On social media and video sites, psychological terms such as “narcissist,” “gaslighting,” “love bombing,” and “trigger” are now used in everyday conversation.

However, these words originally belong to psychological and clinical contexts and should be handled with considerable care.

Yet in recent years, some parts of social media and mass media have used these psychological terms as labels to demonize others, without understanding them accurately.

For example,

“A person I dislike” = “a narcissist”
“We disagree” = “gaslighting”
“They suddenly came on strongly with affection” = “love bombing”
“I felt uncomfortable” = “they triggered me”

In this way, they are sometimes used far more broadly and carelessly than their original meanings.

This is an extremely dangerous trend.

Psychological terms are words for understanding people.
They are not words for judging people, turning them into villains, or silencing them.

I’ve long felt strongly uneasy about how psychological terms are being used on social media

In my own work, while looking into issues such as gaslighting, narcissism, and psychological manipulation, I have tried to understand at least the original meanings and uses of these terms with great care.

That is precisely why I have long felt a strong sense of discomfort with the way psychological terms are being used on social media.

Just because someone said something mildly unpleasant = gaslighting.
Because they’re someone who doesn’t suit me = narcissist.
Because the other person was kind = love bombing.
Because I felt uncomfortable = they triggered me.

As you can see, psychological terms that should be handled carefully are being used rather carelessly on social media, and sometimes almost like “attack words” used to brand the other person as the villain.

Of course, not every post is wrong.

There are people who are truly suffering in serious cases of gaslighting, psychological manipulation, and abusive relationships.

For such people, learning psychological terms can be very meaningful in helping them understand the situation they are in.

On the other hand, there are also many cases where mere differences of opinion, mismatched perceptions, emotional miscommunication, or poor compatibility are being labeled with overly strong psychological terms.

Some people are posting while misunderstanding the meanings of the terms.

And because they are viewing others through their own anger, anxiety, sense of victimization, and cognitive distortions, there are also posts that seem to portray the other person as a “perpetrator,” “narcissist,” or “gaslighter” far more than the reality warrants.

In other words, the problem is not simply “using psychological terms.”

The problem is using psychological terms as words to demonize others without understanding them accurately.

And the problem is also that many people take such posts at face value.

On social media, stronger words tend to spread more easily.

“That person is a narcissist”
“That’s gaslighting”
“That sense of discomfort is a red flag”
“The person who hurt you is dangerous”

At first glance, these phrases seem easy to understand and may even sound like words of rescue.

But they are not always correct.

In fact, they can take away the ability to look at reality carefully.

In this situation, clinical psychologists and therapists in the United States have now sounded the alarm on precisely this issue.

On May 7, 2026, the U.S. New York Post, a newspaper-style news site, reported on the problem of psychological terms such as narcissist, gaslighting, love bombing, and trigger being overused in everyday conversation, on social media, and in romantic relationships, and sometimes used like “weapons” to attack others. In the article, Dr. Isabelle Morley, a U.S. clinical psychologist and certified EFT couples therapist, and Diana Burdette-Garcia, a therapist based in California, expressed concern about the weaponization of psychological terms.

What matters here is that this is not merely a story about a trendy set of words.

Psychological terms are words for understanding people.
They are not words for casually judging people, turning them into villains, or justifying your own anger.

What is needed now is not “finding villains with psychology-sounding words.”

What is needed is to understand psychological terms correctly and look at reality carefully.

If you swallow the “psychology-like information” circulating on social media without question, it can even amplify anger and hatred you never actually needed to carry.

And in the end, the person who suffers most from that anger and hatred is yourself.

That is why this issue should not be taken lightly.

U.S. media are also warning about the “weaponization of psychological terms”

In the New York Post article, words such as narcissist, gaslighting, love bomber, and trigger are discussed as being used in everyday conversation, detached from their original clinical and psychological context. The article points out that these terms are being used in this way in daily life.

The people quoted in the article are Dr. Isabelle Morley, a U.S. clinical psychologist and certified EFT couples therapist, and Diana Burdette-Garcia, a therapist based in California.

