In this post, we will discuss the online mind games that narcissists, psychopaths or toxic people play in their digital communications in different types of relationships: romantic, social, familial, professional, etc. In particular, we will talk about four of them:
- No reply: When the person ignores your messages inappropriately or only responds to some messages. This intermittency is generally used for “training”, punishment or demonstration of “superiority”.
- Ghosting: When the person disappears unexpectedly without giving any prior clue that the relationship is ending. The person may also block the victim from all their communication channels, preventing them from trying to seek explanations for their disappearance. In other words, the person vanishes without giving any explanation.
- Zombieing: When the person ghosts the other person and returns later, acting as if nothing had happened. If this person is a narcissist, which is very likely, this is nothing more than hoovering: sucking the victim back into the cycle of abuse.
- Hot and cold: When the content of a person’s messages alternates drastically and toxically between positive and negative, between super praise and harsh criticism. Between intense communication and complete silence. The person goes from heaven to hell quickly and without much logical explanation. This type of mental game uses intermittent reinforcement to create a trauma bond and emotionally trap the person in this roller-coaster.
But before we get into the toxic dynamics, let’s look at some healthy parameters.
Healthy Online Communication Dynamics
When we are getting to know someone, whether professionally or socially, it is normal for virtual communication to be strange, intermittent, sparse or cold at first. This may mean something minor, like just a confusing start.
For example, I have experienced more than one situation in which I emailed people who did not know me, and they did not respond. So, I waited a while and then tried again. By the third email, I received a first response. The conversation gradually evolved until it turned into work partnerships or friendships.
This can happen. Someone did not respond to you at first or responded intermittently but then changed their mind and realised that there was potential for a relationship. However, in successful cases, I noticed a gradual evolution; there were no strange disappearances or inexplicable ups and downs.
In other words, the contact progressed in an understandable, logical way, within the expected. The rules of the game seemed clear. Affection and intimacy consistently increased. They didn’t abruptly recede or leave awkward doubts in the air.
Let’s look at three examples of healthy dynamics:
- Closing: The communication eventually ended because the person wasn’t interested in forming a partnership or friendship with me. But everything happened respectfully. I received a polite “no”, and that was it. Or the person was more sparse and laconic in the emails, which is a sign that they want to end the dialogue. So, I stopped insisting and didn’t take it personally, because it’s not really personal: the person doesn’t even know me! The world is big. Other opportunities will come.
- Friendly Level: The communication reached a friendly and healthy level, but not intense. In other words, that partnership, friendship, contact, etc., reached its peak, and we established a dynamic of occasional contact. For example, a professional with whom I’ve exchanged some exciting emails. And, now and then, when I need them or they need me, we get in touch. When we meet at events and conferences, we are kind and considerate to each other.
- Deepening: Communication has evolved into something more serious and profound. For example, a virtual friendship can become a face-to-face one. An email exchange with a professor can turn into an invitation to a conference. A conversation with a professional can turn into a joint project, and so on.
Whatever it was – closure, friendly level or deepening – the dynamic was natural. Even though communication started in a truncated way, it evolved as expected between mature and emotionally healthy people.
But this does not always happen. Sometimes, we find ourselves in situations where the person does not respond to our emails or messages when, in fact, they should.
The Social Normalisation of Ghosting
Not responding to messages has become a socially normalised behaviour. Disappearing entirely without giving any explanation, too. I am not defending this normalisation, on the contrary. I am stating a fact.
If something significant happens between two people, not responding or suddenly disappearing is unacceptable!
Examples: when people work together, when someone is waiting for a response, if two people go out to dinner and there is the expectation of a second date, mentoring or academic guidance in progress, etc.
In these cases, ghosting is extremely rude and is undoubtedly a red flag for narcissism, psychopathy or toxic behaviour. In the workplace, this attitude is a lack of professional ethics.
Let’s be adults and face the awkward situation of giving a response, even if it is a “no”. People are much more upset and offended by disappearance or silence than by a negative response.
If someone has had a job interview with us, they deserve to know the result, even if it is a “no.” If the result comes along with kind and honest feedback, even better.
In friendship or romantic relationships, if we decide to go out with someone but don’t want a second date, it is fair for that person to know this through a phone call. Or, at the very least, a polite audio or text message.
