Enzo: But I would advice to go to a recognized psychologist, and follow an intense therapy, and don't let pseudo science manipulate you in accepting ideas that are not accepted iby scholars in the psychiatric community..
Here is the problem. How do you arrive at the conclusion that this is "pseudo science" that "manipulate" the many people on this thread? What is your evidence? Is it because it is rejected by a vast majority of other researchers it is pseudo science? In which case how do you establish this majority?
The reason people here look positively on the BITE model is because it very accurately reflected their own issues with the JW -- i.e. Steven Hassans points for each entry in the BITE model reflected experience they themselves had experienced with the JW. Now you can try and tell people that the JW are not emotionally manipulative, or that this has no bearing on them being a high-control group or whatever, but It is not at all fair of you to claim the BITE model is a "Belief system". Again such a claim --based on absolutely no evidence-- does not exactly scream you are in academia yourself.
More importantly, how come you again and again try to invalidate the people who actually respond to you?
For instance: But that's unfortunately the behaviour of some ex-Cult members: an arrogance, a Mr or Ms knows it all attitude..and in a very defensive modus...and try to shoot down every other opinion an other person can have.
So now it would appear the people on this thread ARE ex-cult members and their assessment of the JW group (based on among other things Hassans ideas) is CORRECT? So your point is that Steven Hassan might be correct re. the JW, and the people here who used Hassans methods did arrive at the right answer, but he is still highly problematic?