Understanding the “traumatic invalidation” experienced by Jews after October 7

Presentation of the article “Traumatic Invalidation in the Jewish Community after October 7”

 

What is “traumatic invalidation”? According to psychologists Miri Bar-Halpern and Jaclyn Wolfman, it is a concept that could adequately describe the subjective effects of October 7 on the psyche of many Jews. Their important work is presented here by clinical psychologist Céline Masson.

 

 

“Traumatic invalidation within the Jewish community after October 7, 2023” is the title of the article by Miri Bar-Halpern and Jaclyn Wolfman published in May 2025 in the Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment. The two psychologists give a name to an often overlooked reality: traumatic invalidation. This refers to the denial of the suffering caused by the trauma experienced by Jewish communities after the mass crimes of October 7, 2023 (still referred to as pogromist razzia). The two therapists, who specialize in psychotrauma, report the testimonies of people who, instead of being listened to with “compassion and attention,” were met with reactions of embarrassment, silence, or contempt resulting from a denial of the atrocities committed on October 7.

In France, the testimonies that we, as psychologists and psychiatrists, receive indicate that Jewish and even non-Jewish individuals^[1] sometimes suffer more from this denial of reality than from the events of October 7 that shook them. Drawing on their clinical experience, the authors consider that “traumatic invalidation” offers a relevant framework for analyzing the effects of antisemitism on the mental health of the Jewish community, particularly since October 7. They report a 140% increase in cases of antisemitism in the United States between 2022 and 2023, with a significant spike after October 7 (Anti-Defamation League^[2]).

The delegitimization of the narrative prevents the recognition of suffering and trauma.

What does “traumatic invalidation” mean? This concept refers to the minimization, denial, or disqualification of a subject’s traumatic experience. This delegitimization of their narrative and emotions prevents recognition of their suffering and trauma. As we have seen, there is sometimes a complete annihilation of empathy. The authors cite psychologist and researcher Melanie Harned^[3], who writes that “Invalidating behaviors can take many forms, but they share a common characteristic: they attack the person’s self-esteem and worth by making them feel that they are bad, wrong, unacceptable, and undesirable.”<footnote>Harned, M. S. (2022). Treating trauma in dialectical behavior therapy: The DBT prolonged exposure protocol (DBT PE). Guilford Press. Psychological trauma is defined as a sudden, highly intense, and disruptive experience—a real shock that changes a person’s life—caused by exposure to a threat that affects their physical and psychological well-being without them having the means to cope with it. In 1980, with the support of Vietnam War veterans and psychoanalysts, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) recognized the new diagnosis called “post-traumatic stress disorder” (PTSD). It was included in the same year in the Diagnosis and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM III of the APA) and in 1992 in the ICD 10 (International Classification of Diseases of the WHO). Although this syndrome has been heavily criticized, and rightly so, it has nevertheless helped to raise awareness of the concept of psychological trauma among the general public. In my opinion, its greatest merit has been to gain medical and psychological recognition for the suffering of individuals. Usually, a person who has suffered trauma elicits a form of empathy from those around them, which encourages help and support. On the other hand, when suffering is denied or minimized, it becomes much more difficult for the victim to benefit from this help.

The two therapists observe that their patients, as well as their Jewish colleagues, have had to deal with reactions from friends, colleagues, or institutions marked by indifference or even a refusal to show attention and compassion. Worse still, they have sometimes encountered denial of the atrocities of October 7, the impact of which affected them directly or indirectly. Without exception, all of them have experienced profound pain as a result.

After October 7: denial, silence, and types of invalidation

“Traumatic invalidation” manifests itself in awkward or even dismissive silences, averted gazes, rationalizations that obscure suffering, distortion of what is said, relativization of traumatic experiences and pain, or even denial of reality, signs of weariness, neutralization of the significance of the experience, competition over suffering, and trivialization of the emotions expressing that suffering.

“Traumatic invalidation” based on Jewish identity can manifest itself in various ways: through insults such as “dirty Zionist,” through antisemitic acts such as tearing a mezuzah from the doorframe of a home, or through repeated exposure to antisemitic remarks or acts.

The lack of recognition—indifference, denial, or discreet support—causes a feeling of abandonment.

People who experience traumatic invalidation are at risk of developing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): intrusive thoughts, avoidance behaviors, mood swings, or even traumatic dissociation. All of these manifestations can have major psychological repercussions, which can sometimes be severely debilitating.