If we get a quote from a professional but decide to go with someone else, the professional should know that we will not be using their services. So they know whether or not to include that service in their schedule.
If we are working with someone, some permanent and reliable online communication channel must exist between us. Preferably, a management software forum, which is checked and responded to on business days, at the time agreed upon by the team.
Not responding in a work context needs serious justification: severe illness, unforeseen complicated circumstances, etc.
In the post Email Management, I talk about how to organize your virtual communication so that you don’t feel overwhelmed by it. (Only in my Portuguese blog; the translation is coming soon!)
Now, and if things haven’t reached that level? In that case, if it was just the beginning of a virtual conversation without any significant physical or emotional consequences, it has become commonplace to be ghosted.
In cases of weaker ties, when the online conversation was still at the beginning and nothing special happened, is the person who ghosted us necessarily a toxic or narcissistic person?
Is Every Person Who Ghosts Someone Narcissistic or Toxic?
Not responding to messages and emails or ghosting someone is a lazy and even cowardly way of dealing with any situation, whether in the personal or professional life. But it doesn’t necessarily mean that the person is toxic.
It could be that the person has difficulty saying “no” or is afraid of conflict. They could just be immature or even a bit selfish, thinking that you’re the one who needs to “guess” that it won’t happen. But even in these cases, the fact is that you don’t matter enough for the person to face this discomfort.
In a more justifiable scenario, the person could be experiencing a serious problem, such as burnout or a relative’s severe illness. In this case, there’s not a lack of empathy on the part of the person, there’s a lack of emotional health and time to deal with digital communication with the politeness that is expected.
When they regain control of their life, the person will apologise profusely, and that event will be an exception, not the rule. Be suspicious if these disappearances happen all the time, with excuses that seem increasingly flimsy.
The cases in which there is an understandable justification for silence are usually absurdly rare. In general, the person didn’t respond to you because they didn’t want to.
Whatever the reason, all ghosting or silence is a message.
Don’t rationalise the event with excuses like: “Her battery died”, “He was at an event all day”, “She was travelling and didn’t see it”, “He’s overwhelmed with work”, “She receives too many emails, she can’t respond to everyone”.
Unless the person is in an intensive care unit or a village in the middle of the Amazon rain forest, going many hours without responding, or even days or weeks, means that the person doesn’t want to relate to you the way you would like or feel you deserve.
Silence, at the very least, shows that this relationship’s demands, expectations, or desires are not reciprocated. You are not a priority for that person. Period.
Narcissists and Toxic People Adopt the “No Reply” as a Standard
Not replying because “I am too busy” or because “I get too many emails” are the most wick excuses. Unless you are an ultra-famous person who deals with thousands of emails from fans.
And even in these cases, an automatic reply can be provided. A polite automatic reply thanking them for contacting you is a form of consideration because they know that at least their email arrived and there is a chance that you will read it.
But if you are not an ultra-famous celebrity and your inbox has hundreds, not thousands, of emails, it is possible to reply to everyone super-fast. Make ready-made templates for each type of demand: compliment, criticism, request, etc. This way, responding to most emails will take only 30 seconds.
- “Thank you for (your kind words, this interesting link, the article, this information, etc.).”
- “I appreciate your constructive criticism. I will reflect on it.”
- “I appreciate your invitation, but unfortunately, I have many things going on, and I won’t be able to accept it. However, I’m glad you thought of me.”
Again, it takes 30 seconds to “copy and paste” the response template. If the person didn’t respond, it’s because you’re not worth 30 seconds to them. Or you’re worth much more than that, but they’re playing games with you.
Responding to a message ending a relationship, clarifying that expectations are not reciprocal, or saying “no” takes a maximum of five minutes. A brief response is preferable to no response at all.
Therefore, silence means the person considers you not worth even five minutes of their time. Or it’s not worth the hassle they’ll feel having to write you that message.
In the case of narcissists, silence can mean that they think you’re “under control.” Narcissists default to “no reply”. They only respond to messages when they are love bombing, want something from you, or want to show who has the “power” in the relationship.
If your message makes it clear that you are under control and the narc does not need anything from you at the moment, then they will not bother to reply. There is no need to waste time with someone who is “submissive.” They feel entitled and comfortable automating “no reply” because they don’t care about you at all!
In addition, silence also demonstrates “superiority” through scarcity. They want to pretend they are more notorious, solicited or VIP than they actually are.