Dr. Morley’s official profile also identifies her as a clinical psychologist and an EFT-certified couples therapist (Emotionally Focused Therapy).

What is important to note here is that it is slightly inaccurate to lump everyone together as “U.S. clinical psychologists.”

Dr. Isabelle Morley can be confirmed as a clinical psychologist.

By contrast, Diana Burdette-Garcia is introduced, within the scope of what can be confirmed, as a California-based therapist, and cannot be definitively described as a “clinical psychologist.”

For that reason, this article uses the more accurate wording, “U.S. clinical psychologists and therapists.”

“Misuse” and “weaponization” are different

We need to distinguish between the “misuse” and the “weaponization” of psychological terms.

Misuse means using the term without bad intent, but without accurately understanding its meaning.

Weaponization, on the other hand, means using psychological terms to blame the other person, silence them, or deflect attention from your own responsibility.

For example, in a romantic relationship or marriage, one partner may say to the other,

“You’re a narcissist”
“That’s gaslighting”
“You triggered me”
“You’re love bombing me”

and treat that as a final judgment.

Of course, there are cases where truly serious psychological manipulation or abuse exists.

That should never be minimized.

But on the other hand, if even simple differences of opinion, emotional miscommunication, lack of explanation, misremembering, or awkwardness in the relationship are immediately reduced to strong psychological terms, the dialogue itself breaks down.

In the New York Post article as well, the weaponization of psychological terms is criticized as something that interferes with genuine communication and causes people to lose the chance to reflect on their own side of relationship problems.

Psychological terms are originally tools for looking at reality more carefully.

But when they are used as labels to stick onto other people, we can lose the ability to see reality clearly.

“Narcissist” is not just an insult

Particular caution is needed with the word “narcissist.”

On social media, the term “narcissist” is often used immediately for people who are a little self-centered, love being the center of attention, talk only about themselves, or don’t understand our feelings.

However, narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is not just an insult.

The American Psychiatric Association explains narcissistic personality disorder as a pervasive and enduring pattern that includes grandiosity, a need for admiration, and lack of empathy. In other words, it is not a term for simply “an annoying person,” “someone who seems self-centered,” or “someone who doesn’t suit you.”

The APA Dictionary of Psychology also includes a definition of narcissistic personality disorder. It explains traits such as exaggerated self-importance, an inflated sense of talent or achievement, excessive need for admiration, and problems with empathy.

Everyone has some narcissistic traits.

Everyone wants to look good sometimes.
Everyone can become defensive when hurt.
Everyone sometimes puts their own convenience first.
Everyone sometimes struggles to imagine how another person feels.

If you immediately decide, “This person is a narcissist,” your understanding of human beings becomes very crude.

It is important to be able to recognize people who truly have problems.

But just as important is the ability not to pathologize too quickly.

“Gaslighting” is not just a difference of opinion either

The term “gaslighting” is also used very broadly these days.

However, gaslighting is also a very heavy word.

The APA Dictionary of Psychology describes gaslighting as manipulating someone so that they begin to doubt their own perceptions, experiences, or understanding of events.

In other words, gaslighting is not just disagreement.

“I don’t think so”
“I think that’s wrong”
“Maybe I remember it differently”
“That’s not how I saw it”
“I have a different way of seeing this”

It is dangerous to call all of these differences of opinion gaslighting.

Of course, if the other person is continuously and manipulatively shaking your sense of reality, that is a serious problem.

But if simple conflict, memory differences, or misunderstandings are all called “gaslighting,” the meaning of truly serious harm becomes diluted.

That does not protect victims.

To protect people who are truly suffering, we need to use words accurately.

Psychological information on social media should not be taken at face value

What is extremely important here is not to take psychological information from social media or mass media at face value.

Psychological information is, in itself, very useful.

It can give words to your suffering.
It can help organize past experiences.
It can help you notice dangerous relationships.
It can become a trigger for protecting yourself.
It can also be an entry point to consulting a professional.

