About referring to AA/NA as a Cult
Ned
philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
* AA/NA isn't about suckering people into anything. It's about staying
clean and sober. People can choose to stay sober in AA/NA or can choose
a different path. The only ones in the way are themselves.
* Calling a 12 step group a cult is like calling a paticular political
group fascist-- it is a polemical term designed to discredit
people. No matter what a person says or does to the contrary, they are
viewed as a cult or fascist. This makes
people paranoid, frustrated and dogmatic. If you truly believe that
people are more important than ideologies, than talk
to them like people, not ideologues. No one is static, including your
percieved adversaries.
* People have a right to think for themselves, yet by presenting to a
someone that this is a cult they are forced to
see things through your eyes. Make your criticisms and let them figure
it out. They may not give a hoot about going to meetings or accepting a
Higher Power to keep them clean and sober. But, they would probably have
a problem with joining a group percieved as a cult by the outside world
or another faction of people.
It's like if you and I were eating macoroni and cheese and right as I'm
about to take a bite you say, "This macroni
tastes like shit." The macoroni might taste great to me, until you
opened your mouth. As an alternative, you might
have waited until I was done and asked what I thought of the macoroni or
simply made yourself something else. It's
called "manners".
* There is something more that a person can offer than writing the same
damn message to this newsgroup everyday. I
didn't come here to read propaganda, which is what this crap amounts to.
Why don't *you* try using the reasonable mind
God (or whatever you want to call it) gave you and throw us a bone.
People come here to discuss recovery and not sit in intellectual
trenches fighting endless ideological wars. Everybody's parade gets
pissed on now and then-- that doesn't mean you can urinate
wherever you want.
Sincerely,
Ned
"I got an open mind so why don't you all get inside."
-- Beastie Boys
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
R. Fransway
>
>While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems and
>philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
>does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
All of this is interesting, Ned, but I don't think AA as a whole is a cult.
You're barking up the wrong tree.
NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I do
think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
cultist. That is what I meant when I referred to the way
arna reacts to critisism of NA. Arna actually should not have the NA
name attached to it.
You haven't really replied to my post. The stuff snipped is really not
a reply. You're talking about something else. You see, my reply had to
do with how you can tell cultists from those with legit philosophies. Also
you did not address the fact that others have the right to recover too, and
to ignore horror stories in AA and NA is to deny them thier just due of
validation for thier anger. Covering up the truth is never helpful
Ned, especially when it can lead to death, as it has for many. It isn't
a matter of manners.
Rebecca
Yuch!>http://www.AA-Lamplighters.org
Wow! Check out>http://www.churchofgodanonymous.org/index2.html
Join 12-step-free zone mailing list!
List Archive: http://www.egroups.com/group/12-step-free/
jersey devil
Ned <njlaw...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems
> and philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult
> everyday does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
>
> clean and sober. People can choose to stay sober in AA/NA or can
> choose a different path. The only ones in the way are themselves.
Here's how the Cult Information Center at www.xenu.net/cic/
defines a "cult":
BEGIN QUOTE
Definition of a Cult
Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following 5
characteristics:
1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and
retain its members
2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society
3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not
accountable and has charisma
4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit
funds and recruit people
5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society
END QUOTE
As far as I can tell, NA arguably fits into 2/3 of #1, arguably #2, and
that's it. NA and AA have a few cult-like traits, but they are
certainly not cults.
--
Nick
thew...@cybernothing.org
: In article <7lipqu$gbh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ned says...
: >
: >While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems and
: >philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
: >does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
: All of this is interesting, Ned, but I don't think AA as a whole is a cult.
: You're barking up the wrong tree.
: NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I do
: think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
: cultist.
Anne. Listen to me. You will send me $200.00 U.S. every week. You will
worship Damian with slave-like devotion.
Go. To. The window. Go. To. The window.
--
TheW...@Endor.com
"It costs extra to carve the word 'SCHMUCK' on a tombstone, but you would
definitely be worth the expense."
- Lee Remick (from The Competition)
jersey devil
R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> All of this is interesting, Ned, but I don't think AA as a whole is a
> cult.
> You're barking up the wrong tree.
> NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I
> do think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
> cultist. That is what I meant when I referred to the way
> arna reacts to critisism of NA. Arna actually should not have the NA
> name attached to it.
Having lots of rules doesn't make an organization a cult. It's one
trait of a cult, but it's not the only trait.
Reacting negatively to criticism doesn't make an organization a cult,
either.
Ned started to lose me about halfway through his post, but I agree with
his basic tenet: That calling an organization a cult is an overly
simplistic way to disagree with it. I understand you have tons of
disagreements with NA. I have some disagreements with it, too; but it's
an exaggeration to call it a cult.
Ned
Where did I lose you, Nick? Let me see if I can explain myself better.
Ned
kimb...@my-deja.com
Ned <njlaw...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> While 12 step groups may have their problems,
as all beliefs systems and
> philosophies do, I can't see how calling these
folks a cult everyday
> does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons
why below:
>
anything. It's about staying
> clean and sober. People can choose to stay
sober in AA/NA or can choose
> a different path. The only ones in the way are
themselves.
>
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Everyone has a right to an opinion. If you dont
like or approve of anothers opinion, surely you
still accept that they have a right to express
it. This is a forum for exchanging ideas. Use
your anger constructively if you can.
Respectfully,
Kevin
Ned
> >
> >While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems
and
> >philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
> >does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
>
cult.
> You're barking up the wrong tree.
> NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I
do
> think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
> cultist. That is what I meant when I referred to the way
> arna reacts to critisism of NA. Arna actually should not have the NA
> name attached to it.
Anne is just agreeing with people you disagree with. ARNA is a public
forum to discuss NA and related recovery issues. I'm sure that if it
were a cult, and you were busting them, they would have taken you off
the forum. They probably would have taken that dude that keeps
re-routing messages to arna titled "The Witch Sucks Eggs" or whatever.
>
> You haven't really replied to my post. The stuff snipped is really not
> a reply. You're talking about something else. You see, my reply had
to
> do with how you can tell cultists from those with legit philosophies.
I went ahead and replied directly to your message.
Also
> you did not address the fact that others have the right to recover
too, and
> to ignore horror stories in AA and NA is to deny them thier just due
of
> validation for thier anger.
Irrational idea #5: The idea that emotional misery comes from external
pressures and that you have little ability to control or change your
feelings.
It would be better for these people to go on with their lives and make
an example to others that there are other, better methods for them to
stay clean. Not to mention, the folks on these ngs aren't to blame for
the morality of other members of NA/AA.
It's like saying that, because I'm white, I'm responsible for 400 years
of oppression of the black race. The reality is that my family never
owned slaves and many of my anscestors were treated as second-class
citizens as well.