They overestimate themselves and underestimate others, which can cost them badly in the future. A 30-second “copy and paste” reply could keep someone happy — someone who is (or can become) more connected or powerful than the narc imagined.
The former student whom the narcissist ignored, but who became the dean of the university where he works. The colleague at the next desk who became the boss. The former employee who exposes the toxic environment of the institution to journalists. The intern became friends with the CEO. And so on. The world goes around and around.
The great motivator for being kind to people and not ignoring them should obviously be empathy. But narcissists are so addicted to gaining control and supply that they can’t even act strategically and intelligently. In this sense, they go against their own interests and self-sabotage.
Finally, it may even be that the person who ghosts you or defaults to not respond to others is not toxic. As I said, the behaviour has become so normalised that it has lost some social weight. But, at the very least, this is someone with limited empathy. This type of behaviour is very disrespectful. Accept it, and it will hurt less…
If someone often fails to respond to your messages or vanishes out of the blue, this person does not respect or value you.
When Silence May Be the Best Option
However, there are some situations where not responding or ghosting may be the best solution.
For example, when dealing with a narcissist, psychopath or extremely toxic person. So, we may go into No Contact and ghost them to protect ourselves because we fear the person’s reaction. Therefore, we opted for silence or ghosting because we understood it was the best way to ensure our well-being.
In addition to ghosting, breaking off the relationship with everyone around this toxic person may be necessary, especially if they insist that the relationship needs to be maintained (enablers).
We can also be ghosted when we are being inconvenient. We may have crossed the boundaries without realising it.
For the person who ghosted us, it is pretty evident they do not want to be in a relationship because they stopped to get in touch.
Or even because the person was already explicit about it when you asked. They already gave you clear indications that the relationship was ending.
In this case, where obvious clues or even frank conversations about the relationship’s end have already happened, we are no longer talking about ghosting.
Ghosting is to vanish out of the blue when the other person believes the relationship is fine or, at the very least, is still ongoing.
Silence can be, in short, the person’s polite way of telling you again that they have turned the page without throwing it in your face that you should do the same.
Is Every Person Who Insists on Contacting us Even Without a Response a Narc?
Not every person who ignores our messages is a narc. And not every person who insists is a narc, either. But there is a healthy limit to insistence; it cannot become stalking.
If you have sent two or three messages or emails to the person, leaving some space between them – days for personal relationships or weeks and months for professional ones – and the person has not responded to any of them, move on.
If the person has responded negatively, then do not insist. “No” is a complete sentence. No means no. Period. Unless the justification for the “no” has changed.
For example, you heard from an employer that no vacancies were available at the company. But after a few months, you discovered some vacancies had opened. Or you asked someone out without knowing the person had a boyfriend and received a “no” because of this. Sometime later, you find out through mutual friends that they broke up.
In these cases, trying again doesn’t seem inappropriate to me. But a second “no” carries even more weight than the first. Therefore, if you hear a second “no”, move on without ever insisting. Life goes on. There are plenty of other fish in the sea!
But I believe insisting a little is valid if there is no explicit “no”, just silence or short answers. Several incredible partnerships in my career only came to fruition because I insisted. My insistence helped the person pay attention to me, too. My persistence has already opened countless professional doors for me.
This also applies to friendships and romantic relationships. My husband’s insistence resulted in a decades-long marriage and two beloved children.
But there is a limit to strategy. This limit varies from person to person and even between cultures. Insistence in Brazil, for example, is much more tolerated than in more formal countries, such as the United Kingdom, Germany or Japan.
We need to turn on the “boundaries meter”, even if we think the person is losing out by not paying attention to us. Maybe they really are. But it is their right, don’t you agree?
The No Reply to Impersonal Messages
Silence can still be acceptable when the message is impersonal or a mere formality. Therefore, it does not necessarily require a response.
No one is obliged to respond to the motivational phrase that a colleague sends every Monday in the company’s WhatsApp group. Or the card with flowers and a “good morning” your aunt sends you daily.
In this case, silence means the person prefers not to waste time responding to impersonal messages. Or that they hate WhatsApp and only respond when strictly necessary. That’s it, nothing more. Everything is fine between you.
Finally, some people send messages occasionally, congratulating you on birthdays or wishing you a Merry Christmas, just to keep in touch.