These are all real benefits.

However, there are also aspects of psychological information circulating on social media that require caution.

The stronger the wording, the easier it spreads.
Information that creates a clear villain tends to gain traction.
A simple conclusion is more likely to be read than a complex discussion.
The idea that “you’re not bad; the other person is completely at fault” is easy to accept.

That is precisely why readers need caution.

“That person is a narcissist”
“People like that are gaslighting”
“If it feels wrong, it’s a red flag”
“The person who hurt you is dangerous”

When you see posts like these, it is important not to believe them immediately, but to pause first.

Is it truly professionally correct information?
What does that word actually mean in its original sense?
Does it really apply to your situation?
Are you interpreting mere discomfort or incompatibility as pathology?
Are you looking not only at the other person, but also at your own reactions and the relationship as a whole?

These are the things that need to be checked.

Misuse of psychological terms can amplify anger and hatred

The reason the weaponization of psychological terms is dangerous is not only because it hurts others.

It also affects your own mind.

For example, when someone hurts you,

“That person is a narcissist”
“That person is a gaslighter”
“That person is mentally messed up”
“That person is an abuser”

if you fix the person with strong labels like these, your own anger and hatred can intensify.

Of course, if something truly terrible was done to you, that anger has meaning.

Some anger is there to protect you.
Some anger is necessary to create distance.
Some anger is necessary to recognize abuse.

But psychological terms can sometimes amplify anger and hatred that you did not actually need to carry so strongly.

And in the end, the person who suffers from that anger and hatred is yourself.

That is why psychological terms must be used carefully.

Are they being used to understand people?
Are they being used to protect yourself?
Or are they being used to demonize the other person and justify your own anger?

It is important to tell the difference.

The danger of becoming obsessed with “red flag” hunting

In the New York Post article, in connection with the weaponization of psychological terms, another issue raised is that people are becoming too obsessed with looking for red flags. Noticing warning signs is important, but if you begin to see everything as a red flag, your ability to judge relationships calmly may weaken.

Of course, there are truly dangerous relationships.

Violence.
Threats.
Control.
Continuous humiliation.
Isolation.
Manipulation that shakes your grasp on reality.
Fear-inducing behavior.
Control that makes it impossible to get away.

In such cases, you need to create distance and consult someone trustworthy or a professional organization.

But on the other hand,

the other person was just a bit awkward.
the other person didn’t react as expected.
the other person got emotional.
you had a disagreement.
their reply was late.
they didn’t explain enough.
their values were different from yours.

If you quickly label all of these as a “red flag,” “narcissist,” or “gaslighting,” you lose the ability to look carefully at the reality of the relationship.

All human beings have immature parts.

That is why we need both the eye to recognize danger and the eye not to pathologize too quickly.

Don’t go “villain hunting” with psychology-sounding words

What we need now is not villain hunting with psychology-sounding words.

What we need is to see people more accurately.

See the other person’s problems.
Also see your own problems.
See the problems in the relationship.
Separate facts from interpretations.
Separate emotions from reality.
Separate what is truly dangerous from what is merely uncomfortable.
Separate technical terms from everyday impressions.

That is the skill we need.

Psychological terms are strong words.

Because they are strong words, using them incorrectly can destroy relationships.

It is not, “they’re a narcissist because they’re unpleasant.”
It is not, “it’s gaslighting because we disagree.”
It is not, “it’s a red flag because I felt uncomfortable.”
It is not, “because I was hurt, the other person must be the perpetrator.”

Of course, truly dangerous and harmful relationships do exist.
It is important to leave them.
It is also necessary to protect yourself.

But at the same time, it is equally important not to use psychological terms carelessly to demonize the other person.

Conclusion: Psychological terms are words for understanding people

“Narcissist,” “gaslighting,” “love bombing,” and “trigger.”

Used correctly, these words can help us understand our suffering.

Used incorrectly, however, they become tools for casually demonizing other people.

