If your Born In your Screwed..You don`t have a choice..
When your old enough to leave..and..You do leave..
You leave at a Price..
.................... 
...OUTLAW
Nobody forced us to believe. We CHOSE to follow their crap advice.
by hamsterbait 45 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
OUTLAW
-
leavingwt
Deception is necessary in the recruiting process. A calm examination of the history of Jehovah's Witnesses is not a part of the recruitment process. Nor is there a detailed explanation of the excommunication offenses and the procedures related to excommunication.
As Hassan says, "People don't join cults. They're recruited into them."
The recruitment usually takes place when a person is vulnerable, for one reason or another: depression, grief, loss, finances, loneliness, etc.
-
Nice_Dream
Cameo-d, yes if we stay in we lose our soul. I guess in hindsight, I had doubts when I was 16 but I was too afraid to look into them. I carried those doubts for 10 years, and finally having a child caused me to face my fears so he can hopefully have a better life.
-
Terry
An agent represents the interests of others.
An insurance agent, for example, represents the Insurance company.
The Jehovah's Witness represents the Supreme Being.
Using the authority of the Supreme Being to convince people they should do this and that is an act of agency.
Believing reputable claims in not stupid.
Due dilligence requires that we check sources.
The Jehovah's Witness minister provides the BIBLE as the source of their claims.
In our society the Bible has an unblemished record of integrity.
That is TWO agencies in play: the minister and the bible.
The fact that we accepted the testimony of two witnesses (agents) and complied with what we heard in believing and acting upon those representations IN NO WAY makes us at fault when the claims made turned out to be spurious.
-
Palimpsest
I don't know the particular examples to which you refer, but I can tell you that, as a cultural anthropologist who researches cults and HDOs, I think a lot of it comes down to a misunderstanding of terminology. A lot of people use common terms -- mind control, behavior modification, brainwashing, etc. -- in extremely different ways, which makes clear discussion of the general subject very difficult. We had a thread once on JWR (I think it was there, anyway; might have been a different location) where we asked people to give their own definitions of what "mind control" means, and it was pretty much a different response from every person. The same thing happens when I've asked interview subjects and students to explain to me what they think it is. So when someone says they're critical of the concept of "mind control," they may actually not be criticizing your own view of it. It's very tricky and requires a lot of very careful listening to figure out the specifics of what's being supported and what's being questioned.
There's also the problem of teasing out the different criticisms and their implications for the overall debate. The growing consensus of most social science organizations since the early '90s has been that the most popular concept of mind control either does not exist or cannot be proven, and that people are instead manipulated through social control that results in behavior modification. A lot of people like Steve Hassan and Margaret Singer, both controversial figures within the larger field of cultic studies, have a tendency to write off that distinction in a way that suggests that people who don't endorse the concept of mind control are "apologists" or "blaming the victims." We're not. What we're saying is that the cause of the control is different than previously believed. We're saying that the social influence of the cult is so strong that, even if you do disagree with the cult on an intellectual level, you are effectively prevented from being able to act against it.
So no, we're not saying anyone has a "choice" to follow or not -- we're actually saying the cult is so strong socially that it takes that choice (and all other options) away. The people who do want to make a choice can't, which is, to me, the saddest thing about cults and HDOs. That is anything but blaming the victim -- it places the blame squarely on the organization.
I think a lot of people have an emotional attachment to Hassan, Singer, and some others, which is perfectly understandable. Their writings and positions have helped a lot of people find the closure they seek, and even many critics (including Barker) still endorse Hassan's books even while disputing some of his core ideas. Unfortunately, I think that attachment can at times cause people to see any criticism of them, especially Hassan, as a personal attack on both him and his supporters. I also don't think for a moment that he or Singer or anyone else on "that side" of the argument is "bad" or anything else pejorative. It's just differences of opinion, and those differences need not be taken as insults or an attempt to demean members/ex-members. They're not meant to be at all. Everyone, regardless of their stance on mind control/behavior modification, is working towards the same goal of freeing people from outside influences, so there is much more commonality than there is difference.
Of course, it's entirely possible that there have been people on the board who have meant to be pejorative, and that's a shame. But I don't feel that they represent the entirety of that side of the debate.
-
PSacramento
Looking from the outside in, and having 3 family members in, it seems to me that yes, JW's CHOOSE to follow and stay, even when presented the case of where and why they are wrong.
So, yes, it i s their fault and they have no one to blame but themselves when they choose to ignore what its point out to them.
