, regardless of how offensive they find their perception of me to be, there is no use in continuing to fixate on me. My ultimate hope for them would be that they develop insight about what is driving these behaviors, seek appropriate help, and gain new tools for handling the real problems in their life, which have nothing to do with me.
My wishes for that person aside, one final principle that I think applies here is to focus on the silent majority and speak to the onlookers, rather than giving more fuel to those causing chaos. I did not write this article as a reaction to one loud person who doesn’t want to play by the same set of rules I do. I wrote it for myself, and for the larger audience that isn’t making so much noise but whose eyes and ears are open. Perhaps some of you will find something in this article helpful for your own sanity as well. If so, I wish you all the best. If not, thank you for taking the time to read anyway, and if my words are rarely helpful for you, of course, I trust you to move on to resources that are a better fit for your needs. All the best.
