Contrariwise,’ continued Tweedledee, ‘if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.”

Makes perfect sense to me but I should imagine it will not to you. Welcome to the logic of my world. The penchant that our kind and me exhibit for telling you that black is white and when you eventually agree (and you will no matter how ridiculous this may appear) we will tell you that it was black all along. Or orange. Or azure.

Our ability to deploy contrariwise must rank amongst one of the most confusing, infuriating and draining manipulative techniques that we possess. Well, judging by your reactions when we wheel this out it is. In all honesty, it is used so often it may as well be a default setting. No matter what you say to us we will automatically adopt a contrary position even if that contrary position appears to you as untenable and that it flies in the face of logic. We will always find ways of undermining, denying and deflecting what you are saying to us, most particularly if you are trying to make us look bad, prove we are wrong or you are challenging us in some way. We cannot allow those things to happen. We have a number of standard phrases that we will use in furtherance of this ability.

“Why must you always exaggerate?”

“No, I have never done that.”

“You are over-reacting. Again.”

“I think you will find that you are being sensitive, I did not mean it the way you are interpreting it.”

“You always look at it the wrong way.”

“I didn’t say that.”

“Your memory is playing tricks on you.”

“You/he/she/the world is making things up.”

“If you say so but you have got it wrong.”

“I never do that.”

“You always have to make a scene don’t you?”

Do any of these sound familiar to you? Our capacity to be presented with evidence of something and then in the next breath deny the existence of that evidence is staggering. We will reject what you say, deny we ever said anything (even though we actually said it just ten minutes ago) and twist our position so many times we appear to turn into a corkscrew.

Why do we do this? It serves three purposes. The first is because we are never wrong then we must never be shown to be wrong. You seem to have a fascination for trying to demonstrate to us that we are wrong about the things we say and do. That is a nonsense. We cannot be wrong and you must accept that. Our use of contrariwise enables us to ensure that we remain right and you remain wrong. It is entirely logical to us. If it is not so to you then that is your problem. You wanted to come into our world so now you must accept its rules. Do not try and argue that you did not agree to this. When you embraced our illusion you consented to this state of affairs. Do not try and deny that it is the case otherwise we will just have to provide you with some more contrariwise.

The second reason that we do this is that we have to have you in a state of confusion. This means that being a creature of order and logic you will try and make sense of our contrariwise which will merely serve to put your head in a spin. Furthermore, you cannot help yourself but want to show us that we are wrong. You cannot accept that we are unable to see the point that you are making. That is entirely the point. You are subjected to our rules now and logic, reason and sense rode out of town many moons ago. This confusion will leave you susceptible to our other manipulations and drain you of your resistance and resolve making it harder for you to escape our grip.

The third reason is down to our lifeblood, yes fuel. Your evident frustration, curses and desperation as you try to make us see that we are wrong provides us with delicious dollops of fuel. You tear your hair out, repeat yourself, raise your voice and collapse sobbing in frustration. It is all good fuel to us. No matter if you argued the point with the forensic precision of a top barrister we would twist the words so they achieve what we want and not what you want. To borrow from Lewis Carrol’s fantastic writing I leave you with the words of humpty dumpty, who was clearly a pioneer of our kind.

“When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean.”

11 thoughts on “Contrariwise

  1. truthseeker6157 says:

    Have you ever had one of those silly hypothetical conversations whereby it’s clearly fantasy? A scenario if you like. My narc operated contrariwise a lot, even during this hypothetical scenario. HG I’d be really interested to see how you would answer the question below. Assume it was asked by an IPPS. This was supposed to be a bit of fun. It wasn’t.

    Only if you have a minute.

    You awake to the smell of burning. You look outside, buildings are on fire, windows are smashed, crashed cars line the streets. Midst the wreckage you can see the forms of staggering misshapen bodies as they make their way aimlessly down the street. You are in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. What do you do?

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Is the IPPS in the golden period or in devaluation?

      1. truthseeker6157 says:

        Let’s assume she’s in between. No overt devaluation to date.

        1. HG Tudor says:

          There is no in between, there is either golden period or devaluation. The devaluation may be the Stranger Zone or it may be more obvious devaluations.

          1. truthseeker6157 says:

            Thank you for clarifying, I’m already learning here due to your previous two responses. Then it had to be devaluation. Early.

          2. HG Tudor says:

            You will have to restate your question, it has become lost in the failure to provide context.

          3. truthseeker6157 says:

            Sorry. Ok.

            The IPPS is in the Stranger Zone. She is unaware of this and after watching the latest episode of The Walking Dead, she gives you the following imagined scenario.

            You awake to the smell of burning. You look outside, buildings are on fire, windows are smashed, crashed cars line the streets. Amongst the wreckage you see the forms of staggering misshapen bodies as they make their way aimlessly down the street. You are in the middle of a zombie apocalypse.

            She then asks, ‘What would you do HG?’

            What would you say?

          4. HG Tudor says:

            Thank you for restating.

            Continue watching the football and ignore her for such a mindless question.

          5. Violetta says:

            I don’t understand the question. What kind of answer would prove what? Is it good news if he says, “My first thought would be to rescue you from the zombies, Pookie,” and bad news if he says, “oh, I got turned last night, gotta eat your brains now”?

          6. truthseeker6157 says:

            You aren’t playing!

            Ok, my point. As regards Contrariwise.

            Firstly, I hadn’t considered that a made up scenario would elicit the same Contrariwise behaviour in the narcissist as a real life interaction. I would just say what I would do in the scenario. The narcissist didn’t. I also hadn’t considered that the response would differ dependent on golden period or devaluation. This was highlighted by your request for clarification.

            Secondly, I would have said until this point, that I was never devalued. The response given by my narcissist to the scenario above, suggests that in fact I was in a process of devaluation, or, accidentally ignited fury in the narcissist.

            Thirdly, I was interested in what your response would be to check if the response I received was down to narcissistic perspective. As in, would a narcissist engage in an imagined scenario, and if so answer ‘honestly’ or still attempt to exert control. As such would your response be similar.

            When given the scenario he answered

            ‘ I’d grab a machete, go outside and start killing.’
            I responded, ‘ You would never make it. There are zombies everywhere. I think I’d drive to the Landrover garage steal a Rangey and head out to the middle of no where. Try and pick up a team en route.’
            ‘ I am a God. I’d kill them all. You would just hide. Hide in the corner like a shitting dog.’
            ‘ Why are you being like that? That’s what you think of me then? Thank you for explaining so fully.’

            No communication for a couple of days. He reopened with ‘Still sulking?’ Then went on with, ‘ You over reacted. You read too much into things.‘ exhibiting the contrariwise of your article and rounding off with ‘ I didn’t say that.’ ( interesting given we were using a chat app and I only needed to scroll up to see that he did)

            Difficult for me to say if that was devaluation or ignited fury at implied criticism by my response.

            It’s a minefield.

            Thank you for your responses.

          7. HG Tudor says:

            You asked the question, I answered it.

            You are welcome.

Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.