8 things master manipulators love to bring up in an argument, according to psychology

Arguments with emotionally manipulative people don’t feel like normal disagreements. They feel like you’ve entered a theater where the script keeps changing — and somehow, you’re always cast as the villain.

Or like a game of chess where your opponent is playing four moves ahead, and you didn’t even realize you were on the board.

One minute, you're defending yourself calmly. The next, you're apologizing for things you didn’t do, second-guessing your memory, or wondering how you became the one crying when they started the conflict.

That’s not by accident.

Master manipulators — especially those who’ve been getting away with it for years—use specific psychological tactics during arguments to flip the narrative, dodge accountability, and maintain control.

Think of them as emotional improvisers and strategic chess players. They play on timing, ambiguity, and misdirection. Their goal isn’t resolution. It’s domination disguised as discourse.

Below are 8 specific things master manipulators love to bring up in arguments — according to psychology and lived experience — and what those moves really mean. 

1. “Remember that time you messed up?”

This is the classic counterattack.

You bring up something that hurt you or didn’t sit right, and instead of engaging, they pivot. Suddenly the conversation is no longer about the issue at hand—it’s about that one thing you did six months ago.

You forgot their birthday once, so how dare you bring up that they’ve been emotionally distant for weeks.

This tactic is designed to throw you off balance by activating guilt.

Psychologists call this deflection by moral equivalence. It’s a chess move: take your queen off the board by reminding you that your pieces aren’t clean either.

Analogy: Like an improv actor who, when challenged, throws the spotlight back on you, ad-libbing your worst scene out of nowhere to change the tone of the play.

2. “I guess I’m just the worst person ever, huh?”

This one is a masterclass in victim reversal. You express hurt, and instead of accountability, they collapse into exaggerated self-loathing. It sounds like surrender, but it’s actually an emotional trap.

This tactic uses covert narcissism — the kind that plays the martyr to escape responsibility. The manipulator shifts from opponent to victim, forcing you to comfort them instead of holding them accountable.

Suddenly you’re saying, “No, no, that’s not what I meant,” instead of getting your needs addressed. Game, set, match.

Analogy: It’s like arguing with a chess master who flips the board, lies on the floor, and says, “Why do I even try?”—while you rush to clean up the mess.

3. “Everyone else agrees with me”

Here comes the ghost jury. They’ll tell you their friends, family, coworkers, or even your mutual connections also think you’re being unreasonable. There’s rarely any proof—just vague references. “Even your sister said you’re always overreacting.” “My exes never had this issue.”

This tactic is a form of triangulation, where the manipulator invokes third parties (real or imagined) to validate their position and isolate you.

It makes you feel like the minority in your own reality.

Like you must be crazy, overly sensitive, or selfish. Even if you’re 100% in the right.

Analogy: Imagine playing chess, but your opponent claims the audience behind you is booing your every move—even though you can’t hear them. It’s psychological pressure without substance.

4. “Why are you making this such a big deal?”

This is a minimization tactic.

It reframes your reaction as irrational, dramatic, or disproportionate. The goal is to make you question your emotional response and shrink your voice.

According to psychology, this taps into a phenomenon known as gaslighting. The manipulator redefines your perception of reality to gain control over it.

And because most of us don’t want to be seen as overly reactive, we often retreat. We downplay our feelings. We let it go.

Which is exactly what they wanted.

Analogy: It’s like being told you imagined the checkmate. “It’s not checkmate. You’re just seeing the board wrong.”

5. “You’re just like your mother/father/that ex you hated”

This one goes straight for the identity wound. The moment you bring up an issue, they compare you to the person you’ve tried your whole life not to become.

It’s personal. It’s intentional. And it’s psychologically potent.

This is projective identification in action: they project a toxic trait onto you, then provoke you until you start believing it—or acting defensive in a way that looks like confirmation.

Wondering why it works?

Because identity is vulnerable territory. We want to be understood and seen clearly. Weaponize that, and you can unravel someone mid-sentence.

Analogy: Like slipping a sabotaged piece onto the chessboard and telling you it was yours all along.

6. “I guess you just want to fight, like always.”

This is a pre-emptive discrediting. Before you even get to your point, they label you as combative, aggressive, or impossible to talk to.

It’s a variation of DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender), a common pattern in manipulative dynamics.

You bring up a grievance, and suddenly you’re the attacker, they’re the target.

This tactic makes you question whether it’s even safe to speak up again. That’s the real goal: to make confrontation feel futile.

Analogy: It’s like showing up for a game and being told you’re not allowed to play—because last time, your moves were “too intense.”

7. “You’re too emotional to talk about this right now.”

On the surface, this seems reasonable. Emotions are high. Take a break, right?

But manipulators use this line selectively—only when you’re upset. Not when they’re shouting or spiraling. Only when your voice carries truth that threatens their control.

This is a version of emotional invalidation — framing your feelings as a barrier to communication instead of a signal that something needs attention.

And once that door closes, it rarely reopens. The issue gets buried. Again.

Analogy: Like a chess player saying, “We’ll play later, when you’re not so invested in winning,” as they walk off with half your pieces.

8. “Fine, forget it. You never listen anyway.”

This is the escape hatch. When they feel cornered, manipulators often pull the plug on the whole conversation.

Not because they’re overwhelmed—but because you’re getting too close to the truth.

The tactic here is called stonewalling.

It halts the conversation by framing you as emotionally unavailable or unfair, flipping the power dynamic one last time before exiting.

You end up chasing closure. Or worse—apologizing to win back their attention.

Analogy: Imagine making a perfect move in chess, only to have your opponent knock over the board and say, “This game is pointless.”

Final thoughts

Not every canceled plan or heated argument is manipulation. People forget. People get overwhelmed. People say the wrong thing. That’s human.

But when these patterns repeat—when your feelings are consistently minimized, when the conversation is always somehow your fault, when you leave interactions feeling smaller, shakier, or unsure of your own memory—that’s not communication. That’s control.

The best thing you can do? Step back and observe the game being played. You don’t need to win it. You just need to name it.

And once you do, you can decide something powerful: to stop playing altogether.

Because while manipulators treat arguments like chess or improv—strategic, performative, all about the win—you don’t have to. You can choose something different. Truth over tactics. Clarity over chaos.

And sometimes, walking away from the board is the most strategic move of all.