Covering up the truth is never helpful
> Ned, especially when it can lead to death, as it has for many. It
isn't
> a matter of manners.
You have to consider that for many people, NA/AA lead to a better life.
When my step-dad was alive, the best 8 years of his life were in AA, and
the man was a professor of psychology. He knew of REBT. It just wasn't
his thing.
Agape,
Ned
>
> Rebecca
>
> Yuch!>http://www.AA-Lamplighters.org
> Wow! Check out>http://www.churchofgodanonymous.org/index2.html
> Join 12-step-free zone mailing list!
> List Archive: http://www.egroups.com/group/12-step-free/
>
>
Anne
thew...@cybernothing.org a écrit dans le message
<93094045...@news.satanic.org>...
>R. Fransway (rfr...@ivillage.com) wrote:
>: In article <7lipqu$gbh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ned says...
>: >
>: >While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems and
>: >philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
>: >does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
>:
>: All of this is interesting, Ned, but I don't think AA as a whole is a
cult.
>: You're barking up the wrong tree.
>: NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I do
>: think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
>: cultist.
>
>worship Damian with slave-like devotion.
>
>Go. To. The window. Go. To. The window.
>
>--
>TheW...@Endor.com
You know I don't even have $200 Canadian left to my name, I already gave up
my house, my car, my bank account when I became a member of arna. I'm
working very hard on my devotion to Damian.
Gotta.go.now.
Anne
R. Fransway
>> cult.
>> You're barking up the wrong tree.
>> NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I
>> do think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
>> arna reacts to critisism of NA. Arna actually should not have the NA
>> name attached to it.
>
>trait of a cult, but it's not the only trait.
Yeah, but they've got the sponsorship families and now they kick out
people who disagree with them. The Trusted Servants might be called
a cult. The whole of NA is probably not.
>
>Reacting negatively to criticism doesn't make an organization a cult,
>either.
No, but cultish groups or cultist withing groups are much more likely
to respond like a hive of insects when disturbed. The wish to deny
horrors and hide them from outsiders is definitely a cult characteristic,
and also, characteristic of dysfunctional families.
For instance, look at the case of the pictures of me. Jenny has heard
arna--only 4 or 5 of the Halloweeners, say the pictures show I'm fat
and ugly, so she agreed that I'm fat and ugly. Now Reese has said I'm not.
This put Jenny in a terrible dillema. Now she can't decide whether I'm
fat or ugly or not.
Tell me, where and who do you suppose Jenny is? Who knows. So far, all
I've seen is that she and Anne are whomever arna says they are.
>
>Ned started to lose me about halfway through his post, but I agree with
>his basic tenet: That calling an organization a cult is an overly
>simplistic way to disagree with it.
That's true, but I didn't call an organization a cult. I said Anne seemed
happy in her little cult. I was referring to arna, which is not really
an organization, but it is a cult. It isn't a way to agree or disagree,
its just an observation.
>I understand you have tons of
>disagreements with NA. I have some disagreements with it, too; but it's
>an exaggeration to call it a cult.
I agree. Again, who called NA a cult?
Anyway, although we agree that neither AA nor NA are full-blown cults,
do you agree that NA and
AA both are ripe grounds for smaller cults to arise? Have you seen this
happen often? I saw a lot of it in AA. Why do you think it happens? How
do you suppose the groups can improve so that gurus don't come in and
clone themselves?
R. Fransway
>I'm not angry. I didn't write this post out of spite. And, yes, I
>certainly accept others have the right to their opinion and to express
>it. I have the same right which I am applying here. I'm not in any 12
>step group. Actually, I've been practicing SMART recovery, which is
>working for me, how about you?
>
>The idea I'm attempting to bring to the forefront here is that the term
>"cult" detracts from legitimate philosophical discussion about recovery.
>It is a polemical term used to stereotype and discredit a group of
>people who don't necessarily think or act in the same manner as each
>other.
The term "cult" can indeed be used that way. There are a lot of cults, and
not all of them are necessarily bad. The term "cult" does carry with it
a lot of connotations as per Charlie Manson or Jim Jones.
However, in spite of its connotations, it is a useful term under
certain circumstances. One of those circumstances is how to describe
arna. Can anyone deny that the arna Halloweeners are a cult? Look how
they all stand by and watch Fke and Theo get trashed. Look at the cesspool
the arna newsgroup has become, ever since they learned you don't dare
stand up for someone or else you'll be trashed to. They can keep the
little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty got
used, and now he's out. That's cultish, and its bad. Those subbing and
enabling these shenanigans are not going to grow. YOu can't grow if you
don't know who you are, and you'll never find out who you are if some group
decides what you are going to think.
Rebecca
This kind of polemical argumentation degrades into name calling
>and off-topic arguments, like whether Ms. Fransway is fat or not for
>example.
>
>Sincerely,
>Ned
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Yuch!>http://www.AA-Lamplighters.org
R. Fransway
>
>
>Anne is just agreeing with people you disagree with.
How can you call "stupid bitch" an agreement or disagreement? You're way
off base here. Are you really following what's been going on?
>ARNA is a public
>forum to discuss NA and related recovery issues.
Excuse me, but have you read ARNA lately Ned? I'm the only one around
here who discusses recovery issues, and I haven't been here for months. If
it wasn't for Beth, Derek, and Damian invading ARAA and ARFS, I wouldn't
be here at all, but now I need some breathing room. You better learn the
ropes before you start blabbing stuff you know nothing about.
>I'm sure that if it
>were a cult, and you were busting them, they would have taken you off
>the forum.
You can't take people off a recovery forum for discussing recovery. And
I'm just telling the truth, which always flies.
>Irrational idea #5: The idea that emotional misery comes from external
>pressures and that you have little ability to control or change your
>feelings.
That is a SMART philosphy I don't agree with, and its off-topic here Ned.
This group is to discuss NA recovery, not SMART recovery. Also, one of the
deadliest things you can tell someone is that they can control what
emotions rise. You can control what you do, but not what you feel. If you
want to argue about that, take it to ARFS, or, better yet, alt.recovery.
rational. That's what those groups are for.
>You have to consider that for many people, NA/AA lead to a better life.
No, I don't have to consider them. They can consider each other.
If they really have better lives, they probably aren't paying any attention
to me, and they certainly aren't here reading this. The people
I'm considering are those who can't make it because they get caught up
with sponsors similar to some of these creeps here. (and I'm *not* saying
everyone here is a creep) Awhile back, Damian and his wife got the cops
called on them for their behavior toward a sponsee. Also, awhile
back some of them were actively participating in some sick, sick stuff, and
sponsoring people for god sake. I'm talking hideous, serial killer type stuff,
that gets talked about in alt.torture. Do you think this is okay? Frankly
I think the NA way of life as per what these folks have just might kill more
people than it helps. The only stats anyone has shows that, at best, NA and
AA offer nothing at all toward higher rates of recovery.
