Re: For Arnie who is now calling Paul Martin and Michael Langone's writings I quoted Scientology Propoganda

On Jul 12, 7:51 pm, "JT" <BarryPep...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> "Monica Pignotti" <pigno...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>
> news:02c932d9-3347-46f0-b855-7b1b35509fb1@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jul 12, 5:12 pm, "JT" <BarryPep...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> "Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!"
<ale...@verizon.net>
> >> wrote in
> >>
messagenews:137bceb6-5b3a-4b58-b2ba-85b3405272fe@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Jul 11, 11:26 pm, cultxpt <cult...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> The one thing Patrick did wrong is he did no followup. He'd get
the
> >> >> person to at least appear to be out of the cult mindset, take the
>
> >> Actually that's an incomplete statement. It would lead to think Patrick
> >> came
> >> in, "deprogrammed" the person and then left. It isn't true. He
> >> systematically sent the person to "rehabilitation" where he/she
would
> >> stay
> >> in a safe house for weeks. I forgot the word he used for it.
>
> > Ginger Z concurred. She reported that it was after her deprogramming
> > that Patrick gave her the choice of going to live with either him or
> > someone else and allegedly being taken sexually advantage of because
> > the sex was considered part of her "recovery". So yes, there was
> > follow-up --- and the followup allegedly included continuing the
> > abuse.
>
> I think that would be unusual, but possible.
>
> If that's the line of argument, then most of the time they would be
> encouraged to have sex with a whore or someone else than the "therapist"
and
> someone else than associated with the deprogramming.

If they were sincere, then that would be the case, but the other
possibility is that they were using this as an excuse to have sex with
their clients. Psychotherapists who have sexually abused their clients
have also used this type of excuse, claiming that the sex was
therapeutic.

For example, for
> ex-Hare Krishna members, they may argue that having sex would be
> "therapeutic" to counter the cult indoctrination's part, and I have read
> that they were encouraged to seek a prostitute or go out in discos trying to
> find someone willing to accomodate them.
>
> However, even following that line of thought, having sex with the
> deprogrammer or someone associated with the deprogramming would be very
> wrong, but for different reasons. It would be the same as having sex with
> one's therapist in any accepted therapeutic context. If the line of argument
> above is used to justify sex with themselves, then that would be clearly
> abusive. If the person was kidnapped and forcefully restrained at the onset,
> it could even amount to rape.

Right -- its a matter of power imbalance that is even worse if the
person was held captive.

>
>
>
> > That said, I know of a number of cases where people were
> > deprogrammed and there was no follow-up at all.
>
> >>   > right, that is why when we snapped the Director of Personnel,
> >>   >  the star "recruiter" for SFO out of the trance,
> >>   >  his next stop was WellSpring for real psychological counselling...
>
> >> That's no different than what Patrick did.
>
> > The thing that loses credibility for me with that theory is that so
> > many of us walked out of cults and didn't have that kind of
"snapping"
> > experience. It seems to me that a better explanation for what happened
> > in the deprogrammings was trauma bonding or Stockholm Syndrome, where
> > the person bonds and identifies with the aggressor -- in this case the
> > kidnapper deprogrammers. Kidnapping a person, terrorizing them by
> > screaming in their face is not a good way to help someone think
> > rationally.
>
> That would be the case if there was no content to it, but as the
> deprogrammer happens to be "right", the person may eventually rally to
his
> viewpoint in spite of the abuses. You are right to say, however, that the
> abusive means to bring that about is very wrong, with all the consequences
> you described.
>
> Note that "snapping" and "rehabilitation" are typical of
forcible
> deprogramming because the whole process is extremely intensive and abrupt.
>
> People who are not forcibly deprogrammed do not usually need a
> rehabilitation period. Why? Because the whole realization came about
> gradually. Either they gradually realized what was happening through growing
> doubts or because they had repeated exit counseling sessions over a longer
> period of time and from which they were free to walk out at any time.
>
> Nevertheless, I think there is always a "point" where the person shift
> viewpoint, even if it isn't always dramatic. This could be referred to as a
> snapping moment, or maybe there may be several small such snappings moment
> of sort.
>
> If the person's doubts grew to the point where they are not sure they really
> want to be part of the group anymore, it also may help then if he would take
> time on his own away from the context that constantly reinforces the cult
> line, and this could be viewed as a soft rehabilitation period of sort.
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]