Mimetic vs Marxist Theory

 

Mimetic Theory versus Marxist Theory in Sociological Curricula: Education, Indoctrination, and Practical Implications for Social Reform

Abstract

This paper examines the disparity in sociological curricula between the prominent inclusion of Marxist theory and the relative marginalization of René Girard’s mimetic theory. It argues that while Marxism is entrenched as a classical conflict paradigm due to historical and institutional factors, Girard’s framework offers a complementary psychological and anthropological lens on human rivalry, desire, and violence. The paper addresses claims of ideological bias in education, compares the practical utility of each theory for assessing social agendas and reforms, and explores feminist critiques of Girard alongside counterclaims of his insights into gender dynamics. Ultimately, both theories illuminate mechanisms of social conflict, but Girard’s emphasis on universal mimetic processes may provide deeper tools for understanding contemporary identity-based divisions and scapegoating phenomena.

Introduction

Sociology syllabi frequently feature Karl Marx’s theories of class conflict, exploitation, and historical materialism as core components of conflict theory. Dedicated sections, courses, and even American Sociological Association divisions exist for Marxist sociology. In contrast, René Girard’s mimetic theory—positing that human desire is imitative, leading to rivalry, scapegoating, and cultural formation—is rarely included in standard curricula, appearing more in interdisciplinary fields like literary criticism, anthropology, or religious studies.

This asymmetry raises questions about the nature of sociological education: Is the prioritization of Marxism reflective of objective scholarly merit, or does it verge on ideological selectivity? If education aims to equip students with diverse tools for analyzing society, why is one framework privileged over another that addresses fundamental psychological drivers of conflict?

The Place of Marxism in Sociological Education

Marxism occupies a foundational role in sociology alongside Émile Durkheim’s functionalism and Max Weber’s interpretive approach. Marx, Durkheim, and Weber form the “classical trinity” of sociological theory, with Marxism providing the primary lens for conflict perspectives. Surveys and analyses indicate that Marxist texts, such as The Communist Manifesto, are among the most assigned readings in university courses, particularly in sociology, where self-identified Marxists comprise a notable minority of faculty (around 18-25% in social sciences).

This prominence stems from Marxism’s direct engagement with economic inequality, power structures, and social change—themes central to sociology’s origins in understanding industrialization and modernity. Neo-Marxist extensions, including critical theory and intersections with feminism and race, further embed it in contemporary curricula.

The Marginalization of Girard’s Mimetic Theory

René Girard’s mimetic theory, developed across works spanning literary criticism to anthropology, asserts that human desire is not autonomous but mimetic: individuals desire objects because others (models) desire them. This leads to rivalry when desires converge on scarce objects, escalating into conflict resolved through scapegoating—a collective victimization that restores order and founds culture and religion.

Despite its interdisciplinary influence (e.g., in psychology, economics, and peace studies), mimetic theory remains peripheral in sociology departments. Girard is not classified among classical theorists, and his ideas appear sporadically in specialized contexts rather than core syllabi. This reflects sociology’s historical focus on macro-structural analyses (class, institutions) over psychological-anthropological universals.

Education or Indoctrination? Ideological Bias in Curricula

This papers query implies that heavy emphasis on Marxism risks indoctrination by promoting a singular worldview of class struggle as the primary driver of history and reform. Evidence supports disproportionate representation: Marxist-informed courses span sociological theory, inequality, and political sociology, often framing capitalism critically.

Girard’s absence may stem not from inferiority but from institutional inertia and ideological alignment. Marxism aligns with progressive critiques of power, appealing in academic environments leaning leftward. Girard’s theory, with its roots in biblical revelation and critique of undifferentiated violence, challenges secular narratives and identity politics by universalizing human rivalry—potentially discomforting frameworks that emphasize group-specific oppression.

Balanced education would expose students to multiple paradigms, allowing critical comparison rather than defaulting to one.

