Why Do i Feel Like Im Making Things Up or Exaggerating My Experiences?

Why Do i Feel Like Im Making Things Up or Exaggerating My Experiences?

Short Answer

You are not making things up. The sensation that you are exaggerating or fabricating your experiences is actually a documented trauma response called "gaslighting internalization" or reality-testing confusion, where your nervous system learned to doubt its own perceptions because acknowledging the truth of your environment was once neurologically overwhelming or relationally dangerous. When trauma occurs—especially in childhood or in contexts where you were dependent on the person causing harm—the brain often fragments the memory and stores it without a coherent timestamp or narrative, leaving you with emotional residue but no clear "proof" that feels valid to your adult, logical mind.

This mechanism originates in the body's threat detection system: your dorsal vagal pathway may have activated to create a dissociative buffer between you and reality, while your prefrontal cortex went offline to prioritize survival over story-making. One sentence you have never heard before: Your brain literally tags traumatic memories with a chemical question mark instead of a period when your caregiver was both the source of danger and your only source of comfort, creating a biological paradox where believing your own experience feels like a life-threatening betrayal of your attachment bonds.

What this means for your identity is that you are not dishonest, dramatic, or "crazy"—you are someone who developed exquisite perceptual caution in an environment where certainty was punished, and learning to trust your own reality is not an act of arrogance but a necessary repair of your nervous system's compass.

What This Means

Internally, this experience feels like standing in quicksand while trying to describe solid ground. You might notice a hollowness in your chest or a constriction in your throat when you attempt to share a memory, followed by an immediate mental scramble: "But was it really that bad?" or "Maybe I'm just sensitive." The sensation is not just intellectual doubt; it is a full-body recoil, as if the air itself thickens when you speak your truth, accompanied by a faint nausea or dizziness that signals your nervous system is bracing for punishment or abandonment.

Others often see someone who minimizes legitimate pain, who apologizes too quickly, or who speaks about horrific events with a disturbingly flat affect or self-deprecating humor. They see evidence. They see the way your hands shake when you say "it wasn't a big deal," or the way you flinch at sounds that don't bother anyone else. But what you feel is fraudulence—a creeping sense that you are performing victimhood, that you have somehow tricked everyone including yourself, and that if you just looked hard enough, you would find the "real" story where you were actually fine and just wanted attention.

The cost of living this way is profound self-abandonment. You delay seeking help because you convince yourself you don't deserve it. You stay in harmful situations because you cannot trust the alarm bells ringing in your body, attributing them instead to your own "overreaction." You become fluent in the language of self-invalidation, translating hunger into "I'm just cranky," translating violation into "I probably misunderstood," until your life becomes a museum of experiences you cannot fully claim as your own.

Over time, this creates a split self: the part that knows, and the part that punishes you for knowing. You might find yourself compulsively seeking evidence—old journals, witness corroboration, medical records—not to heal, but to prosecute your own doubt. The energy spent managing this internal courtroom drains the resources you need for actual recovery, leaving you exhausted by the mere act of existing in your own story.

Why This Happens

This begins in childhood when the people responsible for your survival were also the source of your danger, or when your emotional reality was consistently denied by caregivers who could not tolerate their own shame or limitations. When a child says "that hurt" and the adult responds "no it didn't," the child faces an impossible choice: trust their own nervous system and lose the attachment, or trust the attachment and betray their nervous system. Most children choose attachment, dissociating from their direct experience to maintain the bond, creating a template where external validation feels safer than internal knowing.

Neuroscientifically, chronic trauma disrupts the hippocampus—the brain's librarian that files memories with time stamps and context—while hyperactivating the amygdala, the smoke detector. When trauma occurs repeatedly or without resolution, memories get stored as sensory fragments (a smell, a texture, a tone of voice) rather than coherent narratives. Without a clear story, your brain cannot verify the memory against present reality, leaving you with the emotional flash of danger but no "proof" that convinces your logical mind, creating the fertile ground for self-doubt.

This connects deeply to disorganized attachment patterns, where the caregiver is simultaneously the solution and the problem. In these dynamics, the child learns that reality is negotiable and dangerous to name. The nervous system adapts by developing "fawning" responses—automatic people-pleasing and reality-denial—that keep the child physically safe but psychologically fragmented. Your doubt is actually a highly sophisticated survival strategy: if you never fully believe you were harmed, you never have to confront the terror of being helpless, and you never have to risk the attachment by naming the harm.

What was adaptive then becomes maladaptive now. As an adult, this neurological pattern means you may intellectually understand that abuse occurred while your body treats the memory as hypothetical. You might find yourself minimizing your experiences when stressed, not because you are lying, but because your nervous system is defaulting to the childhood program where self-doubt prevented abandonment. The brain prioritizes relational safety over historical accuracy, even when you are no longer in danger, because those neural pathways were grooved in when your survival literally depended on not knowing what you knew.

What Can Help

**Practice somatic tracking before cognitive analysis.** When the doubt arises, place one hand on your chest and one on your belly and ask: "What temperature is my skin right now? Is there tingling, heaviness, or buzzing?" Describe the sensation without interpreting it as "real" or "imagined" for sixty seconds. This builds neural pathways that validate felt sense over narrative certainty, teaching your nervous system that your body is a reliable witness even when your mind wavers.

**Create a "both/and" journal entry.** Write the memory exactly as you doubt it ("Maybe I exaggerated how bad it was"), then write it again as if you absolutely believe yourself ("It was exactly as bad as I remember"), then write a third version that holds both: "I feel like I'm exaggerating, and I also know that feeling is a trauma response." This interrupts the all-or-nothing thinking that trauma creates and gives your doubting part a seat at the table without letting it drive.

**Engage in selective vulnerability with a "reality anchor."** Choose one person who has demonstrated consistent trustworthiness and practice saying one small true thing that you normally minimize, followed by: "I am telling you this to combat my urge to believe I'm making it up." This externalizes the doubt and allows you to borrow their nervous system's stability until yours learns to hold the truth alone.

**Use the "court of body" technique.** When you catch yourself spiraling into "Did it really happen that way?", stop and present evidence to an imaginary jury composed of your physical symptoms: the chronic tension in your jaw, the startle response, the insomnia. Ask: "If this body were a crime scene, what would it testify to?" Treat your physiological responses as evidence that requires no emotional interpretation to be valid.

**Practice parts dialoguing with the skeptic.** Instead of fighting the voice that says "you're lying," get curious. Ask it: "How old are you? What are you afraid will happen if I believe myself?" Often this voice is a younger self who needed to doubt reality to stay safe. Thank that part for its protective function, then gently inform it that you are an adult now and can handle the truth without dying.

**Document in real-time when possible.** If you are currently experiencing something difficult, send yourself a voice memo or write a three-sentence email immediately, before the doubt can edit the memory. Date it. When future-you doubts, you can witness past-you's unprocessed reality, creating a paper trail that circumvents your brain's tendency to retroactively minimize.

**Engage in bilateral stimulation while recalling.** Walk while you think about the memory, or tap alternate knees under a desk. The rhythmic left-right movement engages both hemispheres of the brain and helps integrate fragmented traumatic memories into a more coherent narrative that feels less "made up" because it is neurologically more organized.

Robert Greene

Author and trauma-informed researcher. Founder of Unfiltered Wisdom. This content is for informational purposes and does not replace professional care.

Learn more about the book →