drama triangle

On the Karpman Drama Triangle

| jaylazzo

This is how to play a psychological game known as the Karpman Triangle. It’s named after Stephen Karpman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karpman_drama_triangle).

Anyone playing a psychological game must enter as Persecutor, Rescuer, or Victim. They are decribed below. Two people can play this, shifting roles along the way.

Image: https://www.listeningpartnership.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Drama-Triangle-v1.jpg

Each role starts with a discount. The Persecutor discounts others’ sense of worth. The Rescuer discounts others’ ability to think for themselves and to act on their own resources. The Victim discounts his own ability to think and to solve problems.

At some point, someone switches. For example, from Victim to Persecutor.

We can now outline the Game Formula as follows:

Con + Gimmick = Response –> Switch –> Cross-Up –> Payoff

Always starts with a CON: a bait or a hook. Then follow up with a GIMMICK, i.e., weak spot or vulnerability, the button in the other that when pushed makes him buy the Con, leading to a RESPONSE.

Then the SWITCH, e.g., Victim –> Persecutor. The Switch grabs control through the use of confusion and surprise, called the CROSS UP. The switch is the essential part of the game, one might say its object: to hurt the others.

Then follows the PAYOFF, i.e., the negative emotions that everyone experiences as a result of playing the game. One might say these emotions are the object of playing the game.

Here’s an example:

Once upon a time, there lived three characters entangled in a curious dance called “The Karpman Drama Triangle.” Meet Victor, the Victim; Pam, the Persecutor; and Rachel, the Rescuer.

Victor, a sensitive soul, often found himself overwhelmed by life’s challenges. One day, he encountered Pam, a stern and critical neighbor, who constantly pointed out Victor’s perceived flaws and mistakes. Pam assumed the role of the Persecutor, placing blame and making Victor feel like the perpetual Victim.

Enter Rachel, a well-intentioned friend who couldn’t resist swooping in to rescue Victor from Pam’s harsh judgments. Rachel offered comforting words and advice, trying to shield Victor from the Persecutor’s relentless critiques. In doing so, she assumed the Rescuer role.

All of a sudden, however, Victor changed and began accusing Rachel of siding with Pam. What did Rachel say? Something to the effect that Pam’s actions were “objective observations”. Victor accused Rachel of being inconsiderate of his feelings and beliefs. As he attacked Rachel and his adrenaline flowed, he also attacked Pam, who being a strong woman didn’t give any shit. Rachel, however sought a Rescuer in Pam, who assumed that role to Rachel, now the new Victim. Everyone feels bad now.

At what point did the game start? When Victor baited Rachel. This isn’t the first time he played this game. He knows from past experience that at some point the Rescuer would point out flaws in his reasoning, using “objectivity”. He was waiting for just this point to spring the bait.

His objective? To underline the fact that everyone but him is wrong. Victor is trying to feel superior, because in truth he is so lacking in self esteem that he must play games like this to feel good, by making others feel bad. Quickly, however, he lapses back into misery as he realizes the feeling is short-lived; beside, Rachel has now distanced herself.

Psychological games are sometimes fun, but most of the time they cause much hurt. They could be a waste of time, except that they do reveal a lot about what’s going on in the minds of others.
My advice: don’t play, but if you are dragged into it, use it to get information.

But first, how you escape a game.

First, learn to spot Games. Learn to spot the Con. People like Victor are not that rare and the opening moves are similar.

Second, if you regularly participate in games it may be because you are either NOT Ok or think of others as NOT Ok; you discount as a Victim, Rescuer, or Persecutor.

Not wanting to play, and then having spotted the Con, you might either call the instigator out: “Are you playing a game?” or simply refuse further communication.

Be aware that a game player might try another game.

In the long term you might try replacing your discounts. So, instead of discounting as a Rescuer, show respect as a Teacher, who cares and respect other’s abilities while asserting your own needs. Trust that the desire to rescue Victims might come from not trusting them.

Instead of discounting as a Victim, respect yourself as a Survivor, vulnerable, but willing to ask for help, take advice, and make the needed sacrifices.