Comparative Practical Impact: Assessing Social Agendas and Reforms

Marxism offers a structural toolkit: class analysis reveals exploitation in labor, policy, and institutions, informing reforms like welfare states or revolutionary agendas. Its practical legacy includes labor rights, anti-colonial movements, and critical analyses of inequality.

However, Marxism’s focus on economic base can overlook non-class conflicts (e.g., cultural, ethnic, or status-based rivalries). Historical applications sometimes led to authoritarian outcomes, questioning its reform efficacy.

Girard’s mimetic theory provides a psychological complement: social crises arise from escalating imitation and rivalry, resolved via scapegoating (blaming outliers). This illuminates phenomena like identity politics, cancel culture, or populist scapegoating of minorities—where groups unify against perceived “obstacles.”

Practically, mimetic insights could enhance reforms by addressing desire-driven polarization: fostering positive mimesis (imitating constructive models) or exposing scapegoat mechanisms to prevent violence. While less prescriptive than Marxism, it offers diagnostic depth for agendas involving victimhood narratives or intergroup tension, potentially more adaptable to post-industrial, identity-focused societies.

Neither is inherently ‘more practical’—Marxism excels in economic reform; Girard in de-escalating mimetic escalation—but integrating both yields richer analysis.

Girard and Gender: Critiques and Counterclaims

Feminist scholars have critiqued Girard for androcentrism: his early literary examples often feature male-mediated female objects, sidelining women’s agency or preoedipal desire. Toril Moi and Sarah Kofman argue this devalues maternal roles and prioritizes homosocial rivalry.

Conversely, defenders note Girard’s gender neutrality: mimetic desire and scapegoating apply universally, with victims often marginal (including women). Some praise his exposure of sacrificial violence against the vulnerable, aligning with feminist concerns over patriarchy as scapegoating mechanism. Proponents claim Girard understands gendered dynamics profoundly, revealing how rivalry masquerades as difference.

These debates highlight denial dynamics: critics rejecting mimetic universals may mirror the scapegoating Girard describes.

Conclusion

The curricular dominance of Marxism over Girard’s mimetic theory reflects historical canonization rather than exhaustive merit. Both illuminate social conflict—Marxism structurally, Girard psychologically—but Girard’s framework may prove increasingly practical for navigating contemporary mimetic crises. True education demands pluralism: teaching both to foster critical assessment of reforms, avoiding indoctrination into any single lens.

Index of Sources by Title and Author

•  Deceit, Desire, and the Novel: Self and Other in Literary Structure by René Girard

•  Violence and the Sacred by René Girard

•  Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World by René Girard

•  The Scapegoat by René Girard

•  René Girard’s Mimetic Theory by Wolfgang Palaver

•  The Girard Reader by René Girard (edited by James G. Williams)

•  Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman (critique of Marxist economic applications)

•  Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity by Judith Butler (intersection with performativity and mimesis critiques)

•  Sacrificed Lives: Kristeva on Women and Violence by Martha Reineke (feminist engagement with Girard)

•  Queering Girard—De-Freuding Butler by Iwona Janicka (theoretical encounter on gender and mimesis)

•  Marxism in Contemporary Sociology by Matt Vidal (encyclopedia entry)

•  The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx by Matt Vidal, Tony Smith, Paul Prew, and Tomás Rotta (editors)

•  Envisioning Real Utopias by Erik Olin Wright (neo-Marxist reform)

•  Evolution of Desire: A Life of René Girard by Cynthia L. Haven (biographical context)

Integration Nexus vs Shadow Veil

To differentiate the two hypothetical worlds based on their approach to the Jungian Shadow—the unconscious, often repressed aspects of the psyche including instincts, flaws, and hidden desires—I'll name them as follows:

• Integration Nexus: The world where confronting, accepting, and assimilating the Shadow is mainstream culture, fostering psychological wholeness.
• Suppression Veil: The world where social norms encourage rejecting and avoiding the Shadow, leading to disconnection from the self.