Nine forms of “traumatic invalidation” have been identified, including:

1. Emotional neglect

This is a major form of traumatic invalidation: it involves denying or ignoring another person’s distress by refusing to offer support and recognition, particularly when it comes to the pain associated with antisemitism. Since October 7, numerous testimonies from American campuses have illustrated this phenomenon. Jewish students report their peers’ lack of reaction to their anxiety or grief, with some continuing “as if nothing had happened” or even displaying slogans in support of the attacks. Teachers and staff members say they have felt deeply isolated: silence from colleagues, justification of violence, fear of speaking out. Finally, university administrations (Harvard, Stanford, among others) are accused of issuing statements minimizing or relativizing the October 7 attack and failing to clearly condemn antisemitism. This lack of recognition—whether through indifference, denial, or overly discreet private support—causes a feeling of abandonment and exacerbates the suffering of those affected. Reports (notably from the Anti-Defamation League) emphasize that the majority of students, both Jewish and non-Jewish, consider the measures taken by their universities to combat antisemitic prejudice to be insufficient.

2. Systematic criticism

“Systematic criticism” is also a form of traumatic invalidation and manifests itself in insults, accusations, aggression, or abusive language (“baby killers,” “Zioterrorist,” “stupid Jew,” “death to Zionists”) that fuel ongoing tension. In 2023, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) recorded a 184% increase in antisemitic harassment compared to 2022, with a sharp rise in online hate speech. There have also been attacks on institutions and individuals (synagogues, community centers, professors and students accused of “ethnic cleansing” or disrupted during conferences unrelated to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). At universities, students, teachers, and administrators alike made derogatory and essentializing remarks about Jewish students (clichés about money, accusations of alleged privilege, etc.), thereby contributing to a climate of mistrust and a feeling of insecurity.

3. Unequal treatment

This concerns instances of downplaying the suffering of Israeli civilians and hostages in media coverage, the stigmatization of supposedly Jewish or Israeli names when sending resumes, the distribution of pro-Hamas educational material by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, the lack of support for Jewish and Israeli students at Stanford, and the ignoring of complaints of antisemitic violence at Harvard.

4. Ignoring (pretending the person does not exist)

Another form of traumatic invalidation involves rejecting aspects of a person’s identity and neglecting or ignoring their suffering, which creates feelings of abandonment and betrayal. Feminist organizations have remained silent on the well-documented sexual violence of the October 7 massacre, sometimes refusing to condemn it or delaying in doing so. In addition, acts of vandalism have targeted posters of hostages, another way of ignoring the pain of families and erasing their stories.

5. Exclusion

On university campuses, Jewish and Israeli students and teachers have faced growing hostility, marked by antisemitic harassment, social ostracism, and various forms of intimidation. This exclusion has also resulted in the cancellation of cultural events dedicated to Jewish culture. In addition, some therapists have found themselves blacklisted because of their Jewish-sounding names.

Invalidation through control forces Jews to change their behavior, conceal their identity, or deny their ties to Israel in order to be socially accepted.

6. Misinterpretation (distortion of words or feelings)

Misinterpretation consists of attributing negative or hostile intentions to Jews or Zionists, distorting their identity and commitments. While for the majority of Jews, the connection to Israel is intrinsic to Jewish identity, it is often demonized. Lecturers and teachers equate Zionism with colonial ideology, violence, and even genocide. On some campuses, professors stigmatize Jewish students as “colonizers” or question their legitimacy, going so far as to mock the memory of the Shoah. In the arts, expressing the pain of October 7 has been interpreted as “imperial propaganda.” Finally, healthcare professionals have had their competence questioned on the grounds that they are Jewish. These accusatory inversions—which portray Jews as oppressors or “white colonizers”—erase the memory of the Holocaust, even annihilating the history of Jewish persecution, and fuel a climate of dehumanization and danger.

7. Excessive control

Invalidation through control forces Jews to change their behavior, hide their identity, or deny their ties to Israel in order to be socially accepted. On campuses, this takes the form of attacks on religious symbols (mezuzahs torn down), injunctions not to appear “too Jewish,” or to condemn Israel in order to fit in. This pressure also affects certain progressive or LGBTQ spaces where even Jews who declare themselves anti-Zionist may be rejected in certain queer spaces, due to the recurring accusation that all Jews support Israel. Control is also exercised through the denial of Jewish feelings: slogans or comments perceived as antisemitic by those concerned are relativized or denied by others. These experiences contribute to reinforcing isolation and marginalization by invalidating the legitimacy of Jews to define what constitutes an attack or a threat to them.

8. Blaming (unfairly accusing or holding responsible)

According to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), antisemitism can manifest itself in particular through the tendency to blame Jews individually or collectively, for example by holding them responsible for the actions of the State of Israel. Blame directed at the Israeli government becomes blame directed at all Jews. For example, at Stanford University, protesters were heard shouting at Jewish students: “Zionists, Zionists, you can’t hide. We accuse you of genocide!”

9. Denial of reality

A number of testimonies and media outlets have denied or downplayed the sexual violence committed by Hamas on October 7 and the suffering of the hostages. Denial of reality is the final form of traumatic invalidation. Numerous reports point to attempts to deny or downplay the severity of the October 7 attacks, calling into question the eyewitness accounts of many members of the Jewish community. The Washington Post (2024) notes that although Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack is “one of the best-documented in history,” conspiracy theories are spreading widely. These range from downplaying the violence to accusing Israel of staging the attacks to justify the war in Gaza, or even of kidnapping its own citizens, with some rumors going so far as to blame the United States.