And instead of discounting as a Persecutor, show respect as a Challenger, assertive and firm, but not to punish, manipulate, shame or belittle.

Some notable players in my life.

1. Garfield. Loves the Victim role, and constantly criticizes others like a Persecutor. I avoid playing games with this guy, just give him facts and short responses, not to cut the conversation but to direct them along.
2. Amber. Perennial Rescuer, believes everyone has a problem that she could help with. I do not have the problems she claims. Disses other people at every opportunity.
3. Virginia. Normally a Challenger, extremely competent, But she occasionally explodes and turns everyone off. Highly competent professionally, but not many real friends.
4. Napoleon. Persecutor, always authoritative, dominant, critical and condescending. Hardly even smiles, is aloof from the friends he spends time with the most, but is congenial with the ones he sees occasionally. Always complaining.
5. Clark. Most of the time a Teacher, but tends to be Victim very easily. Feels himself persecuted by some people, and then becomes a Persecutor himself. The way he talks is offputting, actually. He is readily triggered, very sensitive.
6. Jack. Professionally, he knows his stuff. He is very talkative. In a table among friends you can always be sure he will try to dominate, regaling with lots of details (he has a powerful memory), with an air of authority. He likes predicates like “I told you so,” “Of course,” and similar definitive versions because he has an explanation for everything like many Rescuers. But he rarely asks genuine questions; YOU ask him the questions. I minimize social conversations with this guy. Professionally, however, very competent.
7. Steve. This guy has formal authority, but does not articulate clearly what he wants and so leaves many of his people confused. In my dealings with him he is more of a critique than a problem solver.
8. Vincent. Very smart. Always playful, and as a consequence, is not very orderly. People are complaining.
9. Augustine. This guy is losing his memory, is awkward, takes on a lot of tasks and is overwhelmed. Very balanced overall, but does not retain many details and for this reason can be tiring. A survivor.

I’m sometimes baited because of a service orientation I learned from my parents. But I’ve learned to be a little less nice, especially to Victims who find my helpfulness soothing. However, I have become more willing to trust that most people can deal with their dramas on their own.

(Q.C., 231228)

Bury your baggage under a barbell

| jaylazzo

I came down last week with an allergic attack brought on I think by a combination of heavy lifting, not taking beer afterwards, and some unknown factor. A form of bronchitis that can last for a week. It’s inconvenient, especially just before an out-of-town trip whose purpose was precisely to energize before the school year starts. So, no gym this week.

It matters somewhat, not going to gym. Why? Because it’s part of how I solve my problems. I’m not here referring to “What will I take up in college?” or “Should I move to another country?”.

I’m referring to worries, anxieties, and guilts. Like, I was anxious about my Mazda last week and how it would be inconvenient to bring it to the shop now because I needed it for this and for that, and it’s expensive, and what, and then solved half the problem by writing a short paragraph about it.

“If you write the problem down clearly, then the matter is half solved.”

Kidlin’s Law

For a big chunk of what remains, my go-to approach is to pray and to lift heavy. Praying is to tell God how much we love and trust Him. Weightlifting is to tell the world how we f*****g don’t give a s**t how anything else turns out. And it works: 9 times out of 10 my personal problems become personal opportunities after a few powerlifts. The other 1% always resolves with time, patience and cheerfulness.

Write. Pray. Lift.

Image: https://media.istockphoto.com/id/1304733510/video/silhouette-of-sportsman-lifting-barbell-in-darkness.jpg?s=640×640&k=20&c=5cGLXeHycyIcw2N9SjFU7k_er_chhyn_XKSvlcTbYOQ=

There’s this game, however, that doesn’t help. Stephen B. Karpman in his book A Game Free Life called it the drama triangle. It has the characteristics of a psychological game: roles, duplicitous communications and a payoff that’s negative. It’s a fascinating study in misery and manipulation.

The roles played out in the Karpman triangle are the Persecutor, the Rescuer, and the Victim. In a psychological game all players discount themselves and/or the others.

The Persecutor discounts others’ sense of Worth. The Rescuer discounts others’ ability to think for themselves and to act on their own resources. And the Victim discounts his own ability to think and to solve problems.

