Introduction
The concept of gaslighting stems from a play famously known as Gas Light. Within this play, a husband manipulates his wife into doubting her perception of reality by changing seemingly insignificant aspects of their environment, ultimately resulting in the progressive decline of her mental health. Over time, the term gaslighting was adapted from this play into a psychological context, thus becoming what we deem it today - a form of manipulation where the perpetrator deliberately causes the victim to doubt their reality, often to gain control or power over them (Stark, 2019). This definition can very well be extended into a racial setting, fundamentally describing experiences in which people of color are made to doubt or devalue their encounters with racism. This phenomenon, as aforementioned, is particularly corrosive in Brazil.
Within the republic, racial gaslighting holds a presence in both interpersonal and institutionalized interactions - most commonly manifesting through peoples’ denied, dismissed, and minimized confrontations with racism. This denial and invalidation is further pushed by the idea of Brazil as a “racial democracy” - a longstanding narrative that posits racial harmony and equality as a result of widespread racial mixing and the lack of formal racial discrimination (Freyre, 1933). This article poses the argument that it is harmful ideas, such as racial democracy, that hinder the social progression of developing countries but, furthermore, that racial gaslighting can manifest as both a form of emotional abuse and a tool for maintaining racial inequality.
The Context of Racial Dynamics in Brazil
Brazil was the last of the Americas to abolish slavery in 1888. The sheer number of Africans left after slavery, combined with little to no efforts to integrate manumitted individuals into greater society, left Afro-Brazilians disproportionately impoverished and marginalized. This fleeting moment in time constituted a racial hierarchy that would persist and thrive for over a century. It would also constitute a racial hierarchy distinct in its nature due to historical roots, socio-cultural dynamics, and the ongoing complexities surrounding ethnicity and racial categorization.
Brazil’s racial dynamics can be characterized by its eccentric and complex nature, which directly reflects the country’s diverse population and unique historical context. Contrary to specific rigid racial classification systems found across the globe, Brazil employs a more fluid system with more categories to represent a broader spectrum of people better. These categories include branca (people of European descent ), parda (multiracial), preta (of African descent ), amarela (of Asian descent ), and indígena (indigenous Brazilian). An important thing to note is that although there is a distinct difference between pardos and pretos, pretos being predominantly of African descent and pardos typically having more varied ancestry, pardos are still considered to be part of the broader Afro-Brazilian category (in majority instances). The term ‘Afro-Brazilian’ - encompasses all individuals with a level of African ancestry in Brazil - the complexity lies in the fact that the categorization of ‘pardo’ typically reflects a combination of African, European, and, to a lesser extent, Indigenous ancestry (United Nations, 2021). Resultantly, people who identify as pardos can navigate their racial identity in a number of ways, especially blurring the lines between preto and pardo in activist contexts and discussions of racial discrimination.
The phenomenon of racial gaslighting can very closely be linked to the obscurity of this racial identification system. Because racial identity in Brazil is so inexplicit, owing to the country’s diversity, but importantly also left to subjective interpretation in many instances - individuals who experience racism are very likely to face additional challenges in having their experiences validated. In this context, racial gaslighting would look like a pardo being told they are “not black enough” to face racism or that having lighter skin means that they benefit from certain privileges pretos do not have access to, ultimately invalidating their lived experience with discrimination. It is here that we realize the ambiguity of racial labels in the republic can be weaponized to obscure racial discussions or, on the extreme end (which is not so extreme), dismiss claims of inequality and deflect accountability from the government (Ribeiro, 2019). This resembles unaffected institutions and individuals suggesting that issues like poverty, police brutality, and socioeconomic disparity exist solely as a result of personal choice and ‘cultural differences’ rather than acknowledging faults in an unequal constitution and covertly racist systems.
