對於一段關係，怎樣維持才算好？
答案是：“像愛自己一樣愛你，而不以愛的名義”。
解讀一下：
1）自己。絕對是一個正常、沒有思想過於偏差的人。
2）愛自己。比如你會珍視和朋友之間的關係，深夜赴約；你會因為對一個文案負責，熬夜到天明；你知道自己的行為，並願意為其付出對應代價。
3）平等對待別人。比如，你會深夜赴約，就不要念叨你的伴侶深夜未歸；你會熬夜，就不要指責他熬夜......對於另一半，做事說話均以一種平等的態度。
舉個例子：
有個女孩過年回家，當時買了高鐵票，他男朋友知道就說：別坐高鐵了，不舒服，我給你買機票。
女孩就說了一句：你回家是不是每次都坐飛機？
男孩說：沒有，我以前也坐高鐵，早些年還坐過綠皮的呢？
女孩說：你看，你也坐，為啥我就不可以。我選高鐵是因為，高鐵可以直達，而飛機需要中轉，我帶的行李箱很重，中轉不方便；而且高鐵平穩舒適、空氣也好，我在上面看本書或電影，時間很快，就到了，而且整個時間不會打斷。
在這裡面，女孩對自己有清晰的認知，不受影響；男孩原先的“以愛的名義”關懷，其實並沒有解決女孩真正需要的關懷。一段長久的關係裡，應該是平等的對待，而不是特殊的對待。
不管是之前的拉姆、還是現在的另一個“拉姆”或是電視劇裡的樊勝美，她們的現象，或許可以從這篇心理學文章中，找到根源。
正如文章結尾所說：一段關係中，越少平等，對煤氣燈現象的抵抗力就脆弱。The less egalitarian a relationship, the more vulnerable it is to gaslighting。
文章標題：Turn off the gaslight 關掉“煤氣燈”
什麼是煤氣燈？
“煤氣燈”指一種懷疑現實的現象，如不相信自己和自己已知的事。This reality-doubting （stop trusting ourselves and our belief in what we know） is called 'gaslighting'。
它起源於戲劇和電影，如Patrick Hamilton's 的戲劇 Gas Light (1938)。如今，電影將搖曳不定的煤氣燈隱喻為一種大師課，主要傳授一個具有侵略性的人如何去捕獲，然後慢慢削弱對方的技巧。To this day, Gaslight, a reference to the flickering gaslights featured in the drama, remains a masterclass on how one predatory partner captivates and then slowly undermines the other.
它是一個過程，而不是一個事件。It's a process of establishing and then exploiting trust and authority to achieve an endgame of control and dominance.
主要出現的地方？
1）情感剝削，讓人從裡到外的懷疑現實。（the emotional abuse inherent in doubting a person's reality with a goal of destabilising the victim.）
2）被洗腦的人群當中（ in cult members or others who seem brainwashed ），而且一旦認同和接受，就很難逃離。
3）情感關係裡面的依賴
為什麼指掌煤氣燈的人，想要這樣做，他們的動機和手段是什麼？
動機——他們有不安全感，因此需要尋求補償，來抵消這種不安全感，也就是將自己的不安全感投射到別人身上。（Gaslighters project their own insecurity onto their victims and magnify any insecurity that their victims already have.）
手段——削弱他人的安全感。weakening the resolve of the victim becomes essential
最常見的話語？
'He didn't mean anything by it, stop making such a big deal out of it.'
'Here, let me take care of it, you don't know what you are doing.'
'You're too sensitive.'
'Stop overreacting.'
'You keep imagining things.'
'That's not how it happened.'
'Your memory seems to be slipping.'
原文參見下方：
The skilled manipulator casts a shadow of doubt over everything that you feel or think. Therapy can bring the daylight in.
'He didn't mean anything by it, stop making such a big deal out of it.'
'Here, let me take care of it, you don't know what you are doing.'
'You're too sensitive.'
'Stop overreacting.'
'You keep imagining things.'
'That's not how it happened.'
'Your memory seems to be slipping.'
Such comments undermine our trust in ourselves and our belief in what we know. More than that, they trespass on our sense of identity. The more we hear such phrases, the more we stop trusting ourselves. When another person becomes a gatekeeper to our reality, then we're in a precarious spot – vulnerable to further manipulation and control. This reality-doubting is called 'gaslighting'. As a psychologist in practice, I often see my role as the person who turns off the gaslights. I work with survivors of relationships with high-conflict, antagonistic, rigid, entitled, dysregulated people. These might be their partners, parents, adult children, siblings or colleagues. Once we remove the gaslight, and the house lights come on, my clients recognise that this one difficult person in their lives was the tip of a dysfunctional iceberg.