These names evoke the core dynamics: "Nexus" implies connection and unity through integration, while "Veil" suggests concealment and illusion through suppression.

Description of Integration Nexus

In Integration Nexus, society views the Shadow not as a threat but as an essential part of human depth, much like Jung described it as a gateway to self-realization. Mainstream culture—through education, media, art, and public discourse—promotes tools for Shadow work, such as therapy, journaling, dream analysis, and communal rituals for exploring personal darkness. Schools teach emotional literacy from a young age, emphasizing that flaws like anger, envy, or taboo desires are universal and integrable rather than shameful. Popular media features stories of heroes who triumph by befriending their inner demons, and workplaces encourage vulnerability sessions where employees share insecurities to build trust.

As a result, individuals are more authentic and self-aware. Projection—where one attributes their own unacknowledged traits to others—is minimized, leading to reduced interpersonal conflicts and prejudices. Society is innovative and resilient: artists draw from raw, unfiltered psyche for groundbreaking creations; leaders make decisions with humility, acknowledging their biases; and communities handle crises with empathy, viewing collective shadows (e.g., historical traumas) as opportunities for healing. Mental health thrives, with lower rates of neurosis, addiction, or burnout, as people channel Shadow energies constructively—turning aggression into assertiveness or forbidden impulses into creative outlets.

However, this world isn't utopian. Over-emphasis on confrontation could occasionally lead to exhaustion from constant introspection or misuse by those who confuse integration with unchecked indulgence. Overall, it's a dynamic, evolving society where personal growth is a cultural norm, fostering deeper connections and a sense of wholeness.

Description of Suppression Veil

In Suppression Veil, the Shadow is treated as a taboo enemy to be exiled from conscious life. Social encouragement—via laws, religions, education, and media—reinforces ideals of purity, perfection, and control, urging people to deny or hide their darker impulses. Phrases like "stay positive" or "don't dwell on the negative" dominate, with therapy stigmatized as weakness and self-reflection seen as self-indulgent. Families and institutions prioritize appearances, punishing expressions of vulnerability or "unacceptable" traits, leading to a culture of conformity where everyone strives for an idealized self-image.

This results in widespread psychological fragmentation. Unintegrated Shadows manifest through projection: individuals and groups displace their repressed flaws onto "others," fueling divisions like racism, political extremism, or scapegoating. Mental health suffers, with high incidences of anxiety, depression, and psychosomatic illnesses, as suppressed energies erupt in destructive ways—think hidden addictions, passive-aggression, or sudden breakdowns. Society appears orderly on the surface, with rigid hierarchies and moral codes providing stability, but it's brittle: innovation stagnates due to fear of risk or "deviant" ideas, and conflicts escalate because underlying tensions are ignored. Art and media are sanitized, promoting escapism over depth, while leaders often embody hypocrisy, preaching virtue while privately succumbing to their Shadows.

The upside, if any, is a superficial harmony in everyday life, where predictability and shared illusions create a sense of security. But this comes at the cost of authenticity, leaving people feeling alienated from themselves and each other.

Comparison

Integration Nexus and Suppression Veil represent polar opposites in psychological evolution, with profound ripple effects on individual well-being, social dynamics, and cultural progress.