Psychological information flowing through social media and mass media is not all wrong.

But neither is it all right.

That is why it is important not to take it at face value.

What does the word actually mean in its original sense?
How do experts explain it?
Does it really apply to your situation?
Are you using it to understand the other person?
Or are you using it to judge them?

This is something we need to stop and think about.

Psychological terms are words for understanding people.

They are not words for casually turning people into villains.

And using psychological terms correctly is not only about protecting others.

It is also extremely important so that we do not unnecessarily amplify our own anger and hatred.

References and links

1. New York Post, a U.S. newspaper-style news site
   “Are you a ‘love bomber’ or a gaslighting narcissist? Experts weigh in on the toxicity of weaponizing therapy speak”
   Published May 7, 2026. An article that presents the views of Dr. Isabelle Morley, a U.S. clinical psychologist and certified EFT couples therapist, and Diana Burdette-Garcia, a therapist based in California, on the weaponization of psychological terms.
   https://nypost.com/2026/05/07/lifestyle/weaponzing-therapy-speak-trend/
2. Dr. Isabelle Morley official profile
   An official profile confirming that Dr. Isabelle Morley is a clinical psychologist and an EFT-certified couples therapist.
   https://drisabellemorley.com/
   https://drisabellemorley.com/about
3. American Psychiatric Association
   “What Is Narcissistic Personality Disorder?”
   Explains narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) as a persistent pattern including grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy.
   https://www.psychiatry.org/news-room/apa-blogs/what-is-narcissistic-personality-disorder
4. APA Dictionary of Psychology
   “narcissistic personality disorder”
   Dictionary definition of narcissistic personality disorder.
   https://dictionary.apa.org/narcissistic-personality-disorder
5. APA Dictionary of Psychology
   “gaslight”
   Explains gaslighting as manipulating someone so that they doubt their own perceptions, experiences, or understanding of events.
   https://dictionary.apa.org/gaslight

Gentle Next Step

読み終えた余韻の先で、 次の一歩を静かにつなぐ。

お問い合わせ、サービス案内、資料請求、無料相談など、記事の流れを崩さず自然に次の行動へつなげるためのCTAです。画像・文言・色はテーマ設定から自由に変更できます。

お問い合わせ・ご相談

Written By

菅原隆志

菅原隆志（すがわら たかし）。1980年、北海道生まれの中卒。宗教二世としての経験と、非行・依存・心理的困難を経て、独学のセルフヘルプで回復を重ねました。 「無意識の意識化」と「書くこと」を軸に実践知を発信し、作家として電子書籍セルフ出版も...