And the reason for keeping this channel of communication open is not love or friendship. They simply want something from you: your ear to rant about life, your borrowed money, your free work, your beach house, your contacts, etc.
In this case, not responding is also acceptable. Then, if one day this person sends you a less superficial message, asking why you disappeared and don’t return messages, you can be honest.
Anyway, there are times when silence is the best response. If the person doesn’t understand why you disappeared and openly questions you about it, tell them the truth politely, but talk to them; don’t ghost them.
And if someone ghosts you…
Believe it or not, there are times when it’s great to be ghosted! If the person is toxic or narcissistic, disappearing from your life is a favour they’re doing you.
Because silence isn’t the most dangerous dynamic in virtual games.
The Perverse and Toxic Game of “Hot and Cold”
The “hot and cold” game is more dangerous and disturbing than ghosting.
The toxic person goes from heaven to hell, from hate to love, from contempt to admiration. They write something outrageous, tearing you apart. Then they send you a very long audio, almost like a podcast episode, telling you how amazing you are.
This game can manifest itself in a passive-aggressive way. For example, when the person has selective responses or intermittent behaviours. They respond to you normally when you tell them what they want to hear. But when you set boundaries, criticise or disagree with them, you receive the silent treatment.
In this case, the person is using silence to “train” you. To condition you always to say or do what they want you to do. In other words, it is a weapon of control and an assertion of “superiority”.
It is highly toxic behaviour and certainly a red flag for narcissism.
This behaviour can also be associated with splitting: thinking things are “black or white” with no shades of grey. I wouldn’t say I like these linguistic expressions with colours because, to me, it seems like structural racism in language. But this is how experts usually explain splitting.
In splitting, the toxic person fails to understand that we all have qualities and flaws. We can also feel contradictory emotions. We can love someone, but find that person toxic. We can admire a boss’s competence but consider them unethical.
For those with “us versus them” thoughts, you are either totally good or bad; there is no middle ground. Either they love you, or they hate you. Either you are on their side or against them.
And the feelings and perceptions about you follow this oscillation. In other words, the toxic person may think you are fantastic today and consider you a despicable enemy tomorrow.
In the “hot and cold” game, the person can also go from ghosting straight to sending you a loving and kind message without explaining their disappearance. This is known as zombieing. The person reappears “from the dead” out of nowhere. They disappear for weeks and then send you a message: “Where have you been, girl? I miss you so much…”
In these cases, keep your eyes open and turn on your radar, because this zombie is a narc!
Finally, the game is equally toxic when the person ignores you most of the time, rarely responds to your messages, and pretends not to care about you, but when you are about to jump ship, they pull you back into the cycle with a lovely and sweet message.
In other words, the person doesn’t want to go into trouble to meet your expectations but doesn’t want to lose you. It’s pretty comfortable, isn’t it? With your taxi empty but with a busy signal, you’re there, losing your effort and time. You’re investing a lot in that relationship and receiving breadcrumbs in return.
This type of dynamic ends up creating a trauma bond, which is when you become addicted to this adrenaline, to this type of ambiguous relationship, full of ups and downs.
Don’t let this game prevail because the longer it goes on, the harder and more painful it is to escape later.
Mind Games are a Pirate Flag
People are generally intelligent and discerning. They realise when we love them, when we are entirely enchanted with them, or when we really want to establish a friendship or a professional partnership.
If they play virtual games, even knowing how intense our feelings are, they have little empathy and no real consideration for us. Maybe they have no empathy at all. They are simply playing with our feelings.
The person may be giving us false hope or intentionally playing with our emotions, especially if they are a self-aware narcissist or psychopath. However, they may also act this way without realising they are toxic and lack self-criticism.
In any case, do not accept being ignored for no reason. That is not nice. And do not treat anyone like this either; do not normalise this type of toxic behaviour. Do unto others as you would like them to do unto you.
Finally, be careful with those who like to play games with you. They are not harmless. They could be the tip of the iceberg of greater abuses to come. Did the relationship start with this type of dynamic? Don’t dive in headfirst. Take it slow.
If online games are accompanied by other toxic behaviours (triangulation, gaslighting, mirroring, etc.), this is not a red flag but rather a pirate flag slapping us in the face. There is a good chance that we have a narc in sight.