The Persecutor says “I told you so“. He’s the one with the conditionals, the judgments, and the analysis that explains what’s wrong with you and why IF you did what he told you, you would be a better person. He provides the proverbs.

The Rescuer provides the medicine. “You have a problem, HE is the solution“. Just open up to him and everything will be fine. Rescuers aren’t really interested in rescuing, but in finding sick satisfaction in knowing the Victim is really miserable.

The Victim is the one who needs rescuing (from the Rescuer) and judgment (from the Persecutor). He signals these needs through self pity and deprecation, to which the other two respond.

The three roles SWITCH. Say, two people are playing the game. It starts with one playing Victim and the other Rescuer. Somewhere in the dialogue the Victim becomes, say, the Rescuer (“No, it’s you who needs healing!”) or the Persecutor (“What qualifies you?”); the Rescuer also shifts a role.

The communication is duplicitous in the sense that they use words that of objective, rational adults, but at the back of their minds they are thinking of you as helpless or tyrannical. This is sometimes called the subtext. “What qualifies you?” sounds rational, but at the back of the Persecutor’s mind he’s really questioning your abilities, not asking for information. The real messages are hidden under some veneer of acceptability. Why? Because it is too risky to express honestly what one feels, and could cut the game and therefore the fun.

Which is ironic, because the results in a psychological game are negative outcomes or payoffs for all players. Within a few minutes or even days, a drama triangle concludes with each player getting something that validates a generally false belief about himself, others, or life. Persecutor’s payoff is “All men are idiots“, Rescuer’s is “All men are sick“, and Victim’s is “I’m sick, you’re all sick“. It’s not that we play these games to feel bad, but to validate why we feel bad.

Because a game is ultimately negative, it is best to cut it if recognized. One does this in a number of ways. Simply don’t respond to a move. Or, change the direction of negativity to positivity, e.g., “You need help“. “Yes, I think you’re right. Do you know the cellphone number of a doctor I can consult?”. Or, call it out: “I don’t know why you think I have the problems you say I have.”

Game’s over before ‘fore it even starts. Which really sucks, because those who want to play will not get the validation and attention they seek.

Let’s be clear: we all have problems. A friend of mine said that if we used the DSM-5 definitions many of us would have some mental disease or pre-mental disease at some level of virulence or another. I don’t believe there’s such a thing as mental disease, however: tell, what’s the organic lesion in bipolar disorder? I do think there are such things as BRAIN or NERVE or SPINAL cord lesions. Still, people get depressed and anxious. And everyone falls for a cognitive bias even hundreds of times a day. These aren’t diseases: they are cognitive and behavioral lapses.

But most “personal” problems, the ones we idiomatically refer to as “issues” that cause worry, guilt, or anxiety can be addressed with a change in thinking or behavior. Most are not solved by talking about them; even thinking about them often leads to overthinking about them. And if we’re not thinking about them, what do we do? Lift weights, play golf, run, make wooden toys, paint, whatever you love. I think that the rise in mental health issues over the last few years correlates with stricter laws on smoking.

A friend and I were talking about this recently. We both came from all-male elementary and high schools. Our experience was that when we had issues we resolved our differences through a fist fight, sports or, as we got older, direct confrontation while sharing an ashtray. Then it was business as usual. Another friend who was in on the conversation shared that the situation in all-female schools is different. There, girls settle their issues through psychological violence, then through secret Post-It allegations and now through cyberbullying. Best girl friends have been separated for life because of their drama.

Finally, what about problems like “Should I move to another country?”, or in the case of a friend “Should I join the Jesuits now or get my PhD first?”. These are complex problems that sports and smoking cannot resolve. Various approaches and techniques are available, including seeking the opinion of experts.

Nonetheless, even problems like these become easier and more fun to solve when we are calm. As someone I know once quipped, smoking may have actually saved millions of lives by calming the nerves of the guys who had their fingers on the nuclear button.

Peter O’Toole in Dr. Strangelove (1964), in a military conference discussing nuclear tactics. Image: https://s3.amazonaws.com/criterion-production/images/7303-6b96c31f78b7ab81c3bb7802e3655903/dr4_original.jpg

(Q.C., 230907)