Rebecca
R. Fransway
>
>It's true. The Weeners promised me money and drugs and
>women if I'd join arna. So I did. Then they cut me cold
>just because I ventured a couple of teensy jocular
>criticisms of Reese. And all I got were some na women.
>
>as
Gosh Steve. What a terrible waste of your enormous genitals.
Ned
> > While 12 step groups may have their problems,
> as all beliefs systems and
> > philosophies do, I can't see how calling these
> folks a cult everyday
> > does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons
> why below:
> >
> like or approve of anothers opinion, surely you
> still accept that they have a right to express
> it. This is a forum for exchanging ideas. Use
> your anger constructively if you can.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Kevin
> >
Kevin,
I'm not angry. I didn't write this post out of spite. And, yes, I
certainly accept others have the right to their opinion and to express
it. I have the same right which I am applying here. I'm not in any 12
step group. Actually, I've been practicing SMART recovery, which is
working for me, how about you?
The idea I'm attempting to bring to the forefront here is that the term
"cult" detracts from legitimate philosophical discussion about recovery.
It is a polemical term used to stereotype and discredit a group of
people who don't necessarily think or act in the same manner as each
other. This kind of polemical argumentation degrades into name calling
jersey devil
Ned <njlaw...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Where did I lose you, Nick? Let me see if I can explain myself better.
>
I don't mean that you "lost me" such that I couldn't understand you. I
mean that I started to disagree with you.
It was at about the point of the macaroni metaphor, I guess. If I'm
eating macaroni and enjoying it, and somebody is all like, "Man, that
macaroni sucks," I'm gonna just be all like, "Well, I like it," and
that'll be that for me.
Also, Fransway and all of these people who can't stand NA or AA have
every right to feel the way they do, and they've got every right to
talk about it. I don't have a problem with them doing that at all.
In fact, I've questioned many things about the 12-Step programs myself,
and I've found that, for me, questioning them has only strengthened my
faith in the Steps. I might not still have so much faith in all the
bells and whistles that go along with them, but I still feel that the
Steps saved my life.
--
Nick
thew...@cybernothing.org
:
: thew...@cybernothing.org a écrit dans le message
: <93094045...@news.satanic.org>...
: >R. Fransway (rfr...@ivillage.com) wrote:
: >: In article <7lipqu$gbh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ned says...
: >: >
: >: >While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems and
: >: >philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
: >: >does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
: >: All of this is interesting, Ned, but I don't think AA as a whole is a
: cult.
: >: You're barking up the wrong tree.
: >: NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I do
: >: think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
: >: cultist.
: >Anne. Listen to me. You will send me $200.00 U.S. every week. You will
: >worship Damian with slave-like devotion.
: >
: >Go. To. The window. Go. To. The window.
: >
: >--
: >TheW...@Endor.com
:
:
: You know I don't even have $200 Canadian left to my name, I already gave up
: my house, my car, my bank account when I became a member of arna. I'm
: working very hard on my devotion to Damian.
:
: Gotta.go.now.
Now, Anne, is that any way to serve ARNA? It's time for you to hit the
bus stations and start trawling for new recruits. Remember you have to
bring at least 10 back, or no gruel for you young lady.
thew...@cybernothing.org
: It's true. The Weeners promised me money and drugs and
: women if I'd join arna. So I did. Then they cut me cold
: just because I ventured a couple of teensy jocular
: criticisms of Reese.
Nah it was cuz your stats were down on recruitment. No fresh meat, no
nookie. That simple. The Chosen One of ARNA (thesourceofallgoodness)
hath decreed it.
: And all I got were some na women.
Some people are so bloody ungrateful.
Derek M.
damian <postm...@damomen.com> wrote in message
news:7ljkhp$3...@news1.newsguy.com...
> On Fri, 2 Jul 1999 18:41:26 -0400, "Anne" <chatea...@videotron.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >You know I don't even have $200 Canadian left to my name, I already gave
up
> >my house, my car, my bank account when I became a member of arna. I'm
> >working very hard on my devotion to Damian.
> >
> >Gotta.go.now.
> >
>
> You got potential, babe.
> And great legs.
>
> ps, don't tell gerard I said that, he's bigger than me.
>
>
why would that bother you? Rebecca's bigger than 4 of you standing side by
side.
Derek
>
>
> -
> * What's the definition of eternity? 4 blondes at a 4-way stop
fke
> However, I do
> think arna is a cult.
youre here, cultist
:)
fke
> Where did I lose you, Nick? Let me see if I can explain myself better.
would that make your post longer or shorter?
:)
fke
> No, but cultish groups or cultist withing groups are much more likely
> to respond like a hive of insects when disturbed. The wish to deny
> horrors and hide them from outsiders is definitely a cult characteristic,
> and also, characteristic of dysfunctional families.
youre crusade against 12 steppers is cultish, rebecca..
it's non-productive too...
go help out a soup kitchen or something...
do something useful.
you might help more people in one day by taking
that type of action than youll help with your
cult against "cults" in your lifetime.
fke
> Reese, among all his other "good" points, is a southern gentleman. > That is obvious.
john...
reese is far from a southern gentleman.
if he's far from anything, it's gentlmanliness.
in my experience, he more resembles a northeastern,
midwestern, or western bigot.
maybe that's because he hides "his" southern nature.
then again, south carolina aint in the south.
the real south...
alabama, mississippi, georgia, tennessee.
fke
>
> How can you call "stupid bitch" an agreement or disagreement? You're way
> off base here. Are you really following what's been going on?
rebecca...
is this really your philosophy?
im gonna try it with my wife...
when she expresses an opinion, im gonna say
"stupid bitch..."
ill teach her it's not an agreement or a disagreement.
hey, beck..
not to agree or disagree with you but give you want you want:
stupid bitch.
NOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW can i be in your cult?
dink
fke
> > While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems
> > and philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult
> > everyday does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
> >
> > clean and sober. People can choose to stay sober in AA/NA or can
> > choose a different path. The only ones in the way are themselves.
>
> defines a "cult":
>
> BEGIN QUOTE
>
> Definition of a Cult
>
> Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following 5
> characteristics:
>
> 1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and
> retain its members
>
> 2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society
>
> 3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic, not
> accountable and has charisma
>
> 4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to solicit
> funds and recruit people
>
> 5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society
>
> END QUOTE
>
> As far as I can tell, NA arguably fits into 2/3 of #1,
then stop promoting na..
stop indoctrinating members.