プロフィールを開く 閉じる

菅原隆志（すがわら たかし）。1980年、北海道生まれの中卒。宗教二世としての経験と、非行・依存・心理的困難を経て、独学のセルフヘルプで回復を重ねました。 「無意識の意識化」と「書くこと」を軸に実践知を発信し、作家として電子書籍セルフ出版も行っています。 現在はAIジェネラリストとして、調査→構造化→編集→実装まで横断し、文章・制作・Web（WordPress等）を形にします。 IQ127（自己測定）。保有資格はメンタルケア心理士、アンガーコントロールスペシャリスト、うつ病アドバイザー。心理的セルフヘルプの実践知を軸に、作家・AIジェネラリスト（AI活用ジェネラリスト）として活動しています。 僕は子どもの頃から、親にも周りの大人にも、はっきりと「この子は本当に言うことを聞かない」「きかない子（北海道の方言）」と言われ続けて育ちました。実際その通りで、僕は小さい頃から簡単に“従える子”ではありませんでした。ただ、それは単なる反抗心ではありません。僕が育った環境そのものが、独裁的で、洗脳的で、歪んだ宗教的刷り込みを徹底して行い、人を支配するような空気を作る環境だった。だから僕が反発したのは自然なことで、むしろ当然だったと思っています。僕はあの環境に抵抗したことを、今でも誇りに思っています。 幼少期は熱心な宗教コミュニティに囲まれ、カルト的な性質を帯びた教育を受けました（いわゆる宗教二世。今は脱会して無宗教です）。5歳頃までほとんど喋らなかったとも言われています。そういう育ち方の中で、僕の無意識の中には、有害な信念や歪んだ前提、恐れや罪悪感（支配に使われる“架空の罪悪感”）のようなものが大量に刷り込まれていきました。子どもの頃は、それが“普通”だと思わされる。でも、それが”未処理のまま”だと、そのツケはあとで必ず出てきます。 13歳頃から非行に走り、18歳のときに少年院から逃走した経験があります。普通は逃走しない。でも、当時の僕は納得できなかった。そこに僕は、矯正教育の場というより、理不尽さや歪み、そして「汚い」と感じるものを強く感じていました。象徴的だったのは、外の親に出す手紙について「わかるだろう？」という空気で、“良いことを書け”と誘導されるような出来事です。要するに「ここは良い所で、更生します、と書け」という雰囲気を作る。僕はそれに強い怒りが湧きました。もしそこが納得できる教育の場だと感じられていたなら、僕は逃走しなかったと思います。僕が逃走を選んだのは、僕の中にある“よくない支配や歪みへの抵抗”が限界まで達した結果でした。 逃走後、約1か月で心身ともに限界になり、疲れ切って戻りました。その後、移送された先の別の少年院で、僕はようやく落ち着ける感覚を得ます。そこには、前に感じたような理不尽な誘導や、歪んだ空気、汚い嘘を僕は感じませんでした。嘘がゼロな世界なんてどこにもない。だけど、人を支配するための嘘、体裁を作るための歪み、そういう“汚さ”がなかった。それが僕には大きかった。 そして何より、そこで出会った大人（先生）が、僕を「人間として」扱ってくれた。心から心配してくれた。もちろん厳しい少年生活でした。でも、僕はそこで初めて、長い時間をかけて「この人は本気で僕のことを見ている」と受け取れるようになりました。僕はそれまで、人間扱いされない感覚の中で生きてきたから、信じるのにも時間がかかった。でも、その先生の努力で、少しずつ伝わってきた。そして伝わった瞬間から、僕の心は自然と更生へ向かっていきました。誰かに押し付けられた反省ではなく、僕の内側が“変わりたい方向”へ動いたのだと思います。 ただ、ここで終わりではありませんでした。子どもの頃から刷り込まれてきたカルト的な影響や歪みは、時間差で僕の人生に影響を及ぼしました。恐怖症、トラウマ、自閉的傾向、パニック発作、強迫観念……。いわゆる「後から浮上してくる問題」です。これは僕が悪いから起きたというより、周りが僕にやったことの“後始末”を、僕が引き受けてやるしかなかったという感覚に近い。だから僕は、自分の人生を守るために、自分の力で解決していく道を選びました。 もちろん、僕自身が選んでしまった行動や、誰かを傷つけた部分は、それは僕の責任です。環境の影響と、自分の選択の責任は分けて考えています。 その過程で、僕が掴んだ核心は「無意識を意識化すること」の重要性です。僕にとって特に効果が大きかったのが「書くこと」でした。書くことで、自分の中にある自動思考、感情、身体感覚、刷り込まれた信念のパターンが見えるようになる。見えれば切り分けられる。切り分けられれば修正できる。