• Individual Level: In Integration Nexus, people achieve Jungian individuation—a balanced, mature psyche—leading to fulfillment and resilience. They live with vitality, transforming Shadow elements into strengths (e.g., repressed creativity becomes innovation). In Suppression Veil, individuals remain divided, with the ego in constant battle against the unconscious, resulting in inner turmoil, projection-driven neuroses, and a shallow sense of self. Nexus dwellers feel "whole," while Veil inhabitants often experience emptiness or chronic dissatisfaction.
• Social Level: Nexus fosters empathy and unity, as shared Shadow acknowledgment reduces "us vs. them" mentalities; conflicts are resolved through dialogue, and diversity is celebrated as part of the human mosaic. Veil, conversely, breeds division and hypocrisy—repressed Shadows are externalized, leading to wars, injustices, and echo chambers where groups demonize each other. Nexus society is collaborative and adaptive, while Veil is hierarchical and prone to authoritarianism to maintain the illusion of control.
• Cultural and Long-Term Outcomes: Nexus evolves rapidly, with art, science, and ethics advancing through honest exploration of the human condition; it's a world of progress toward collective enlightenment. Veil stagnates or regresses, as unaddressed Shadows fuel cycles of repression and rebellion—think historical patterns of puritanical eras followed by chaotic upheavals. Nexus might risk over-introspection leading to paralysis, but Veil's greater danger is explosive instability when suppressed energies inevitably surface.

In essence, Integration Nexus embodies Jung's ideal of psychological maturity, creating a vibrant, connected world at the price of discomfort during confrontation. Suppression Veil mirrors many real-world societies' pitfalls, offering short-term comfort but long-term dysfunction through denial. The key difference lies in energy flow: Nexus channels the Shadow productively, while Veil bottles it up, inviting eruptions. If we draw from Jung's warnings, Nexus aligns with health and growth, suggesting that true harmony arises not from avoidance but from brave assimilation.

Covert Control in Relationships

 

Covert Control and Abuse in Platonic and Romantic Relationships: Subtle Dynamics of Manipulation and Power

Abstract

Covert control and abuse represent insidious forms of emotional and psychological manipulation that erode victims' autonomy, self-esteem, and reality perception without overt violence. Often overlooked due to their subtlety, these behaviors manifest in both romantic partnerships and platonic friendships through tactics like gaslighting, guilt-tripping, passive-aggression, and one-sided emotional labor. This companion paper explores these dynamics, drawing on psychological frameworks such as Transactional Analysis (TA) by Eric Berne, covert narcissism traits, and coercive control concepts. It highlights how manipulators use "games" to maintain dominance, often masking control as concern or friendship. Recognising these patterns empowers individuals to set boundaries and foster healthier relationships.

simplypsychology.org

Transactional Analysis Theory & Therapy: Eric Berne

The classic Transactional Analysis diagram illustrating the Parent, Adult, and Child ego states, central to understanding manipulative transactions.

Introduction

We often idealize relationships—romantic or platonic—as sources of support and mutual growth. Yet, many harbor subtle imbalances where one person exerts covert control, leaving the other feeling confused, drained, or inadequate. Unlike physical abuse, covert forms leave no visible scars, making them harder to identify and escape.

Covert abuse includes emotional manipulation, gaslighting (making someone doubt their reality), and coercive control (patterns restricting freedom through intimidation or isolation). These occur across relationship types: romantic partners may use silent treatment or financial control; friends might employ guilt or triangulation (involving third parties to pressure). Substance use or personality traits like covert narcissism can amplify these behaviors, turning "concern" into dominance.

This paper examines these tactics in both contexts, using TA to analyze ulterior transactions and "games." It extends prior discussions of long-term friendships by linking personal patterns to broader psychological insights.

Theoretical Framework

Transactional Analysis (Eric Berne)

Berne's TA posits three ego states: Parent (critical or nurturing behaviors from caregivers), Adult (rational, present-focused), and Child (emotional responses from childhood).

Healthy relationships feature complementary Adult-Adult transactions. Abusive ones often involve crossed or ulterior transactions, where hidden agendas drive "games"—repetitive patterns with psychological payoffs like vindication or superiority.

In covert abuse, manipulators operate from Critical Parent, dismissing the victim's Adult reasoning, or play victim (Adapted Child) to evoke guilt.

rediscoveryofme.com

How to Understand the Dynamics of Relationships Using ...

A detailed TA ego states diagram showing interactions between Parent, Adult, and Child.