>arguably #2,
learn about anonymity then, would you?
>and
> that's it. NA and AA have a few cult-like traits, but they are
> certainly not cults.
it's unfortunate your experience makes you feel that
NA, as a whole, resembles any of the above...
when you think about it....families are more
like cults based on the definitions above...
of course, NA is not disneyland and has it's sickos...
some of us are sicker than others..
BUT
we're all sick enough.
we have one NA cultist/elitist in our area.
she causes more dissension than ive ever seen
in our area...
ever.
and i believe she does it intentionally..
she did in the two other states she moved from.
notoriety and shit.
fke
> >This one is N/A, relapse is part of the program.
>
> Na lit says relapse is *not* part of the program. Obvious lie by
> Markus.
i dont think markus is wise enough to understand what
NA's perspective on relapse is...
his take is, "relapse is part of the program"
NA's take is, relapse is a reality of the disease..
then again, some people wish the basic text was a book
about the disease..
it's not, it's about recovery.
>
> >> There is never incongruency between words and
> >> deeds. A person who uses fear and phobia indoctrination to control
> >> followers demonstrates insecurity and lack of spiritual maturity.
yeah, particularly when fear and phobia are self-induced,
self indoctrinating...that amounts to insanity.
2nd step duh.
ida love to see your face if i were dating your mother,
sister, ex girlfriend or ex-spouse when i was using...
i bet you woulda hoped i joined any fuckin cult in the world,
much less NA, to either go away or get better...
> Yep, that happens, but not for the reason you give--it's because ppl
> have no self-esteem.
>
> >See "its an uncurable disease" and go from there.
> >
> >> Is total submission and obedience required?
> >
> >"We must never think we can go it alone, many have tried..."
>
> Stated as a 'must', it's wrong. Stated as good advice, it's right.
>
> >> Any relationship that demands giving up one's personal integrity and
> >> conscience is dangerous and leads to totalitarianism.
where does na demand we give up our personal integrity?
i only see us doing that on arna.
> >
> >See: "Hi, I'm yoyo and I'm a ___________ who is powerless"
>
> I'm horrified that anyone would do that, and so would my sponsor be.
> >
> >> 7. Is the organization open or closed?
both..(we're fucked now, eh?)
> >> Are there organizational secrets?
yeah...relapse is a choice.
it seems like it's a secret, anyway, for those that do.
> >> Are there "in" groups and "out" groups?
yeah...na groups and individuals and groups outside the fellowship.
> >> Are there restricted teachings for initiates only?
yeah,
dont use
go to meetings
ask for help
when i get 10 years clean theyll be telling me that, too.
> >> Are there secret texts and publications "for your eyes only?
yeah, my fourth step...
howd your mother, sister, ex-wife, ex-girlfriends get in there
anyway....particularly during the times you were with them?
> >> Is there real financial accountability?
check your own personal finances.
> >> If a group says that you can look at its accounting records, does it
> >> actually provide access? The only way to know is to ask to see the
> >> records. If you are afraid to ask, what does this say about the
> >> atmosphere of the group?
what does it say about one's reaction to the atmosphere of the group?
> >> 8. What structural checks and balances exist within the organization
> >> to prevent abuse of power?
i AM the checks and balances.
fund -- the check
jimmy - the balance
> >> Is there an independent "ethics" committee to challenge and change
> >> policies of the group?
yeah, it's called autonomy.
when people mature enough, they understand shit like the traditions.
>
> >> If there are abuses or injustices, what structure exists to correct
> >> them?
resentment, anger, and fear....
and sometimes, the abusing, ignoble fuckers relapse...
that's not a corrective action, btw.
> >> Can anyone legitimately question the actions of the leader without
> >> threat of emotional withdraw or fear of expulsion to "hell"?
hahahahahahaha......
youre getting NA confused with religious bullshit and
red herrings, dude.
> >> Do the rich and powerful get preferential treatment?
as damian said earlier..
this is new?
what planet do you live on, man?
> >
> >Of course.
>
> Really? Got examples?
>
> >> Are "indulgences" (spiritual pardons) sold?
> >
> >No, white chips are free.
so is forgiveness when warranted and when we get over ourselves.
fke
> Kevin,
> I'm not angry. I didn't write this post out of spite. And, yes, I
> certainly accept others have the right to their opinion and to express
> it. I have the same right which I am applying here. I'm not in any 12
> step group. Actually, I've been practicing SMART recovery, which is
> working for me, how about you?
ned, if SMART is working for you, why argue
about what doesnt work for you?
it's kinda like,
"i can play one sport but not the other...
so the other sport sucks"
sure it does.
fke
> However, in spite of its connotations, it is a useful term under
> certain circumstances. One of those circumstances is how to describe
> arna. Can anyone deny that the arna Halloweeners are a cult? Look how
> they all stand by and watch Fke and Theo get trashed.
to be honest with you, becca,
it reminds me more of reform school and jail.
some specific differences, of course, are that coward
punk ratfuckers woulda been cowering in the corner
after a good beating and we're not manufacturing
drugs we won't share.
was lord of the flies a cult or a societal structure?
jersey devil
R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> In article <7lj5id$l43$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jersey says...
> >
> >In article <7lirob$8...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> > R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> >
> >> is a cult.
> >> You're barking up the wrong tree.
> >> NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules.
> >> others like her a cultist. That is what I meant when I referred
> >> to the way arna reacts to critisism of NA. Arna actually should
> >> not have the NA name attached to it.
> >
> >Having lots of rules doesn't make an organization a cult. It's one
> >trait of a cult, but it's not the only trait.
>
> Yeah, but they've got the sponsorship families and now they kick out
> people who disagree with them. The Trusted Servants might be called
> a cult. The whole of NA is probably not.
I agree that the "sponsorship family" thing is an extremely distasteful
by-product of what was initially a half-decent idea (sponsorship). I
agree that being ostracized from a "sponsorship family" can be
devastating for some. I think we agree that these are occasional
symptoms of an NA culture and not the NA program itself. Not all
sponsorship families are bad, though I hope never to be in one again.
I don't know what you mean by "the Trusted Servants."
> >Reacting negatively to criticism doesn't make an organization a cult,
> >either.
>
> No, but cultish groups or cultist withing groups are much more likely
> to respond like a hive of insects when disturbed. The wish to deny
> horrors and hide them from outsiders is definitely a cult
> characteristic, and also, characteristic of dysfunctional families.
What you're saying is true. However, I don't believe arna really fits
that mold. I've criticized NA in arna and gotten simple responses like
"Fuck you" from some arna members and then more thoughtful responses
from others. There was no group mind.