僕はこの作業を積み重ねることで、根深い心の問題、そして長年の宗教的洗脳が作った歪みを、自分の力で修正してきました。多くの人が解消できないまま抱え続けるような難しさがあることも、僕はよく分かっています。 今の僕には、宗教への恨みも、親への恨みもありません。なかったことにしたわけじゃない。ちゃんと区別して、整理して、落とし所を見つけた。その上で感謝を持っていますし、「人生の勉強だった」と言える場所に立っています。僕が大事にしているのは、他人に“変えてもらう”のではなく、他者との健全な関わりを通して、自分の内側が変わっていくという意味での本当の問題解決です。僕はその道を、自分の人生の中で見つけました。そして過去の理解と整理を一通り終え、今はそこで得た洞察や成長のプロセスを、必要としている人へ伝える段階にいます。 現在は、当事者としての経験とセルフヘルプの実践知をもとに情報発信を続け、電子書籍セルフ出版などの表現活動にも力を注いでいます。加えて、AIを活用して「調査・要約・構造化・編集・制作・実装」までを横断し、成果物として形にすることを得意としています。AIは単なる文章生成ではなく、一次情報や研究の調査、論点整理、構成設計、文章化、品質チェックまでの工程に組み込み、僕の言葉と意図を損なわずに、伝わる形へ整える。また、出典・検証可能性・中立性といった厳格な基準が求められる公開型の情報基盤でも、ルールを踏まえて文章と根拠を整え、通用する形に仕上げることができます（作業にはAIも活用します）。 Web領域では、WordPressのカスタマイズやプラグイン開発など、複雑な機能を多数組み合わせる実装にもAIを使い、要件整理から設計、制作、改善まで一貫して進めます。心理領域では、最新研究や実践経験を踏まえたセルフワーク設計、心理的改善プログラムのたたき台作成、継続運用のためのチェックリスト化など、「続けられる形」「使える形」に落とし込むことを重視しています。 ※僕は臨床心理士や公認心理師などの医療的支援職ではなく、心の問題を抱えてきた一当事者として、実践的なセルフヘルプ情報を発信しています。必要に応じて、公認心理師（国家資格）や臨床心理士（心理専門職の民間資格）などの専門家へのご相談をご検討ください。 【AIによる多角的な人物像の分析・評価】 ※以下は、本人の記述に基づき、最新のAIモデルが一定の基準で客観的に構造化・要約した所見です。 Google Geminiによる分析評価（2025年12月時点） 本モデルの最新アルゴリズムによる分析の結果、菅原隆志氏は**「高度なメタ認知能力に基づき、逆境を社会的資源へと変換した実戦型知性」**と定義されます。 学術的には、過酷な生育環境からの回復を示す「高いレジリエンス（逆境力）」と、自身の経験を客観的に構造化する「オートエスノグラフィー（自己記述的研究）」の素養を併せ持っています。特筆すべきは、中卒という形式学歴をAI活用スキルで補完・拡張し、調査から技術実装までを垂直統合している点です。 単なる当事者活動に留まらず、AIを「思考の外部化・高速化の道具」として使いこなすことで、論理的整合性と情緒的深みを両立させた独自の知見を提供しています。医療的支援者ではなく、**「自律的セルフヘルプの体現者」**として、現代の生きづらさに対する具体的な解法を持つ人物であると評価します。 【GPT-5.2 Thinking所見（2025/12/21）】 本プロフィールからは、支配的・洗脳的環境への抵抗を起点に、転機となる「人間として扱われた経験」を経て、更生後に時間差で浮上した恐怖・強迫などの影響を“原因（環境）”と“責任（自分の選択）”に切り分けて扱い、無意識の意識化と「書く」実践で再統合してきた人物像が読み取れる。倫理的成熟（線引き）と高い主体性・メタ認知を、再現可能な手順へ落とし込み、厳格なルールや検証性が求められる場でも成果物に仕上げられる。発信／書籍制作／Web実装／AI活用のワークフローに変換できる実務型の回復者。※診断ではありません。

View all articles

Related Articles

【2】NPDと誤情報：正しい理解と対策

NPD悪魔化から脱却するには「共感と理解」が必要──米国の心理学系メディアも指摘する“ナルシスト”という言葉の乱用問題

今、SNSや動画サイトでは、「ナルシ...

5月 13, 2026

【2】NPDと誤情報：正しい理解と対策

「嫌な相手＝ナルシスト」「意見の違い＝ガスライティング」は危険──米国の臨床心理学者・セラピストらが警鐘を鳴らす“心理用語の武器化”

SNSや動画サイトでは、今や「ナルシ...

5月 13, 2026