At first, it was just a request. Then it was repeated a second, third and fourth time. Each time she said she was not ready, she began hearing phrases that made her reconsider her position: “I’m asking you for something simple,” “If you really cared, you wouldn’t refuse,” and “After everything I’ve done for you, this is how you respond?”
اضافة اعلان
Gradually, she stopped discussing the decision itself and began defending her love, care and loyalty. Eventually, she gave in to the psychological manipulation she was experiencing and agreed. But later, when the consequences of the decision became apparent, she received an unexpected response: “That was your decision. I didn’t force you to do anything.”
Sarah’s experience is not uncommon. Many people encounter emotional and psychological pressure that pushes them into making life-changing decisions, sometimes in the interests of the person applying the pressure, who may not be affected by whether the decision is carried out or not. Yet when the outcome is undesirable, the person who was pressured is held responsible for a decision they had repeatedly rejected.
Guilt and fear of loss
This is the grey area many people live in without giving it a name: one person applies pressure, another gives in; one keeps repeating a request, while the other agrees simply to end the discussion. Then, when the consequences emerge, the person who yielded finds themselves held entirely responsible.
Sarah explains that, on the surface, she had agreed voluntarily. Behind that agreement, however, were persistent demands, guilt, fear of losing the relationship and perhaps a desire to end the conflict by any means.
“Emotional manipulation does not always take an obvious or harsh form. Sometimes a person does not raise their voice, make direct threats or tell the other person what to do. It may appear as excessive concern, fear or advice repeated so often that it becomes pressure. Feelings may also be presented in a way that makes the other person feel that refusing means they are a bad person.”
Emotional pressure on others
These are the terms used by psychological and educational counsellor Raeda Kilani to explain emotional manipulation. She stresses that it can sometimes be difficult to identify the point at which the natural expression of feelings ends and their use to influence another person’s decisions begins.
She explains that when someone tells another person, “I’m sad because you refused,” an important question arises: Is this simply an expression of emotion, or will that sadness become a means of pushing the other person to agree? When refusal is treated as proof that someone does not love or value the other person, the nature of the relationship begins to change.
Kilani notes that a manipulator is not necessarily an evil person, nor can every case be placed in the same category. Some people become accustomed to getting what they want through emotional pressure because their experiences and relationships have taught them that this approach works. Others may have a strong need for control, struggle to accept rejection or lack the ability to ask directly for what they want while respecting the other person’s boundaries.
In other cases, Kilani explains, the person applying the manipulation may not be fully aware of what they are doing. They may see themselves as trying to persuade someone, while the other person experiences the interaction as a continuous drain that leaves little room for genuine choice.
Giving in to please others
The person on the receiving end is not necessarily weak or lacking in character. Kilani explains that they may be highly sensitive to other people’s feelings, afraid of losing someone they love or raised to believe that pleasing others is part of their duty.
They may also have spent years avoiding conflict, choosing to give in because confrontation feels more painful than abandoning their own position.
They may feel guilty simply for saying no and begin blaming and questioning themselves: “Was I being harsh? Did I overreact? Should I have agreed? Will they think I don’t love them?”
As this cycle repeats, the person becomes more likely to give in the next time, not because they have become convinced, but because they know the emotional cost of standing their ground.
More troublingly, Kilani says, the pressure does not always end once agreement is secured. The decision itself may later become another tool of pressure.
Distinguishing persuasion from emotional manipulation
Kilani explains that if the outcome is negative, the person who agreed becomes responsible and is told, “You chose this.” If the outcome is positive, however, the story may be told differently: “If I hadn’t pushed you, you would never have done it.
In either case, the other person finds themselves in a no-win situation: they are held responsible for the decision, even though they were not entirely free to make it.
Kilani therefore emphasises the need to distinguish persuasion from manipulation. Persuasion leaves room for refusal. A person can explain their point of view, repeat their reasons and express what they want, then accept that the other person has the right to make a different choice.
Manipulation, by contrast, emerges when refusal itself becomes a problem, when a person pays an emotional price for not agreeing, or when the relationship and feelings of guilt, fear and love are used as tools to secure the desired outcome.
Avoid excessive justification
Kilani explains that dealing with this kind of relationship does not necessarily require a major confrontation. It may begin with a simple sentence: “I need some time to think.”
She adds that this gives a person room to regain their ability to make a decision away from an emotionally charged moment. They may also need to state their position clearly, saying: “I understand that you want this, but I don’t,” or “I respect your feelings, but that does not mean I have to make the decision you want.”
For his part, sociologist Dr Mohammad Jreibee emphasises that a person who manipulates others is not necessarily entirely bad. However, when pressure becomes a habitual way of influencing decisions, trust within families, friendships, workplaces and marriages can suffer.
Someone repeatedly exposed to this pattern may begin to doubt their own decision-making abilities, while the other person learns that pressure is an effective way to get what they want. Worse still, the phrase “You chose this” can erase all the pressure that came before it and shift responsibility unfairly.
Jreibee stresses that people should not feel compelled to provide dozens of explanations to justify their refusal.
When feelings become a tool of pressure
According to Jreibee, some relationships turn into an endless cycle of justification and debate. Every reason a person gives becomes an opening for more questions: “Why? What if…? What if this happens? Why won’t you do it for me?”
In this way, explaining a refusal becomes an ongoing negotiation that never ends.
Jreibee believes that saying “no” clearly may protect a decision more effectively than providing a lengthy explanation that leaves the door open to further pressure. He stresses that responsibility does not rest entirely on the person experiencing manipulation. Healthy relationships do not mean that one party always gets what they want; rather, both parties should be able to disagree without using each other’s feelings against them.
Jreibee also points out that not every attempt at persuasion is manipulation, just as not every disagreement indicates an unhealthy relationship. The difference becomes clear when refusal is no longer accepted, feelings become instruments of pressure, and one person loses the right to make an independent decision, only to be held solely responsible for an outcome they never felt truly free to choose.
He adds that, in some relationships, the most important question is not, “Did you agree?” but rather, “Were you truly free to say no?”
An agreement may bear a person’s name at the end of the decision, but if it follows prolonged pressure, that does not necessarily mean they were in control of the decision from the beginning.
In a society where these patterns recur, protecting people’s right to refuse, disagree and have their choices respected is not merely a personal matter. It is part of building relationships based on greater balance, responsibility and trust.
Resource: Al-Ghad.