> For instance, look at the case of the pictures of me. Jenny has heard
> arna--only 4 or 5 of the Halloweeners, say the pictures show I'm fat
> and ugly, so she agreed that I'm fat and ugly. Now Reese has said I'm
> not.
> This put Jenny in a terrible dillema. Now she can't decide whether
> I'm fat or ugly or not.
I see your point here. But I submit to you that really this is just
group behavior that one sees all the time; it may be "cultish," if you
like, but I don't think it makes arna a cult.
I'm not saying it's fair to you, but you have set yourself up as a
lightning rod for criticism. Other arfers criticize the 12-Step
programs, and they don't have web pages about them. By running point,
you've subjected yourself to this sort of abuse. Again, I'm not saying
it's fair.
> Tell me, where and who do you suppose Jenny is? Who knows. So far,
> all I've seen is that she and Anne are whomever arna says they are.
I don't know Jenni or Anne well enough to respond. But, for the sake
of argument, if we assume that their opinions/personalities are
dictated by arna -- which really seems like a stretch, to me -- I would
submit to you again that that is more classic group behavior. You have
leaders and followers in any group. I suspect there are some who
slavishly follow you in arf12s. This may be "cultish," but it doesn't
mean arna (or arf12s, for that matter) is a cult.
> >
> >Ned started to lose me about halfway through his post, but I agree
> >with his basic tenet: That calling an organization a cult is an
> >overly simplistic way to disagree with it.
>
> That's true, but I didn't call an organization a cult. I said Anne
> seemed happy in her little cult. I was referring to arna, which is
> not really an organization, but it is a cult. It isn't a way to agree
> or disagree, its just an observation.
Again, I don't agree that arna's a cult. It just doesn't meet enough
of the criteria.
> >I understand you have tons of
> >disagreements with NA. I have some disagreements with it, too; but
> >it's an exaggeration to call it a cult.
>
> I agree. Again, who called NA a cult?
You're right, you didn't. But others have -- in this very thread!
> Anyway, although we agree that neither AA nor NA are full-blown
> cults, do you agree that NA and AA both are ripe grounds for smaller
> cults to arise? Have you seen this happen often? I saw a lot of it
> in AA. Why do you think it happens? How do you suppose the groups
> can improve so that gurus don't come in and clone themselves?
I certainly agree that I've seen very obnoxious "sponsorship family"
cult-like groups arise. I've been in one. Some are healthier than
others, and there is a great potential for very damaging situations to
arise.
I'm not sure why it happens. I'll think about it while I'm away at my
girlfriends' family's house for the weekend -- not able to access the
Internet *and* hanging out with my in-laws! Woo-hoo! -- and get back
to you. Obviously, for starters, people coming to AA and NA are
extremely vulnerable to suggestion and are more likely to get involved
in such groups. There are probably more factors.
I'll also think about your question about how the groups could prevent
such things from occurring. I don't know if that's possible; but if it
were, it would solve a lot of problems.
jersey devil
fke <msj...@nantucket.net> wrote:
> jersey devil wrote:
> > Here's how the Cult Information Center at www.xenu.net/cic/
> > defines a "cult":
> >
> > BEGIN QUOTE
> >
> > Definition of a Cult
> >
> > Every cult can be defined as a group having all of the following 5
> > characteristics:
> >
> > 1. It uses psychological coercion to recruit, indoctrinate and
> > retain its members
> >
> > 2. It forms an elitist totalitarian society
> >
> > 3. Its founder leader is self-appointed, dogmatic, messianic,
not
> > accountable and has charisma
> >
> > 4. It believes 'the end justifies the means' in order to
solicit
> > funds and recruit people
> >
> > 5. Its wealth does not benefit its members or society
> >
> > END QUOTE
> >
> > As far as I can tell, NA arguably fits into 2/3 of #1,
>
> then stop promoting na..
> stop indoctrinating members.
I meant the second two, not the first two. I don't think NA recruits
members. But it *could* be *argued* that NA uses psychological
coercion to indoctrinate and retain members. Haven't you heard people
use the expression, "Well, my brain *needed* washing!"? I don't think
everybody feels that way, but some do.
> >arguably #2,
>
> learn about anonymity then, would you?
Again, I said "arguably." And not everybody in NA really learns about
anonymity. And many learn about it and then forget about it. Would you
not agree?
> > and that's it. NA and AA have a few cult-like traits, but they are
> > certainly not cults.
>
> it's unfortunate your experience makes you feel that
> NA, as a whole, resembles any of the above...
I don't think I mean NA as a whole, and I said "arguably" for each of
the two I cited above. I've seen examples of those two things
happening; but I don't think they apply to the NA program or to NA as a
whole.
> when you think about it....families are more
> like cults based on the definitions above...
> of course, NA is not disneyland and has it's sickos...
> some of us are sicker than others..
> BUT we're all sick enough.
And NA groups and/or areas and/or regions are often just exactly that:
Big, sometimes dysfunctional families.
> we have one NA cultist/elitist in our area.
> she causes more dissension than ive ever seen
> in our area...
> ever.
> and i believe she does it intentionally..
> she did in the two other states she moved from.
> notoriety and shit.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. You mean she accuses NA of
being a cult, or do you mean she has built a cult up within NA?
fifi_jojo
all keep a copy and read it once in a while when the old arguments surface
Ned wrote in message <7lipqu$gbh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
Reese
>aussie steve (anon...@web.remarq.com) wrote:
>: It's true. The Weeners promised me money and drugs and
>: women if I'd join arna. So I did. Then they cut me cold
>: just because I ventured a couple of teensy jocular
>: criticisms of Reese.
>
>Nah it was cuz your stats were down on recruitment.
No, that's because his posts aren't worth a crap, which I'm not to
blame for. I ain't told nobody not to reply to his posts--I guess
that would be a good way to get the arna'ers to reply to him--ie, to
send out email telling them not to. In the past when people on arna
have used that tactic, it ain't worked.
Just ask David Hecht and Mick C.
Hey, Hecht, you want to share your experience with that? Mick C could
share his experience as well, except that he's probably too busy on
other areas of the usenet tracking down couples to talk to on the
phone while they're fucking and he's sitting there listening.
And Mick C is some kind of a spiritual guru. He also runs one of the
censored NA listservers, if it's still in existence.
Aussie Steve apparently hasn't considered that one reason folks might
pay much attention to his crap is that he's a pill popping cokehead.
I guess I should apologize for the ad hominem attack and the passing
of judgment there. I guess the fact that Aussie Steve is a pill
popping crackhead doesn't have anything to do with his posts being
pretty much total crap.
>No fresh meat, no
>nookie. That simple. The Chosen One of ARNA (thesourceofallgoodness)
>hath decreed it.