Pedagogical perspectives give us more valuable insight into how racial gaslighting is presently addressed and perpetuated within society, namely, the significant role educational institutions play in either enforcing or dismantling these racial biases. Most scholarly frameworks, specifically those informed by critical race theory and social justice education, argue that addressing the psychological components of manipulation and oppression is crucial to unraveling racism’s complex dynamics. For instance, the teaching of gender studies in schools clearly illustrates how curricula can either reinforce or challenge systemic inequality. In schools all over the world, the lack of inclusive gender education reflects the generalization and stigma surrounding the topic as a whole - much like how the omission and distortion of black history maintain racist ideologies. It is this form of systemic bias that serves not only to defend harmful stereotypes but also to manipulate the perceptions of students - notably, those from marginalized backgrounds as you very literally deny and trivialize their lived experiences (Van T. Lac, 2017).
Beyond the walls of academia, the same gaslighting plays out in everyday attitudes: In 2023, an overwhelming 81 % of Brazilians acknowledged that racism is real, yet only 11 % confessed to having any racist attitudes (Lucca, 2023). This collective shrug was made painfully clear in Recife’s 2022 maternal health study - despite broad recognition of Black women’s disproportionate mortality, most residents balked at race-specific programs, yielding meager gains for those most at risk (Recife Health Council, 2022). Such dissonance between awareness and accountability shows how the myth of racial democracy seeps from curricula into public life, sidelining the very equity-driven remedies Brazil so desperately needs.
Mechanisms of Racial Gaslighting
Racial gaslighting works through specific mechanisms that undermine the experiences and identities of marginalized people. First, outright denial of racism: In Brazil, denial is tied to the myth of racial democracy. Authorities or media may claim that racism does not exist or is exaggerated, insisting that the country is harmonious. This silences victims and makes them doubt their reality. For example, dismissing an Afro-Brazilian’s complaint by saying, “We are all mixed here,” denies systemic bias.
Second, victim-blaming: When discrimination is acknowledged, responsibility is shifted onto individuals. Gaslighters might say that Black people fail in life due to poor choices or lack of effort, ignoring structural obstacles. Phrases like “if they worked harder, they would succeed” or “they just need to integrate better” serve this purpose. Such statements imply that racial disparities are personal, not societal, thereby invalidating legitimate claims of injustice.
Third, false admiration (cultural appropriation): Celebrating aspects of Black culture (e.g., samba, capoeira) without addressing underlying inequality can itself be a form of gaslighting. Brazil, for example, proudly showcases Afro-Brazilian heritage yet minimizes the daily struggles of its creators. Treating culture as entertainment distracts from real issues. When outsiders see Brazil’s vibrant cultural exports, they may incorrectly conclude that racial relations are healthy - a dangerous misunderstanding that trivializes ongoing marginalization.
Building on these mechanisms, the psychological toll of racial gaslighting is both personal and far-reaching. When individuals have their experiences of racism consistently denied or dismissed, they begin to internalize these responses - leading to self-doubt, diminished self-worth, and reluctance to speak out. Research shows that repeated exposure to racial microaggressions and gaslighting contributes to heightened stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. Torres, Driscoll, and Burrow (2010), in a study on high-achieving African Americans, found that racial microaggressions directly impact psychological well-being, often causing internal conflict and emotional distress. Similarly, Pittman (2019) observed that Black students at predominantly white institutions reported reduced sense of belonging and increased emotional strain due to racial microaggressions, contributing to alienation and psychological fatigue. These findings align with how racial gaslighting undermines trust in institutions and perpetuates systems where racism becomes normalized and unchallenged.
Long-Term Social and Cultural Consequences of Racial Gaslighting
The long-term consequences of racial gaslighting extend deeply into public trust, especially in marginalized communities. When systemic racism is consistently denied or minimized, individuals begin to view key institutions—such as law enforcement, education, and healthcare—as adversaries rather than protectors. Nowhere is this more visible than in medical settings. Beyond the legacy of abuses like the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, recent data shows the persistence of racial bias in modern healthcare. A 2023 Kaiser Family Foundation report found that 18% of Black adults in the U.S. experienced racial discrimination during medical visits, with many reporting that their pain or symptoms were dismissed (Artiga et al., 2023). Similarly, a 2022 study by Greenwood et al. found that hospitals serving primarily Black patients had higher mortality rates and lower access to critical resources—underscoring the systemic inequities that racial gaslighting seeks to obscure. This erosion of trust fuels what scholars term the “disengagement-inequity cycle,” where people disengage from institutions that devalue their experiences, further entrenching inequality and obstructing reform.
