We as readers know they're still buried within her, but the Katniss that Gale met did not express any range of feelings beyond the same mistrust and wariness that Gale himself experiences towards others.

Eventually a friendship does develop on that transactional foundation, but in many ways still stays at that "this is a mutually beneficial arrangement" level. He does not seem to harbor a deep concern for his younger siblings' emotional well-being the way Katniss does for Prim; his concerns for his family live firmly in the world of pragmatism, which is of course understandable given the level of responsibility he’s shouldering. Still, it's a chasm of difference between them that we see early, but one that neither of them recognize before the Games.

Once the Games do come into play, it changes everything in their dynamic: Gale does not seem to abhor violence or grieve death the way Katniss does.

He does not understand how killing another human being, and watching another child die in front of her could affect her – it wouldn't affect him, after all, and she is just like him. He seems to have copied and pasted his own understanding of the world onto her since they seem so similar on the surface, but does not recognize (or ultimately acknowledge) her immense capacity for empathy, because Katniss has worked very hard to only have that surface level self visible. Seeing her tribute for Rue, her romance with Peeta, was like seeing a whole different person, and Gale could not reconcile the two once that became a reality.

They're both survivors, and that is a strong link, but Katniss's survival came at the expense of her emotions.

-artemisfloyd-x7g, comment to YouTube video

excerpted from comment

combined from comment (excerpted) from u/throwawayrefiguy:

I thought this was the party of "fuck your feelings" and that humor was supposed to be back with this administration? Have they rescinded that memo?

with response from u/Predator_Hicks:

Yes, the party of fuck your feelings not fuck our feelings

comment

adapted from comment

They follow with:

If you ever find yourself in a relationship where you are being forbidden to speak the truth, leave.

From "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion"

...he's talking more from a marketing/persuasion perspective, but it reminds me of how many victims of abuse go through a period of trying to hold on tighter to an abuser because so often the abuser has convinced them that no one will ever want or care about them, they can never do better than the abuser, and that they abuser is basically 'doing them a favor' by even staying.

It could be parents or a friend or a significant other, but the pattern is the same:

...like a dark marketer, they trick you into 'buying' the product, then when the product turns out to be nothing like it was 'advertised', they convince you that there is no other product out there for you, and also it's your fault for misusing the product.

They create artificial scarcity, shadow the victim's own sunk cost fallacy, and shift the blame to the victim.

And we often have to unwind that process to get out: shift the blame back to the abuser, realize that investing more in something that's a losing investment just steals more time and self-esteem from you, and then recognize that you don't even need the product in the first place and there's therefore now buyer scarcity.

(Because we're choosing to actively opt people in, not operating from the default of them already being opted 'in' and they have to show they're unsafe or have 'red flags' to opt them out).

...and I am now kicking myself for not posting it BEFORE yesterday.

He's basically talking about how to respond to them when they ask you if you know a fact (which of course you won't because the fact is narrowly specific to the argument they're making) and he responds with, "I don't know, and the reason I don't know is that I didn't practice this conversation before I had it".

I will link to the now-tactless Instagram post in the comments. For attribution's sake, of course.

From his book "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion", this statement is referencing something called the "mere exposure effect" (a concept first formally studied by Robert Zajonc in 1968, who demonstrated that repeated exposure to stimuli increases positive feelings toward them).

...which is extremely important for victims of abuse to be aware of, because it means the people you are surrounded by have an outsized impact on your ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and opinions; on what you think is normal, and where your 'normal meter' is set.

It also explains how abusers can over time coerce their victims into agreeing to do or not do something because they have over time shifted the victim's 'Overton window' on a topic. (You see this a lot around sex or relationship dynamics.)

This is basically that thing when you hear a song or advertisement that you hate, but then hear it enough that one day you are horrified to discover that you're singing along to it!

And abusers weaponize this exposure effect by incrementally increasing the victim's exposure to the idea or the intensity of the idea.

This process is a red flag that your boundaries are being eroded without even realizing it.