Maybe fke can give him some tips on cybering as well as what type of
keyboards are most resistant to having the keys stick after a build
up.
Reese
Reese
<jersey...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>I agree that the "sponsorship family" thing is an extremely distasteful
>by-product of what was initially a half-decent idea (sponsorship).
It's worse than just distasteful. It's disgusting and abhorrent. And
it causes plenty of problems.
I'm supposedly in Mr. Bill's sponsorship family, I'm ashamed to admit.
But it ain't like I take sponsorship very seriously anyway.
>I
>agree that being ostracized from a "sponsorship family" can be
>devastating for some.
For me it would be about as bad as Brer Rabbit getting thrown into the
briars.
>I think we agree that these are occasional
>symptoms of an NA culture and not the NA program itself. Not all
>sponsorship families are bad, though I hope never to be in one again.
I don't guess I've ever been in one, not exactly. I had this sponsor
who had a few other sponsees, and they told me about that "brother"
crap, that we were "brothers."
Now, that is cultish. When you start getting formal replacements for
family members, that's cultish.
>I don't know what you mean by "the Trusted Servants."
She probably means the people who cuss and carry on at the area
service meetings, most of who take the sponsorship family crap
seriously.
Reese
chikmage
>That's true, but I didn't call an organization a cult. I said Anne seemed
>happy in her little cult. I was referring to arna, which is not really
>an organization, but it is a cult. It isn't a way to agree or disagree,
>its just an observation.
arna is certinly not a cult. no one is in charge to pay hoimage to, and
there is no monetary requirement. People are free to come and go as they
choose, to stay or leave, or to say anything they want.
Despite all the bullshit going on - you missed the boat on this one all
together.
-Shauna
Jenni
Oh shut up............
I am from the south.........NC
And your problem with Reese is that he wont cornhole you
azure
> On 2 Jul 1999 18:32:56 -0700, R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
>
> >Can anyone deny that the arna Halloweeners are a cult? Look how
cesspool
> >the arna newsgroup has become, ever since they learned you don't dare
> >stand up for someone or else you'll be trashed to. They can keep the
> >little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
> >either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty got
> >used, and now he's out. That's cultish, and its bad
>
> Take the little pills, don't just put em in your mouth and pretend to
> swallow em.
> Really.
Very kind of you to warn her, damian. It wasn't pleasant when they strapped
you to the gurney and gave you electroshock therapy, was it?
azure
Anne
R. Fransway a écrit dans le message <7ljp88$1q...@drn.newsguy.com>...
They can keep the
>little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
>either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty got
>>
PEEP, PEEP, PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!
I guess it's buhbye time for me. Scotty, Jenny, wanna start a new cult?
Anne
By the way, if you're out this way: http://www.montrealjazzfest.com/
aussie steve
Oooooo liar, liar, pants on fire.
Reese has been reamed so often by me (and others) and so
freaked by it that he's taking the "high road" of ignoring
his betters (comme moi) and telling his buds to stick by
him if they wanna be friends- tho why anyone would wanna be
his friend is beyond me. Deny it again, liar.
"No, that's because his posts aren't worth a crap, which
I'm not to blame for."
Fine. Come play with me, dude.
aussie steve.
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
R. Fransway
>>I agree that the "sponsorship family" thing is an extremely distasteful
>by-product of what was initially a half-decent idea (sponsorship). I
>agree that being ostracized from a "sponsorship family" can be
>devastating for some. I think we agree that these are occasional
>symptoms of an NA culture and not the NA program itself. Not all
>sponsorship families are bad, though I hope never to be in one again.
I've had the argument with others that bad behavior in NA is not the
program itself. But I think that's a cop-out. What is NA, if not the
people who make it up? Its not as if abuse is an infrequent occurrence--
it happens so often that most people are used to it and it does't even
seem like abuse anymore. Getting dumped by sponsors, attacked at
meetings, not accepted as you are, 13th stepping, spreading of venereal
disease, suicidesm malicious ostrasism--sure, these things happen
in the world too. But the rest of the world isn't claiming they found
clean living through a spiritual program. Whether you like it or not,
trust levels are higher among those who enter NA rooms than they would
be if they were to enter the average dark alley. Look around you right
now and see the abuse.
>
>I don't know what you mean by "the Trusted Servants."
The people who are "not leaders" of course. I'm surprised you don't
know what trusted servants are. Ask Reese. NA-Admin is full of them. He
knows what they are. But they don't govern. Right? No leaders?
>> No, but cultish groups or cultist withing groups are much more likely
>> to respond like a hive of insects when disturbed. The wish to deny
>> horrors and hide them from outsiders is definitely a cult
>> characteristic, and also, characteristic of dysfunctional families.
>
>What you're saying is true. However, I don't believe arna really fits
>that mold. I've criticized NA in arna and gotten simple responses like
>"Fuck you" from some arna members and then more thoughtful responses
>from others. There was no group mind.
Sure there is. The group mind fascilitates scapegoating, and no one dares
to disagree or defend. Has anyone but me spoken up for Fke lately? How
about Theo? How about Tom? Has anyone pointed out that if Beth and
Damian had let Tom and Derek fight it out alone on ARAA, he would never have
ended up sending posts back here? Tom gets blamed, and we cover up who
really is to blame. Why can't the malicious among you fight their own
battles? Why do you have to approach every problem with mob action? That's
cultishness. That's cult activity. Beth Baxter and Damian never fight
thier own battles
alone--they can't. They've always got an entourage of cultish sickos
to fight for them.
>
>> For instance, look at the case of the pictures of me. Jenny has heard
>> arna--only 4 or 5 of the Halloweeners, say the pictures show I'm fat
>> and ugly, so she agreed that I'm fat and ugly. Now Reese has said I'm
>> not.
>> This put Jenny in a terrible dillema. Now she can't decide whether
>> I'm fat or ugly or not.
>
>I see your point here. But I submit to you that really this is just
>group behavior that one sees all the time; it may be "cultish," if you
>like, but I don't think it makes arna a cult.
Its not just group behavior. Jenny used to be a nice person. There is
not other group in the world, other than a cult, when we would find Jenny
saying something like this to the group scapegoat, Fke:
>And your problem with Reese is that he wont cornhole you. The only reason
Jenny hates Fke is because Reese and the rest of the group do.
This is sickening. This is cult behavior.
>
>I'm not saying it's fair to you, but you have set yourself up as a
>lightning rod for criticism. Other arfers criticize the 12-Step
>programs, and they don't have web pages about them. By running point,
>you've subjected yourself to this sort of abuse. Again, I'm not saying
>it's fair.
