When Your Nervous System Doesn’t Feel Safe With People; How dismissiveness, gaslighting, and victim-blaming become biology.
- 5 days ago
- 3 min read
Dismissiveness and gaslighting aren’t rare “toxic people” events. They’re common social patterns that show up anywhere humans care about comfort, control, or keeping the peace.
At Natural Wayz, mental health isn’t treated like a floating concept. It’s anchored in neurobiology, hormones, neurotransmitters, and behavior—because your body doesn’t interpret social dynamics as “drama.” It interprets them as safety or threat.
Unsafe dynamics aren’t “uncomfortable.” They’re physiologically unsafe.
There’s a difference between a hard conversation and an unsafe relational environment.
Unsafe environments are the ones where a person’s boundaries are repeatedly breached—where they are:
betrayed
reality-edited (gaslit)
mocked or met with contempt
labeled “crazy” simply for their truth, their existence, or their perspective
re-blamed for harm done to them
These aren’t simple disagreements. They’re violations of psychological safety. And the nervous system keeps track.
Gaslighting isn’t always cruel. Sometimes it’s dressed as “care.”
Gaslighting isn’t simply disagreement. It’s reality-editing—when someone rewrites events so their behavior stays untouched and your perception becomes the problem.
Sometimes it’s overt: “That didn’t happen.” Sometimes it’s polished: “You’re misunderstanding.” And sometimes it’s wrapped in concern: “I’m just worried about you.”
But when “care” comes with a refusal to be curious—no real questions, no nuance, no willingness to understand—then care becomes a costume. Care without curiosity often turns into control.
Dismissiveness can be contempt, not just minimization
Dismissiveness doesn’t always look gentle. It can be sharp and shaming:
eye-rolling, sarcasm, mocking
tone policing (“calm down”)
character attacks and name-calling (“crazy,” “psycho,” “dramatic”)
That “crazy” label is a huge tell.
It’s often not an observation about mental health—it’s a way to discredit your reality so no one has to engage what you’re saying.
The trauma loop nobody wants to name: victim-blaming
One of the most damaging forms of dismissiveness is re-blaming the victim, especially in trauma and abuse dynamics.
It sounds like:
“She shouldn’t have worn that.”
“You brought it on yourself.”
“You did it to yourself because you reengaged.”
“If it was really that bad, you would’ve left.”
Victim-blaming often protects the bystander’s illusion of safety: “That won’t happen to me because I’d never do that.”But it comes at a cost: it forces the survivor to carry responsibility that doesn’t belong to them.
Why “you reengaged” doesn’t mean you caused it
Trauma responses like freezing, fawning (appeasing), going back, or trying one more time aren’t proof of consent or weakness. They’re often nervous system strategies—especially in long-term relational harm.
Reengaging can happen because the brain is still seeking:
repair and closure
safety through connection
predictability (even painful familiarity can feel safer than uncertainty)
Blaming someone for that response is like blaming a burn victim for flinching.
The Biology of Being Disbelieved
In invalidating environments, “support” isn’t always based on truth—it’s often based on what keeps the group comfortable and regulated.
So the same event can get two completely different responses:
one person is soothed and supported
another person is questioned, minimized, or labeled “crazy” for their perspective
That double standard isn’t just unjust—it’s destabilizing. Your nervous system registers it as:“Reality is unsafe here.”
And when reality feels unsafe, the body adapts:
you scan for micro-signals (hypervigilance)
you over-explain to be believed
you freeze mid-sentence because speaking feels risky
you start doubting your own perception