That said, unless one has been IN a cult of some sort one truly has no idea how controlling they are and how one becomes so very dependant on them.
Yes all JW's choose to be JW's and remain JW's and ignore "the world" so they have no one to blame but themselves, YET at the sametime, not all people understand that they do have a choice or are even able to make the choice.
-
garyneal
Needless to say, I am not nor have I ever been a witness. That said, reading your accounts and looking at my wife's family provide some insite into this phenonema. I questioned my MIL and my wife's aunt a couple of weeks ago when they came to stay with us to see the baby. The mind control is thick.
It makes me realize that people inside of religion tend to say, and not say, things that they believe their religious peers will approve of rather than say what is in their own hearts. I've seen that happening in myself too.
I don't want my kids to ever think that they have to play second fiddle to a religion. If my kids find themselves at odds with the people at my church, we will leave my church together. I think my parents instilled that in me when my step dad was kicked out of his church for marrying my mom (a divorce). His dad left too.
I sometimes wonder if that may have something to do with the phobias some of my wife's family has. Some of my wife's aunts won't even accept my sister in law's friend requests on face book. When I took the kids to a Halloween bash, my sister in law was eager to place some of the pictures of her daughter (dressed as a little pumpkin) on her facebook page. My wife wanted to do the same with our daughter's pictures but she did not. Dad to the rescue.
-
Terry
On the topic of Mind Control.....
A child is disciplined (controlled) by parents, educators and custodial representatives.
As children we grow accustomed to this dynamic (being controlled for our own welfare) and we learn to adapt.
MIND CONTROL is neutral in this context.
Educators must seek to control the attention and comprehension and behavior of students. The mind is certainly the primary target.
Religious and Political leaders are themselves operating out of noble motives (in their view, of course.)
At some point, a line can be crossed when an authority seeks to eliminate resistance to such control...even for the best (seeming) motives.
The Armed Forces seeks to remove all primary and arbitrary decision making on the part of conscripts. Automatic obedience is the goal.
Parents, Educators and other authorities (such as religious) can cross the line of autonomy and not be aware they are violating an implicit trust.
In a time of war rhetoric and propaganda become persuasive to the point violating ordinary societal norms.
In a religiously radical group a constant state of War might well be imagined leading to the same approach to persuasion. i.e. propaganda replaces persuasion.
Jehovah's Witnesses do not trust their own hearts or minds. They have been taught (biblically) to believe they are wretched sinners under a satanic assault and their only safe recourse is to explicitly follow orders without question. This is socially reinforced to seem like a virtue.
MIND CONTROL on the part of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses is not an openly declared boilerplate mission statement. But, the difference between their own exerted Authority and the punishments and threats to those who do not comply amount to the same result.
AUTOMATIC OBEDIENCE through pressure, threat, fear, social enforcement and indoctrination---all framed as LIFE or DEATH---amount to MIND CONTROL.
The enemy of Jehovah's Witnesses is the individual whose thoughts are their own & who demand reasonable access to alternate forms of source material other than officially approved ones.
There is no Loyal Opposition permitted for redress of abuse or clarification of policy. There is only the semblance of representation of the "rights" of the individual in the form of one-sided colloquy.
There are enemies, however. Any person or group who does not agree is the declared enemy.
This is the brute force result of the de facto "MIND CONTROL".
If any two actions produce the same result, we might well ask ourselves what essential difference exists between them?
JW authority to persuade and enforce compliant behavior without resistance does not differ meaningfully from MIND CONTROL.
-
Sayswho
cameo-d...well said. When you are raised in the "truth" your mind if formed (for the most part) for you. If you think or feel different, you are told you are wrong and need to make the adjustment to the Wt's thinking.
- Lets cut the bull$... THOSE IN CONTROLL KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
- I've been awaken or if you prefer awoken and no 'new bs' will work on me now. Thank God?
Sw
-
Scully
cameo-d writes:
You have a conscience. And if you listen to it, you know what is right and what is wrong.
A conscience can be molded and manipulated - just read Stan Milgram's Obedience to Authority studies. If all you've ever really known is what the JWs teach, and what you've been taught is that any thought that differs from what JWs teach is "from Satan", your true conscience is essentially silenced - you become as terrified of it as you are of demonic attacks - because listening to it and acting upon it means certain destruction if you really believe in Armageddon™. A person can endure a lot of internal ethical dilemma from their true conscience if "the greater good" is being served.