And you can't say its true either. That's tantamount to enabling and
making excuses for malicious, criminal behavior. Making a website about
an organization is much different than a sneaky, malicious plan to
obtain and use copyrighted material to injure a person. As far as the
stock stepper statement that people such as myself "set themselves
up," you are using a cliche that when analyzed shows you its silliness.
What you are in essence saying is that abusers are like lightening, mindless,
consciousless, accidents of evolution who have no inner control will
strike certain elements specifically set-up for them. People in this
world are held responsible for their actions. My zine was designed to
link articles on alternative recovery methods, and to liberate people from
the steps. My site is within the realm of fair, informative presentation
of not widely used information about recovery, and what can be expected
from recovery. The only thing you can say about Derek and Beth's stolen
pictures is that they are more related to thier minds and their personal
vendettas than my site. From thier behavior you can also conclude that years
and years of clean time in NA does absolutely nothing to improve character.
Nick, I realize you think that much of the behavior here is common in any
group. You don't like the word "cult." In that case, why don't you think
about some of these questions asked by John Goldhammer, who recently published
a book on group health. These questions are fool for thought. If you're
honest with yourself, you can apply most of the dynamics in arna in these
questions.
Characteristics of Failing Groups
(families, churches, self-help groups)
1) Abusive Relationships
Abusive relationships are found when the organization (or parts of it) seek
a Scapegoat (an individual or a group) designated to suffers pain for others
or the organization. Anyone who chooses not to share in the Scapegoating
will also be scapegoated.and or face severe consequences (e.g. rejection,
blame, physical and/or emotional abuse, censure, et al) for rejection of
that role. Dysfunctional organizations tenaciously maintain the Scapegoat
role, for without it, they would be unable to project their dysfunction on
others but would have to bear the pain of the dysfunction themselves.
Mercilessly drawing attention to otherwise irrelevant minutiae, it directs
energy from focusing on the big picture to an over-attention to details.
Bureaucracy-perpetuating constitutions, detailed bylaws, and detailed
policies and are all part of a dysfunctional organization's on-going
prescription for aggravated conflict.as they simply provides more ammunition
for those enforcing the perfect way of operation.
3) Rigidity
Rigidity, like Perfectionism, relies on unbending rules and strict adherence
to various "objective" standards (Constitutions, Policies, Doctrines,
supposed denominational dictates, the "right" way). The main purpose of the
bureaucracy (formal or informal) is to enforce and enlarge control over
others while squashing spontaneity and risk taking. No surprises are
allowed…although those in or seeking control may instantaneously and
repeatedly change any dictum or direction without warning. However, hose
being controlled must do everything the "right" way.
4) Silence
People don’t speak up at appropriate times in appropriate situations with
appropriate people. Results: Repeated "unanimous" decisions that get
undermined, sabotaging supporters.
5) Repression
Unspoken rules that it is not "unity" to express feelings of
disagreement, dissent, or anger against those causing the problems,
and focus, instead, on scapegoats
Instead, one must hide how one really feels
or suffer censure for expression of emotions. Instead of expressing
feelings, feelings must be hidden. Result: Repression ultimately must be
released in episodes (or series of episodes) of uncontrollable anger and
hostility.
6) Rationalization and Denial
Groups or individuals re-work truth and reality to fit their distorted view
of situations, individuals, and other groups.
7) Triangulation
Triangulation is using "go-betweens" to communicate indirectly with other
parties. Results: Unsuspecting, but sympathetic message-bearers become
entangled in an unwanted destructive web of blame, anger, and
miscommunication. Result: They become uncomfortable with their roles and
jump ship.
8) Double Messages
Such duplicity or "two-faced" aspect is exemplified by people whose actions
always have an opposite "flip side." Some examples: "I care/get lost;" "I
love you/don’t bother me;" "I need you/You’re in my way," "Yes, I accept you
just as you are/Why don’t you change!".
9) Martyrdom
High tolerance by individuals or groups to bear abuse, pain, and extreme
sacrifice for the organization. No real atmosphere or opportunities exist in
the organization for expressing pain, loss and providing healing mechanisms.
Designated martyrs are made to feel "deserving" of their pain.
10) Entanglement: The "Hooterville Syndrome"
This is the situation where everyone knows everyone else’s business but the
information is never accurate, relevant, timely or constructively directed.
11) Elevations of Dysfunctional Leaders
When certain attention-seeking individuals can’t find attention in their
family, job, or elsewhere, the newsgroup becomes a convenient—and easy—place
for such "attention addicts" to get their attention by becoming a Chairman
of a congregational group. By not saying "no" to such incompetents, the
newsgoup succumbs to an inordinate amount of shitposts, flamewars,
and other types of associated narcissistic fallout.
12) Inability to Grasp a Positive Vision.
Those entrenched in perfectionism, procedures, victimization and control
will be too pre-occupied to deal with positive things such as present and
future organizational vision. Instead, there’s a self-defeating zealous
preoccupation with the past and present which leaves no possibility for
deliberating regarding the future.
Anyway, if you need help applying this to the dynamics of arna, or even
your home group, let me know and I'll try to help. If you've been part of
a group for any length of time, quite often some of the dynamics, especially
#5 and #6 are so entrenched that it can be scary to part with the
blinders.
Rebecca
http://www.zinezone.com/users/fransway
Reese
>>john...
>>reese is far from a southern gentleman.
>>if he's far from anything, it's gentlmanliness.
>>
>>in my experience, he more resembles a northeastern,
>>midwestern, or western bigot.
>>maybe that's because he hides "his" southern nature.
>>then again, south carolina aint in the south.
>>
>>the real south...
>>alabama, mississippi, georgia, tennessee.
Then Jenni typed this in reply:
>Oh shut up............
>I am from the south.........NC
>And your problem with Reese is that he wont cornhole you
If we were going to come up with a collection of sayings in which fke
reveals himself as not quite the sharpest knife in the drawer, his
statement that "south carolina aint in the south" wouldn't even stand
out amongst all the other stuff.
And let's not forget that fke is an example of what we have on the
wsc, which is now carving up the world into NA zones, geographic
zones.
Is there any better example of the problem with NA world service than
that we've got this guy on the wsc? Well, yeah, there is: namely the
fact that wso thinks it has the perfect right to keep financial
information secret.
But then, the reason wso is able to get by with such stuff as that is
because we've got people like fke, who don't know up from down, on the
wsc.
Reese
Jenni
wrote:
>
>R. Fransway a écrit dans le message <7ljp88$1q...@drn.newsguy.com>...
> They can keep the
>>little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
>>either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty got
>>used, and now he's out. That's cultish, and its bad. >Rebecca
>>>
>PEEP, PEEP, PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!