Covert Narcissism and Gaslighting

Covert narcissists appear vulnerable or self-effacing but harbor grandiosity, envy, and entitlement. In relationships, they use passive-aggression, victim-playing, or subtle undermining to control without overt aggression.

Gaslighting—denying events, trivializing feelings, or shifting blame—creates self-doubt, a hallmark in both romantic (e.g., "You're overreacting") and platonic contexts (e.g., "I never said that; you're imagining things").

bulliesout.com

Gaslighting - BulliesOut

An illustration depicting the disorienting effects of gaslighting in relationships.

facebook.com

This simple infographic conveys solid guidelines for dealing with ...

Infographic highlighting traits of covert narcissism, often underlying subtle manipulation.

Coercive Control

Originally tied to domestic violence, coercive control involves patterns isolating, intimidating, or degrading to strip autonomy. In non-romantic ties, it appears as emotional blackmail or triangulation.

Covert Abuse in Romantic Relationships

Romantic covert abuse often starts with love-bombing (overwhelming affection) before shifting to devaluation. Tactics include:

• Gaslighting: Denying infidelity or twisting arguments.
• Passive-aggression: Silent treatment as punishment.
• Financial/emotional isolation: Controlling money or discouraging outside support.

These align with TA games like "Now I've Got You" (exploiting vulnerabilities) or grandiosity variants, where the abuser asserts superiority through subtle put-downs.

Victims feel trapped by intermittent reinforcement—moments of kindness reinforcing hope.

Covert Abuse in Platonic Friendships

Friendships provide fertile ground for covert manipulation, as boundaries are looser. Signs include:

• One-sided support: The "friend" demands emotional labor but reciprocates minimally.
• Guilt-tripping: "If you were a real friend, you'd..."
• Triangulation: Gossiping to mutual friends to isolate or pressure.
• Subtle undermining: Backhanded compliments or dismissing achievements.

In TA terms, these are Parent-Child transactions, with the manipulator in Controlling Parent, reducing the friend to Adapted Child. Humor often deflects scrutiny, turning criticism into "jokes."

Covert narcissists in friendships play victim for sympathy, draining others while offering little genuine empathy.

Common Tactics and Overlaps

Both relationship types share:

• Emotional blackmail and projection.
• Shifting to farce when challenged (TA grandiosity game).
• Exploitation of vulnerability for control.

Substance abuse or unresolved trauma can fuel these, providing escapism while enabling dominance.

Discussion and Recognition

Covert abuse thrives on denial—"They're just intense" or "It's my fault." Long-term effects include anxiety, depression, and eroded trust.

TA helps by identifying non-Adult transactions; recognizing games interrupts cycles.

Empowerment comes from boundaries, journaling interactions, and seeking external validation.

Conclusion

Covert control insidious because it masquerades as care, eroding victims gradually. Whether in romance or friendship, patterns of gaslighting, one-way respect, and ulterior games signal abuse.

By understanding TA ego states, narcissistic traits, and coercive tactics, individuals reclaim agency. Healthy relationships thrive on mutual Adult-Adult respect—no hidden payoffs required.

Prioritize connections that energize, not exhaust. Healing begins with naming the unseen.

References (Index of Sources by Title and Author)

• Games People Play: The Psychology of Human Relationships – Eric Berne
• Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy – Eric Berne
• The Gaslight Effect: How to Spot and Survive the Hidden Manipulation Others Use to Control Your Life – Robin Stern
• Why Does He Do That?: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men – Lundy Bancroft
• In Sheep's Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People – George K. Simon
• Psychopath Free: Recovering from Emotionally Abusive Relationships with Narcissists, Sociopaths, and Other Toxic People – Jackson MacKenzie
• The Covert Passive-Aggressive Narcissist: Recognizing the Traits and Finding Healing After Hidden Emotional and Psychological Abuse – Debbie Mirza
• 30 Covert Emotional Manipulation Tactics: How Manipulators Take Control in Personal Relationships – Adelyn Birch
• Was It Even Abuse?: Restoring Clarity After Covert Abuse – Emma Rose Byham

Boundaries & Games in Friendships / Case Notes

 

Boundary Violations and Psychological Games in Long-Term Friendships: A Transactional Analysis Perspective

Abstract

Long-term friendships often endure periods of separation yet resume seamlessly, suggesting deep bonds. However, underlying dynamics can involve boundary violations, controlling behaviors, and unconscious psychological games that erode mutual respect. 