Our actions speak so loudly that others cannot hear our words. Even silence communicates something important to us. Have you ever felt ignored? Don’t ignore this!
Personal Cases: The Inbox of a Narcissist is Nothing Compared to the Inbox of an Empathic Person
Warning: Trigger for sensitive topics about mental health.
Most emails professors receive from students or strangers are compliments, criticisms, or requests (scholarships, guidance, jobs, interviews, partnerships, speech invitations, etc.).
As I explained in the post, ready-made templates and 30 seconds are enough for this type of message.
But do you know what empathics often receive by email from their students or professionals they work with?
Reports of sexual or moral harassment, rape, domestic violence, debts, mourning the deaths of loved ones, dramatic breakups in romantic relationships, depression, burnout, mental disorders, and addictions (gambling, drinking, drugs, etc.), among others. Including several emails or messages expressing thoughts of self-extermination.
Mental health problems in academia are becoming more severe and are a topic that has been discussed in major newspapers and journals around the world. Often, what prevents students and professors from succeeding at university is the toxic environment, combined with personal problems, which become a barrier to concentration and learning.
This type of email talking about academic problems associated with mental health conditions often includes attachments, such as police reports, psychiatric reports, photos, and even videos. The student or colleague needs to prove they are speaking the truth.
There was one time when I received such a disturbing email with such a shocking attachment that I immediately called the helpline service and said:
“Look, I don’t want to kill myself, but someone from my work just sent me an email saying that they want to take their own life. And this email came with a disturbing attachment. Please help me! What do I do now?”
We talked for an hour, and she instructed me on what to do. The attendant classified the case as “perverse.” And we are talking about a person who specialises in this type of emergency! If she considered it that way, imagine me. She was wonderful, and I did everything she advised me to do.
I also had to meet with the mental health team in human resources to report this case. I, too, needed to report other cases involving students who required support. Sometimes, a single email you receive can have countless consequences and demand writing long emails, attending meetings, etc.
Fortunately, no student, professional, or coworker who expressed to me the desire to end their own life carried out the plan. I have received several messages or emails with this type of content throughout my career as a professor and project manager, let alone during the pandemic.
Once, we were in a conversation circle with professors. We were talking about this, about the tragic things that people share with us in the workplace, in person or by email.
And a professor said, “I don’t know what you’re talking about. None of my colleagues or students discuss their personal lives with me.” I wanted to respond, “Of course not. You put yourself on a pedestal and have the contagious empathy of a robot!” But I obviously kept quiet.
The fact is that people seek help from empaths at work and in their personal lives, not from narcs. Actually, they often seek us because of these narc managers and professors, who not only ignore their emails but also abuse them.
And victims seek help mainly from women. This further widens the gender inequality. There is a massive disparity in mental load, time availability and emotional suffering between men and women because of this. And also between empaths and narcs, for sure!
We are not health professionals, and we do not have adequate training for these situations. We feel their pain and a sense of helplessness. Because there is very little we can do other than encourage the person in mental suffering to seek specialised help (psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, police, human resources, etc.).
The point I want to make is… The inbox of narcs is not challenging to tame and clean. The email inbox and messaging apps of empaths are!
So, whenever I bump into a “star” professor in the hallway, and he tells me that he did not respond to a super important email of mine because he was too busy, overloaded, blah blah blah. I say, “I completely understand…”. And my brain finishes the sentence in my mind, “… that you are an arrogant liar!”
More recently, after all the insights I’ve gained about narcissism and psychopathy, my brain has added another thought when I see this kind of selfish bad excuse:
“Poor thing… Do you get too many emails? Cry me a river, Narc!!!!”
Notes
References: Click here for books, documentaries, videos and other references for this text.
If you have self-destructive thoughts, please call helpline services available in your location. You do not have to struggle with complicated feelings alone.
Acknowledgements: Thanks to Alberto Nogueira Veiga and all who gave me their precious feedback. I would also like to thank the authors, researchers and content producers on narcissism, psychopathy, and toxic behaviours in work management for opening my eyes to this crucial issue.
Please help me improve my English by sending me your suggestions through this contact form. Thanks!
Published on my blog in Portuguese on November 16, 2024: Jogos Mentais Perigosos e Narcisismo: Não responder mensagens, ghosting, zombieing e “quente e frio”