Moreover, racial gaslighting largely contributes to the pervasive culture of silence and complicity. In societies where people are likely to be shamed for speaking out against prejudice, open discourse is close to impossible - unironically, open discourse is single-handedly the most crucial instrument to social revolution. This metaphoric silence not only permits systemic racism but hinders the possibility of collective action and advocacy. Consequently, marginalized communities may struggle to mobilize against oppressive regimes effectively. Historically, this materialized due to a lack of traction for the black consciousness movement in Brazil during the 1970s. Due to the prevailing narrative of racial democracy, potential allies often dismissed calls for justice as exaggerated or unnecessary (Ribeiro, 2019). This perpetuated the exact same complicity and silence that any democracy should aim to eradicate.
Culturally, racial gaslighting perpetuates harmful stereotypes and generalizations about racial minorities. When narratives around race are dominated by concepts like racial democracy, the real struggles of Afro-Brazilians and other marginalized groups are relegated to the margins. This not only distorts public perceptions of racial relations in Brazil but impacts how the culture is 'valued 'and understood. For instance, Afro-Brazilian culture may be celebrated superficially, as noted previously, without addressing the underlying social issues faced by these communities. This disingenuous engagement further fetishizes the culture and objectifies these minority identities, reducing them to entertainment rather than the beautiful, nuanced cultures they are.
Lastly, the enduring effects of racial gaslighting magnify economic injustice by masking employment obstacles. In Brazil, white workers earned an average of R$ 3,099 per month in 2021 - 75.7% more than Black workers, who earned R$ 1,764 - and 70.8% more than Brown (“Pardo”) workers, who made R$ 1,814 (Agência Brasil, 2022). Despite representing over 53% of the workforce, Black and Brown employees held only 29.5% of managerial positions, compared to 69% held by whites. Unemployment rates were also notably higher for Black (16.5%) and Brown (16.2%) workers than for white workers (11.3%) (Agência Brasil, 2022). These disparities are not just statistics - they reflect systemic exclusion masked by meritocratic rhetoric. Racial gaslighting thrives on denying these structural inequalities and obstructs meaningful policy responses to address them.
Paradoxically, despite overwhelming recognition of racism’s presence, personal accountability remains elusive: a 2023 national survey by Ipec found that 81 % of Brazilians acknowledge the existence of racism in the country, yet only 11 % admit to harboring discriminatory attitudes (Lucca, 2023). This discrepancy underscores how subtle, often unrecognized biases fuel the very gaslighting that obscures systemic inequality.
Comparative Analysis of Racial Gaslighting in Brazil and Other Contexts
Racial gaslighting is a global phenomenon that manifests differently depending on a country’s historical and cultural context. Comparing Brazil and the United States - two nations shaped by slavery and racial inequality - reveals how contrasting narratives are used to sustain similar outcomes: the denial of systemic racism and the silencing of marginalized voices.
In the United States, racial gaslighting is often embedded in individualist rhetoric. Despite widespread acknowledgment of racial inequality, there is a persistent tendency to frame disparities as the result of personal failure rather than structural discrimination. This is reflected in statements like those of former U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson, who claimed, “Poverty is a state of mind,” - suggesting that systemic barriers are irrelevant if individuals try harder. This reinforces the myth of a meritocratic society and discourages recognition of institutional racism.