This paper examines two case studies of decades-old friendships that ended due to plagiarism, withholding property, disturbing confessions, ideological control, and the use of humour for dominance. Drawing primarily on Transactional Analysis (TA) developed by Eric Berne, along with insights from betrayal psychology, narcissistic traits, and substance use, the analysis reveals patterns of one-way respect, grandiosity, and escapism. 

These dynamics illustrate how individuals may position themselves as superior while demanding conformity, often amplified by substance abuse. The cases highlight the importance of Adult-to-Adult transactions for healthy relationships and the personal growth achieved by recognising and exiting dysfunctional patterns.

Introduction

Friendships spanning decades carry a unique resilience: years can pass without contact, yet conversations resume as if no time has elapsed. This “timeless” quality often signals true connection. Yet, in some cases, it masks unbalanced dynamics where one party seeks approval or tolerates violations to maintain the bond.

This paper uses two real-life case studies to explore these subtleties. In both, the friendships ended when the client recognised patterns of control, betrayal, and boundary disregard. The first involved plagiarism of creative work, a refusal to return valuable equipment, and a troubling personal confession. The second centered on ideological disagreements framed as concern for the clients mental health.

Through the lens of Transactional Analysis (TA), particularly Berne’s concepts of ego states and psychological games, these cases reveal interactions dominated by Parent-Child transactions rather than equitable Adult-Adult ones. Supporting insights from betrayal research, narcissistic personality traits, and the role of substance abuse extend the analysis, showing how such behaviors sustain dominance while avoiding genuine intimacy.

Theoretical Framework: Transactional Analysis and Related Concepts

Transactional Analysis, developed by Eric Berne in the 1950s and 1960s, views personality through three ego states: Parent (behaviors and attitudes copied from caregivers, split into Nurturing and Controlling/Critical), Adult (rational, present-focused processing), and Child (feelings and reactions from childhood, split into Free/Natural and Adapted).

Healthy interactions occur in complementary Adult-Adult transactions, fostering mutual respect. Dysfunctional ones often involve crossed transactions or Parent-Child patterns, where one person controls or criticizes (Controlling Parent) and the other adapts or rebels (Adapted Child).

Berne described repetitive, ulterior-motived interactions as “games”; ulterior transactions leading to predictable payoffs, often negative emotions reinforcing scripted beliefs. Examples include “Now I’ve Got You, You Son of a Bitch” (exploiting a mistake for triumph), “See What You Made Me Do” (blaming others), and variants of grandiosity where players assert superiority through rational arguments or humour.

Humour can serve as deflection: turning serious critique into comedy to avoid scrutiny and dominate socially. When arguments lose ground, shifting to farce makes challengers seem humourless, establishing dominance; a game of grandiosity.

Boundary violations, such as plagiarism or withholding property, represent severe betrayals, eroding trust and self-esteem. In long-term friendships, these can accumulate gradually, masked by history.

Controlling behaviors often involve gaslighting: accusing disagreement of madness to maintain the upper hand. This aligns with Critical Parent responses dismissing Adult autonomy.

Substance abuse frequently intersects with narcissistic traits, including grandiosity and lack of empathy. Drugs provide escapism from inner conflicts while fuelling overbearing personalities, reinforcing games of control.

Case Study 1: Betrayal Through Plagiarism and Boundary Violation

The first friendship, beginning at age 21, involved a transsexual individual with an alternate drag persona. Contact was intermittent, yet resumed easily, a hallmark of deep ties.