Clinical effects and levers for action

After establishing this typology of nine forms of traumatic invalidation, the authors then describe their effects. They cite Harned, who describes six categories of potential consequences, namely post-traumatic stress disorder, which manifests itself in nightmares, emotional distress, forms of dissociation, avoidance behaviors, hypervigilance, sleep disorders, irritability, guilt, or shame. It increases emotional vulnerability and prevents adequate emotional regulation. Since October 2023, many Jewish or Israeli students and staff at American universities have reported feelings of isolation and insecurity in the face of hostile slogans and repeated demonstrations.

“They hate me, and the only way for them not to hate me is for me to hate myself even more.” Jewish students participating in a study described accepting antisemitism through a process of normalization in order to better cope with it.

The second effect is self-invalidation, which is a form of internalized antisemitism involving shame and self-loathing. At Stanford, one student said, “They hate me, and the only way for them not to hate me is for me to hate myself even more.” Jewish students participating in a study even described accepting antisemitism through a process of normalization in order to better cope with it. Lack of confidence in one’s own judgment is another consequence of traumatic invalidation. Repeated messages questioning the validity of subjective perceptions can lead the subject to internalize the idea that their responses are unreliable. Such a process of invalidation then promotes psychological heteronomy, characterized by a dependence on the judgments of others to construct one’s own representations and form an opinion.

Unrealistic standards. A survey by the American Jewish Committee found that 27% of American Jews avoided revealing their identity in new social interactions. In addition, American students reported that they concealed their Jewish identity on campus. A Harvard student said, “It’s much harder for students who are visibly Jewish. I have a friend who wears a kippah and was physically cornered by a group of students demanding that he denounce the so-called genocide [in Gaza].” Concealing Jewish identity out of fear has also been documented with professors removing their Jewish affiliation from their online profiles, and some Israeli students feeling so unsafe that they decided to return to Israel.

Repeated incidents of traumatic invalidation, criticism, blame, and inequality can lead to pervasive insecurity and chronic feelings of anxiety and fear. A 69-year-old Massachusetts resident described being in a “state of constant worry”. A 63-year-old Vermont resident said, “I always walk with my antennas up (…) even when I know there’s no reason to”.

Rejection can lead to a deep sense of invalidity, marked by the belief that one is unworthy of existence or fundamentally bad, accompanied by feelings of shame. In some Jewish people, this manifests itself in ambivalent emotional reactions ranging from heightened pride in their identity to shame about their Jewishness or their connection to Israel.

Based on this observation, the two authors make recommendations to remedy traumatic invalidation. Various measures can help mitigate its effects, although their effectiveness within the Jewish community remains to be explored. Harned (2022) suggests, in particular, clearly defining traumatic invalidation, learning to overcome self-invalidation, adopting realistic standards, restoring confidence in one’s own intuitions, mourning rejection by others, seeking reassuring environments, and seeking psychotherapeutic care. These recommendations, tailored to the specific experiences of people facing antisemitism, open up clinical and preventive avenues.

The literature highlights several areas of intervention to limit the harmful effects of traumatic invalidation in Jewish people facing antisemitism. These include reducing avoidance behaviors, encouraging action and engagement (reporting, legal recourse, community participation), establishing a secure therapeutic relationship, identifying triggers, working on gradual exposure, and, if necessary, offering psychiatric care. Practitioners are advised to learn about Jewish history, understand antisemitism, particularly contemporary antisemitism, and move beyond the binary logic of “I’m right/you’re wrong.”

In France, Jewish clinicians are particularly exposed, as we have seen within the community psychological crisis unit in France, coordinated by Eric Ghozlan of the OSE (bringing together Jewish and non Jewish psychologists, psychiatrists, and psychoanalysts), which was reactivated after October 7, 2023. In addition, the authors of the article recommend taking action through education, by implementing specific programs in schools and universities to address the impact of traumatic invalidation, strengthen resilience, and promote policies to combat antisemitism.

Research will be needed to measure the prevalence of traumatic invalidation, test the effectiveness of interventions, explore protective factors (resilience, identity, social support), and develop clinical tools adapted to Jewish culture, including consideration of intergenerational trauma.

Four months after its publication, the article had been viewed 57,024 times, an exceptional figure for a scientific journal article. By way of comparison, other articles published around the same time in this journal were viewed on average a hundred or so times, sometimes a few hundred times, including those on antisemitism. During an interview, Miri Bar Halpern told me that many people had told her that they recognized themselves in this article. It undoubtedly responds to a real demand from both those affected and psychotherapists. I felt it was essential to bring this article to the attention of the French public.

---

Céline Masson

I would like to thank Caroline Eliacheff for her insightful proofreading.