The term gaslighting derives from theatre and film. Patrick Hamilton's play Gas Light (1938) was adapted as the British film Gaslight in 1940 and the American classic of the same name in 1944. To this day, Gaslight, a reference to the flickering gaslights featured in the drama, remains a masterclass on how one predatory partner captivates and then slowly undermines the other. The play and films introduced the term 'gaslighting' into our vernacular to refer to a specific type of manipulation – one in which a person's reality itself is hijacked by another. This can also be manifested by minimisation, deflection, denial and coercive control. The term is now ubiquitous, and we apply it not just to close relationships but also to any reality-bending that is generated by institutions, media and leaders. The genius of the films was to remind us that gaslighting is actually a grooming process, not just a singular event. It's a process of establishing and then exploiting trust and authority to achieve an endgame of control and dominance.
Traditional conceptualisations of gaslighting focus on the emotional abuse inherent in doubting a person's reality with a goal of destabilising the victim. This isn't just about the gaslighter's need for control and capitulation, but their need for consent. The ultimate 'agreement' of their victim renders a picture of the relationship to the world that looks consensual and cooperative. The impact of gaslighting is most acutely observed in cult members or others who seem brainwashed – they espouse agreement with the tenets of the cult leader, and over time it appears as though the views of the cult are their own. Once that kind of agreement and acceptance are issued, it is far more difficult for the victim to exit from the situation or relationship.
There is a menacing simplicity to the gaslighter's motivations – by and large, they appear to be motivated by power and control, which is likely a compensatory offset of their own sense of insecurity.Gaslighters project their own insecurity onto their victims and magnify any insecurity that their victims already have. To achieve this, weakening the resolve of the victim becomes essential.
Sadly, the romanticisation of dependency within a relationship also facilitates gaslighting. The gaslighter will often reassure and communicate caregiving, as in 'Let me take care of things.' The gaslighter might subtly deny the victim's abilities: 'Are you sure you can manage doing this?' Not only does the seed of doubt get
planted, it builds upon existing insecurities in the victim ('Maybe I can't manage everything, I'm really disorganised') and plays upon the childlike fantasy of someone sweeping in and making everything OK. The less egalitarian a relationship, the more vulnerable it is to gaslighting.
單詞：
trespass on 干涉；妨礙；插手
precarious /prɪˈkeəriəs/ adj.（局勢或狀態）不穩定的，不安全的，危險的
antagonistic /ænˌtæɡəˈnɪstɪk/ adj. 對立情緒的，對抗的，敵對的，敵意的
rigid /ˈrɪdʒɪd/ adj.（人）頑固的，不通融的
entitle /ɪnˈtaɪtl/ v. 使有權利，使有資格
dysfunctional /dɪsˈfʌŋkʃənl/ adj. 機能失調的，功能障礙的
flicker /ˈflɪkə(r)/ v.（燈光或火焰）閃爍，閃現，忽隱忽現，搖曳
masterclass /ˈmɑːstəˌklɑːs/ n. 大師課（由名家給優秀生講授的課，尤指音樂課）
predatory /ˈpredətəri/ adj. 掠奪性的；弱肉強食的；損人利己的
vernacular /vəˈnækjələ/ n. （尤指非官方語言的）本國語，本地語，土話，方言
deflection /dɪˈflekʃn/ n.（常指擊中某物後）突然轉向；偏斜，偏離
coercive /kəʊˈɜːsɪv/ adj. 強制的，脅迫的
ubiquitous /juːˈbɪkwɪtəs/ adj. 似乎無所不在的；十分普遍的
groom /ɡruːm/ v. 使做好準備，培養，訓練
endgame /ˈendɡeɪm/ n.（戰爭、爭論、競賽等的）最後階段
capitulate /kəˈpɪtʃəleɪt/ v. 屈服，屈從
acutely /əˈkjuːtli/ adv. 強烈地，深深地
cult /kʌlt/ n.（有極端宗教信仰的）異教團體
espouse /ɪˈspaʊz/ v. 支援，擁護，贊成（信仰、政策等）
tenet /ˈtenɪt/ n. 原則，信條，教義
menacing /ˈmenəsɪŋ/ adj. 威脅的，恐嚇的，危險的
project sth. onto sb.（不自覺地）把（自己的感覺或問題等）投射到別人身上
resolve /rɪˈzɒlv/ n. 決心；堅定的信念
play on/upon sth. 利用（感情等）
egalitarian /iˌɡælɪˈteəriən/ adj. 主張人人平等的，平等主義的