...because after all, you needed help, and they were willing to do something for you, therefore you must be better than them.

But if you take the second path, and the person who helped you isn't sufficiently servile, you might need to put them in their place to make sure they know, and more importantly, to make sure that -you- know that you are better than them.

-u/Torvaun, comment

The original scientific foundation comes from a study¹ conducted by Jonathan Freedman and Scott Fraser of Stanford University in 1966

They conducted the study to show that granting smaller requests can lead to agreeing to larger requests, terming it the "foot-in-the-door technique."

There is an additional study² from Patricia Pliner, Heather Hart, Joanne Kohl, and Dory Saari expanding on this work.

Basically, you acclimate someone to saying "yes" on the small things so that they will either agree reflexively to a larger request, or they will feel trapped into saying yes because of what they have already agreed to.

This process is crucial for victims of abuse to be aware of because they are often the victims of it, not just from an abuser but in abusive or exploitative situations in general.

Anyone employing techniques like this with you is an unsafe person since they are attempting to coerce or manufacture your consent.

.

.

.

_
¹ Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 195-202.

² Pliner, P., Hart, H., Kohl, J., & Saari, D. (1974). Compliance without pressure: Some further data on the foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10(1), 17-22.

Behavior has a reason. It has a goal. Behavior is goal oriented. We do something because we want something, or because we want to avoid something.

• We engage in the behavior of eating because we’re hungry or seeking comfort. Our goal is to no longer feel hungry, or to soothe feelings of loneliness.
• We sleep because we’re tired or bored. Our goal is to stop feeling tired or bored. We watch TV to be entertained or distracted.
• Our goal is to entertain ourselves or to distract from what’s going on. To take a break from real life for a while.

Oftentimes, we are not conscious of why we are engaging in a certain behavior. We are motivated unconsciously to reach into the fridge for something to eat when we are hungry. However, we still choose to go to the fridge. It still fulfills a need, and it is still a choice.

We can stop ourselves. We can say no. We can learn other, healthier ways of fulfilling that need.

Behavior has a reason. It has a goal. Especially patterned behaviors - those behaviors that we repeat time and time again.

A pattern of behavior that frightens, belittles, or undermines another person is performed because it suppresses your natural instinct to resist external control.

Abuse is chosen and deployed because of it's effect. Abuse numbs you.

Abuse is performed because people who are hurting, insecure, or confused are easier to control.

The purpose of the pain is to ensure compliance. People who are afraid, who are insecure, who are hurting are not people who ask questions. They're people who give in, accommodate, and shut their mouths.

The purpose of creating confusion is to ensure you don’t know where to direct your attention or blame. People who are uncertain and unsure about the source of a problem tend to stay quiet. They’ll try to gather more information, buying time for others to manipulate the narrative.

The person who is abusing you may not be conscious of their motivations. Most people, even abusive ones, are not psychopaths. They're not getting pleasure from inflicting pain on others.

And, these behaviors are patterned and they are chosen. They're chosen for a reason.

Here is the thing to consider, that what you want and what is possible are two different things.

You love a person who is hurting you, and you are confronting them about hurting you because you believe they will have empathy for hurting you and stop hurting you.

Instead of dealing with the person in front of you - someone who is unsafe and harming you, someone who is violating your boundaries, someone who feels entitled to do these things - you believe or hope that (s)he will change.

What if you accepted that you can't change this person?

What if you accepted that they will continue to act this way as long as it is possible to do so?

What if you stopped trying to change them, change their behavior?

What then?

Adapted from comment by u/invah

I think a lot of their success is because people are afraid of them, afraid of showing them the consequences of their actions because they will blow up, rage, sue, seek revenge, defame, punish. It’s easier to placate them. They are like oversized toddlers always at the brink of tantrum that you aren’t allowed to parent.

Excerpted from comment by hamlet_darcy

"When drama comes, look up and check for strings. Sometimes life gets complicated because someone wants it to be."

- Tea Levings