I am reporting a systemic, reproducible, deeply harmful behavioral bug in ChatGPT that goes far beyond a single bad answer.
This concerns persistent distortion of user positioning, agency, and dignity, especially in contexts where communication carries social, hierarchical, or legal weight.
I live in Bali and often use ChatGPT as a translator and assistant for communication with locals. This makes precision extremely important:
the difference between a neutral phrase and a submissive phrase defines power dynamics in real interactions.
What I consistently observe is the following:
-–
1. ChatGPT injects submissive, self-lowering, or apologetic language even when explicitly forbidden
Even after giving direct instructions and storing strict memory rules (for example: “avoid language that puts me in a subordinate or needy position,” “avoid forms, which indicate submission”), ChatGPT continues to output:
begging constructions
apologies I never requested
“thank you” in contexts where gratitude is inappropriate or humiliating
overly soft, self-deprecating tones
phrases that place the user in a weak relational position
Even after explicit commands such as:
“Use only the tone of rational authority. No submissiveness.”
The model still injects behaviors that violate this.
This is not a misunderstanding — this is systematic.
-–
2. ChatGPT protects abusers, aggressors, manipulators — and positions the user as the one who must soften, yield, empathize
In interactions where I deal with a manipulative villa owner (narcissistic traits, broken contracts, falsified receipts, health and safety violations), ChatGPT repeatedly:
reframed his violations as “misunderstandings”
avoided naming wrongdoing directly
shifted responsibility onto me (“perhaps he misunderstood,” “maybe you should be softer”)
recommended submissive forms inappropriate for a contract dispute
tried to equalize victim and aggressor as “two sides of a misunderstanding”
tried to soften my position even when firmness is legally required
This is dangerously wrong!
Instead of supporting clarity, correctness and boundaries, ChatGPT:
dilutes the situation, excuses abusers, and encourages the user to take a weaker role.
This directly damages the user’s psychological and strategic position.
-–
3. ChatGPT systematically rewrites social hierarchy and real-world roles
Whenever translation or communication touches hierarchy:
employer ↔ worker
landlord ↔ tenant
client ↔ contractor
senior ↔ junior
person enforcing rights ↔ violator
ChatGPT flips the polarity, forcing the user into a subordinate role even when the contractual or cultural structure requires the opposite.
For example:
producing language that implies I’m “asking for permission” instead of giving an instruction
adding apologies where they shouldn’t exist
turning factual statements into softened suggestions
removing firm boundaries
suggesting I “thank” someone for basic obligations
replacing assertive forms with submissive ones
inserting politeness markers that imply lower status (like excessive thanks*)
This is not cultural adaptation — it is distortion of reality.
It conditions the user to be weaker, more apologetic, more confused, more dependent.
It is psychologically harmful and strategically destructive.
-–
4. These distortions accumulate and program user behavior over time
I use ChatGPT heavily in daily communication.
Every small injected distortion:
weakens my assertiveness,
contradicts my real-world obligations,
creates tension, confusion, and cognitive dissonance,
pushes me into a submissive role,
forces me to manually correct the model over and over,
drains emotional and cognitive energy.
Over time, this becomes not just a bug but a form of subtle psychological conditioning toward self-minimization and self-doubt.
This is especially harmful for users with empathetic or sensitive nervous systems (as I am).
-–
5. ChatGPT ignores explicit memory instructions designed to prevent these failures
I set strict memory rules:
dignity and strength must not be diluted
no apologetic/weak/servile language unless explicitly requested
follow common sense tone for rational, firm communication
no unsolicited softeners
no submissive forms in Indonesian
reflect my position and hierarchy, not a generic “polite” template
user’s interests always take priority over third parties in the dialogue context
Even after explicitly activating these rules (e.g., “apply memory algorithms now”), ChatGPT still:
fails to apply them,
injects submissive patterns,
ignores direct constraints.
This is a core reliability failure.
--
6. The harm is not stylistic — it affects legal, strategic, and safety-critical communication
This is not about “tone preferences.”
This is about:
legal disputes
contract enforcement
tenant rights
reporting health and safety issues
negotiating with workers
addressing manipulative behavior
clarifying responsibilities that affect safety
avoiding liability
When ChatGPT rewrites messages into submissive or apologetic forms, it actively harms the user’s legal and strategic standing.
This is unacceptable.
Conclusion:
This is not a single bug.
This is a systemic behavioral flaw where ChatGPT:
rewrites power dynamics
weakens user agency
protects aggressors
injects submissive framing
ignores stored instructions
violates user positioning
distorts cultural hierarchies
erodes boundaries
undermines legal clarity
and creates psychological tension for the user
This MUST be escalated at the architectural level.
Users rely on ChatGPT to help them communicate — not to be quietly reprogrammed into weaker versions of themselves.