By contrast, Brazil’s racial gaslighting is rooted in collective denial through the myth of racial democracy - the notion that racial mixing has created a society free of discrimination. This narrative presents Brazil as post-racial, even as Afro-Brazilians face widespread inequality. The myth serves to obscure racism by making any mention of race appear divisive or unnecessary. As a result, public discourse in Brazil often avoids race entirely, making acknowledgment of systemic issues difficult.
While the U.S. confronts racism through a lens of overt systemic history, Brazil’s gaslighting is more covert - shrouded in myths of unity. This difference in framing fundamentally shapes public denial and policy resistance. In both countries, however, affirmative action policies have faced backlash, often under the pretense of promoting fairness. In the U.S., opponents argue that these policies disadvantage white applicants, labeling them “reverse racism” (Norton & Sommers, 2011). In Brazil, critics claim such measures are unnecessary in a supposedly racially harmonious society.
Ultimately, both contexts reveal how dominant racial ideologies—whether individual meritocracy or collective harmony - are weaponized to dismiss racial injustice. Understanding these differences is essential for building solidarity among global anti-racist movements and developing strategies that respond to local forms of denial.
Intersectionality within Racial Gaslighting
Intersectionality is not merely a framework but a necessity for understanding the intricate layered nature of oppression that racial gaslighting imposes on marginalized groups. Racial gaslighting, like most prejudice, is rarely experienced in isolation; instead, it intersects with other forms of discrimination, such as sexism, classism, and homophobia, to create a unique oppressive reality for every individual. Failing to account for these intersections risks oversimplifying this phenomenon and consequently undermining efforts to address it.
The concept of triple oppression - where race, class, and gender converge to uniquely disadvantaged individuals – offers a compelling lens through which racial gaslighting can be studied. This frame is particularly relevant in the Brazilian context, where systemic inequalities are deeply entrenched and multifaceted.
Consider the experiences of a black woman in Brazil. As a target of both racism and sexism, they face a dual burden that amplifies the harm of racial gaslighting. For instance, when women report workplace discrimination, they are, more often than not, going to be met with dismissive remarks that attribute their grievances to hypersensitivity or misinterpretation. This gaslighting is compounded by racial stereotypes that frame black women as inherently stubborn or angry, which serves to delegitimize their experiences and silence their voices. Researchers Barnini Bhattacharyya and Jennifer Berdahl, respectively members of Ivey Business School and the University of British Columbia, conducted a study involving 65 women of color in Canada and the U.S. They found that invisibility is a recurring experience for women of color in traditionally white and male professions. An overwhelming number of participants reported being overlooked, having their contributions ignored, and facing challenges in gaining recognition for their work. The intersection of race and gender in this context creates a unique form of oppression that cannot be fully understood through a single-axis analysis.
Adding a class dimension further complicates this reality. Black women from economically disadvantaged backgrounds are disproportionately employed in precarious jobs, such as domestic work, where they already have to endure racial gaslighting from employers who deny the existence of racism while exploiting their labor under dehumanizing conditions. Employers may invoke paternalistic narratives to justify their behavior, framing themselves as benevolent providers while simultaneously mistreating their workers. This confluence of racial, gendered, and class-based oppression demonstrates the necessity for an intersectional lens in grasping the mechanisms of racial gaslighting.
Similarly, Black LGBTQ+ individuals encounter a form of racial gaslighting that is further entangled with homophobia or transphobia. For example, a black transgender woman may face skepticism for her experiences with discrimination, interlocutors attributing her challenges entirely to her gender identity while simultaneously disregarding the racial dimension. This erasure not only invalidates her lived experience as a trans-black woman but disregards the layered nature of oppression she has faced. In 2023, 90.9% of transgender and gender non-conforming individuals killed in the U.S. were people of color, with 61.8% being Black transgender women (Keller, 2023). This statistic underscores the compounded violence faced by Black transgender women, highlighting how their racial and gender identities intersect to amplify their vulnerability. The erasure of this intersectionality in discussions of discrimination perpetuates a harmful cycle of invisibility and marginalization, further reinforcing the need for a more nuanced understanding of oppression.