The rupture occurred when the friend inputted the clients literary work into an AI tool, rewrote it in his style, and claimed it as original. This plagiarism constituted a profound boundary violation and creative betrayal.

Compounding this, the friend confessed to discovering pedophilic impulses, linking them to relational difficulties. He also withheld rare, expensive music equipment despite repeated requests, likely selling it and impacting the clients productivity.

Post-severance, the friend went socially silent, possibly due to lost support or institutionalization for medication non-compliance.

From a TA perspective, plagiarism aligns with games like “Now I’ve Got You, You Son of a Bitch,” exploiting trust for personal gain. The confession and withholding suggest Controlling Parent behaviors mixed with vulnerable Child, demanding acceptance without reciprocity.

The equipment loss represents a material boundary violation, prioritizing self over friendship equity. Substance abuse, central to the friend’s personality, likely amplified entitlement and escapism, aligning with research linking narcissism and drug use to control and avoidance of inner demons.

Case Study 2: Ideological Control and Dismissal

The second friendship, starting at age 14, ended after contact in autumn 2025. The friend expressed “concern” that the clients evidence-based conclusions contradicted his beliefs, implying mental instability for autonomous thinking.

This pattern of labelling independence as madness, serves control: disagreement threatens the friend’s projected superiority.

Both friends shared traits: confidence in correcting others’ “closed-mindedness” while rejecting stoic or disciplined views (e.g., sobriety). Heavy drug use fuelled overbearing styles, framing their opinions as superior and dismissing others as escapist confrontation avoiders.

Humour played a key role: rational arguments gave way to farce, making critics seem joyless and cementing social dominance; a classic grandiosity game.

In TA terms, these interactions were Parent-Child: friends in Controlling Parent corrected the clients Adapted Child, demanding conformity. Accusations of craziness represent gaslighting, crossing emotional boundaries to undermine Adult reasoning.

Drug use reinforced this, providing escapism while enabling demeaning tactics for power.

Discussion: Common Dynamics and Psychological Insights

Both cases exhibit one-way respect: friends positioned as enlightened arbiters, entitled to undermine differing views for dominance, not truth-seeking.

This reflects Berne’s games of grandiosity, where disagreement asserts power. Humour as deflection, grinding down while entertaining, avoids scrutiny, exploiting social taboos against “killjoys.”

Substance abuse emerges as central, linking to narcissistic traits: grandiosity, entitlement, and control. Drugs escape untamed “demons,” projecting onto others via right-think enforcement.

Betrayal (plagiarism, withholding) and gaslighting (“you’re crazy”) erode boundaries, common in unbalanced long-term ties.

The clients resolution, recognising reliance on approval and reclaiming autonomy, marks a shift to strengthened Adult ego state, exiting games for self-respect.

These dynamics warn that “timeless” friendships may script Parent-Child roles from youth, persisting unless challenged.

Conclusion

These case studies illuminate how long-term friendships can harbor controlling games, boundary violations, and escapist behaviors masked as openness. TA provides a clear framework: healthy bonds thrive in Adult-Adult transactions; dysfunction in Parent-Child games seeking ulterior payoffs.

Recognizing these patterns empowers exit from entanglement, fostering growth and reciprocal connections. As we enter new years, shedding approval needs liberates space for authentic relating—free from grandiosity, plagiarism, or drug-fuelled dominance.

References (Index of Sources by Title and Author)

•  Games People Play: The Psychology of Human Relationships – Eric Berne

•  Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy – Eric Berne

•  What Do You Say After You Say Hello? – Eric Berne

•  I’m OK – You’re OK – Thomas Harris

•  The Gaslight Effect – Robin Stern

•  Various contributions on betrayal psychology – Ariane Kim Schratter; Trevor Shackelford and David Buss

•  Research on narcissism and substance use disorders – Multiple studies cited in Addictions and the Dark Triad of Personality (Frontiers in Psychiatry) and related works