I am male, in my sixties, and have had a Saturday morning job working as a launderette attendant for well over ten years. My boss is female and I would describe our working relationship as quite good.

About 6 or 7 weeks ago, my boss employed one of her friends (also female) in order to reduce her own quite considerable workload. The new co-worker and I have quite separate duties (she does collections and deliveries) but she is also expected to help out in my area when there's nothing else for her to do.

Last Saturday (20th of Sptember 2014) was the first real occasion that we were "left alone together" to get on with things by ourselves. Until this day, I had found the co-worker quite pleasant to work with and and could see no reason why any problems should develop.

Towards the middle of the morning there was a moment when I had to deal with 3 or 4 things at once - a bit overstretched but not at my limit - at which point the co-worker suddenly took a step closer to me from the right and said (in effect), "Do this first, that second, and then something else third."

It is difficult to describe a tone of voice: the words were spoken in a low monotone of purposeful intensity, they were devoid of any humanity and implied a hidden menace. A voice of control designed, in my opinion, to invoke any unresolved psychological issues from childhood caused by having been forced to psychologically submit to an adult with similar "concealed capabilities".

As an analogy, its like juggling balls in a manner natural to oneself when somebody suddenly punches you in the side in a way that can't be guarded against and says, "Juggle them how I want you to!". If an individual does indeed have injuries from similar treatment in their past then, in an attempt to keep the balls in the air, they may make a split-second decision in which they internally give in to the domination and say, "OK, I'll juggle them your way."

A fatal mistake because it marks the transition from human being to human horse - someone who can be ridden and controlled through their fear of receiving any more (psychological) punches. The beginning of a master/slave relationship.

Shocked and slightly confused surprise at the attack from the co-worker, I reacted with something like, "That's what I'm going to do, anyway - its what I'm here for!"

A second incident happened towards the end of the shift and again I responded. The co-worker then said, "All right, there's no need to get lairy (ie aggressive)!" to which I replied, "I will if I want to!" - a standard reply that I give when I want to assert myself but do not want any further confrontation.

I feel this is classic abuser behaviour: first attack the victim then, should they react rather than submit, blame the victim for that reaction! The pressure of a perpertrator's repressed violence completely prevents any self-questioning as to whether the response received was appropriate to the provocation given: it would mean facing up to the existence of their violence in a real way and that would never do - it must always be someone else's fault! As my deliberately childish response of "I will if I want to!" may indicate, I hadn't been "lairy" at all.

In my experience it is quite unusual for a virtual stranger to start targetting someone in this way unless they have been given a "green light" and told what to look for. About a year ago (perhaps even longer than that) the boss's husband was a regular visitor on Saturday mornings during which time he made a number of unsuccessful attempts to achieve a similar psychological domination as the co-worker was seeking.

Its speculation on my part, but the boss's husband was at the launderette the day before the incidents with the co-worker took place and I can see a real possibility that gossip between two people with similar psychopathologies may have put me in the firing line.

I'm accustomed to seeing how unguarded spontaneity can be crushed in a victim by the application of a meaningful tone of voice that induces internal interaction of that spontaneity with pre-existing psychological injuries.

This is the first time I've seen a variation of the above in which a victim is targetted specifically when they are "busy": setting up a conflict between total preoccupation with the demands of the Present Moment and the unexpected re-opening of wounds from yesteryear could be a very effective form of abuse.

Robert Bartels (not my real name, of course!)