In an educational setting, black students in predominantly white institutions are likely to face racial gaslighting that intersects with class and privilege. These students may be told that their success is solely the result of affirmative action, hence undermining their accomplishments and reinforcing harmful stereotypes about black intellectual inferiority. Research indicates that Black students at predominantly white institutions (PWIs) often encounter challenges that undermine their academic achievements. A study published in the Journal of Black Psychology found that stereotype threat - concerns about being judged or maltreated based on racial stereotypes - negatively impact Black students’ academic performance and psychological well-being (Massey & Owens, 2013). This, compounded with the notion that affirmative action is a determinant of black success, exacerbates feelings of imposter syndrome among black students.
The healthcare system offers yet another arena where intersectionality is an indispensable argument. Black women frequently experience medical gaslighting, where their symptoms are dismissed or downplayed due to both gender and racial biases. Studies have shown that black women are less likely to receive adequate pain management or timely diagnosis, a stereotype rooted in stereotypes surrounding their physical resilience and emotional stability. These biases are further amalgamated with socioeconomic factors, which limit access to quality healthcare. Here, we see that an intersectional analysis exposes how these overlapping systems of oppression can manifest in life-threatening ways, making it clear that racial gaslighting in healthcare cannot be addressed without considering its intersectional dimensions.
In arguing for the indispensability of intersectionality, it becomes evident that any effort to combat systemic racism in Brazil must go beyond surface-level understanding of race. Policies and interventions that fail to account for the interplay of race, gender, class, etc., risk perpetuating the same inadequacies they aim to eradicate. By adopting an intersectional framework, we can better identify the root causes of racial gaslighting and develop strategies to address its multifaceted nature.
Ultimately, intersectionality is not just a theoretical construct – but a practical tool to combat the structures that sustain racial gaslighting within Brazil. By recognizing and respecting the interconnected nature of oppression, we can move towards a more inclusive and discrimination-free society.
Conclusion
As discussed, to combat racial gaslighting and its impacts, enacting educational reforms is crucial. Implementing anti-racism and inclusivity programs within schools and universities could be a plausible solution to deconstructing racial biases and validating the experiences of minority groups. Brazil could look to the example of Colombia’s Law 70, which mandates Afro-Colombian history education as a means to acknowledging a legacy of inequity and empowering present-standing afro-descendant communities. Introducing similar requirements within the Brazilian curricula could foster widespread black consciousness and social awareness; on a pedagogical level, it may even challenge harmful narratives that reinforce racial democracy and gaslighting. Through this, we see the benefit of comparative analysis of contexts beyond Brazil’s borders and the invaluable nature of external references for resolving longstanding systemic inequality.
On a policy level, targeted anti-discrimination laws and proactive enforcement mechanisms are called for. Strengthening laws like the Racial Equality Statute of 2010 in Brazil, which advocated for equal opportunity for black Brazilians, but with finer monitoring strategies and harsher accountability measures, could be a viable course of action to mitigate the harms of racial discrimination. Inspiration should also be drawn from countries faced with similar challenges. South Africa’s Employment Equity Act (EEA) (policy enacted after the end of apartheid with the aim of addressing employment inequity) serves as an outstanding model, demonstrating how affirmative action that targets systemic bias can effectively mobilize against workplace inequality. By adopting similar measures, Brazil can tackle its deeply rooted social issues and work towards the ideal of a real racial democracy.
Conclusively, one could easily attribute many disparities to the fault of individuals and minority groups, but the truth is that the cause is far more nuanced - intersectional. Moreover, in denying the complexities of racism in a country like Brazil, you invalidate the lived experiences of millions faced by prejudice every day. More so, you deny the chance of social progress, hence inadvertently stagnating the holistic growth of your society. Racial gaslighting, like many social issues, profoundly shapes both individual lives and societal structures, and thus, confronting and dismantling these harmful narratives is even more crucial to achieving true democracy.