>I guess it's buhbye time for me. Scotty, Jenny, wanna start a new cult?
>
>Anne
>
HummmmmmmmmWhat's ya thinkin of?
How about Hanger-on'rs or
Tie the Fat Bitch up and make her squeal...................
Ned
jersey devil <jersey...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <7ljd0i$nul$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Ned <njlaw...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > Where did I lose you, Nick? Let me see if I can explain myself
better.
> >
>
I
> mean that I started to disagree with you.
>
> It was at about the point of the macaroni metaphor, I guess. If I'm
> eating macaroni and enjoying it, and somebody is all like, "Man, that
> macaroni sucks," I'm gonna just be all like, "Well, I like it," and
> that'll be that for me.
>
> Also, Fransway and all of these people who can't stand NA or AA have
> every right to feel the way they do, and they've got every right to
> talk about it. I don't have a problem with them doing that at all.
I don't either. I just think that calling people in NA and AA a cult is
counter-productive to discussing recovery. This isn't about me censoring
anyone's opinion, its about calling people on a fallacious point in
their criticism of something.
>
> In fact, I've questioned many things about the 12-Step programs
myself,
> and I've found that, for me, questioning them has only strengthened my
> faith in the Steps. I might not still have so much faith in all the
> bells and whistles that go along with them, but I still feel that the
> Steps saved my life.
I've been in other situations where this occured as well. I would hope
that if I criticized your beliefs, I would feel good if such a reaction
would occur, though you and I would continue to disagree. I don't think
saying you're a cultist would be to your benifit one way or the other.
Ned
Ned
fke <msj...@nantucket.net> wrote:
> Ned wrote:
>
> > Where did I lose you, Nick? Let me see if I can explain myself
better.
>
> :)
>
for some reason I immediately thought of chinese handcuffs when I read
this <g>
Ned
Ned
da...@snakebite.com wrote:
> Please note that I took alt,recovery,na out of the crossposting. I
don't
> like crossposting's.
Your attempt at censorship is well noted.
>
> Ned wrote:
> >
> > While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems
and
> > philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
> > does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
>
> How about calling a fish a fish? Nah, too honest.
It's just bait for RR, to continue the metaphor. Or is that too honest
for you?
>
> > * AA/NA isn't about suckering people into anything. It's about
staying
> > clean and sober. People can choose to stay sober in AA/NA or can
choose
> > a different path. The only ones in the way are themselves.
>
> No, it IS about suckering people into a belief system. They are
> threatened with death if they don't join. Often it is a 12step group
> that is in the way of these people.
Why don't you see your own post about the 10 irrational ideas (which,
as an aside, I want to thank you for posting). Like idea number 5.
How can you detirmine that ALL people in AA think they will die without.
Some people in AA believe this... that's their neuroseses. It's a
religious based organization. I'm not denying that. Nonetheless, people
have the right to practice what works for them.
>
> > * Calling a 12 step group a cult is like calling a particular
political
> > group fascist-- it is a polemical term designed to discredit
> > people.
>
> No, it is about calling a fish a fish. The 12step movement fits many
of
> the attributes of a cult, so if it looks like a fish, smells like a
> fish, acts like a fish, then you could only be honest by calling it a
> fish.
Well, a whale looks like a fish, but is actually a mammal. AA may have
many attributes that a cult has, that doesn't mean it is a cult. It
would be dishonest to not consider those attributes that are not
cult-like. It would also be irrational.
It is a method of recovery, plain and simple. It works for some and not
for all. Some of the people it doesn't work for will still defend it if
it is called a cult. Most likely this will not open them up to other
methods of recovery. I would like those people to have a chance at
learning about these other methods.
>
> > No matter what a person says or does to the contrary, they are
> > viewed as a cult or fascist. This makes
> > people paranoid, frustrated and dogmatic.
>
> And there are no paranoid, frustrated and dogmatic people in AA? We,
the
> non-12steppers, didn't make them that way.
Yea, well see where it has led discussions in these newsgroups: putting
up websites about specific individuals, name calling and other great
trolling devices. Yea!
As for your line "we, the non-12steppers", I AM a non-12 stepper.
>
> > If you truly believe that
> > people are more important than ideologies, than talk
> > to them like people, not ideologues. No one is static, including
your
> > perceived adversaries.
>
> When one is wrapped in the veil of a cult, you cannot talk to them
> rationally.
I talk with my wife rationally everyday and she's a stepper. Next...
>
> > * People have a right to think for themselves, yet by presenting to
a
> > someone that this is a cult they are forced to
> > see things through your eyes.
>
> Yes, people do have a right to think for themselves, but only those
> outside of religious cults are allowed to.
If you had ever been in AA, you'd know this was bullshit. While these
people do agree on some basic principles related to their method of
recovery, that's about it. Their lucky to have coffee made before the
meeting otherwise.
>
> > Make your criticisms and let them figure
> > it out. ...
>
> Nothing that I say would prevent them from figuring it out by
> themselves. But your attempt at censorship would.
This isn't an attempt at censorship. Generalizations like the term
"cult" is nothing but sophistry, which I am challenging. I certainly can
not stop anyone from expressing their opinion and do not desire to do
so. I would not like it if someone said that a self-help group I
participated in was a cult and I know to argue someone to the contrary
would only re-enforce that I was "brainwashed". Thus, my ability to
philosophically argue someone is seriously usurped.
>
> > * There is something more that a person can offer than writing the
same
> > damn message to this newsgroup everyday.
>
> Tell that to your 12step toadies.
Save it. I'm not siding with anyone and I have my own opinion on
recovery. I'd like it if addicted persons were offered a choice of
recovery methods, but pathetic polemics such as what I am referring to
here corrupts that. I have made points to the steppers about this like,
"what does Fransway's wieght have anything to do with recovery?"
>
> > I didn't come here to read propaganda, which is what this crap
amounts to.
>
> Then don't read it. No one is forcing you to read every posting.
I'd rather respond to it, if that's ok with you.
>
> > Why don't *you* try using the reasonable mind
> > God (or whatever you want to call it) gave you and throw us a bone.
>
> I call this "God (or whatever you want to call it)" nonexistent and
> silly.
So what?
>
> > People come here to discuss recovery and not sit in intellectual
> > trenches fighting endless ideological wars. Everybody's parade gets
> > pissed on now and then-- that doesn't mean you can urinate
> > wherever you want.
>
> That's what would happen here if the 12step jerks would go back to
their
> own groups. But I guess these guys see us as a threat to their cult.
Is it "us vs. them", Dave? Such a duality exists only in your
imagination. It's more silly and nonexistent than you believing in God.
Agape,
R. Fransway
>
>On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 17:28:20 -0400, "Anne" <chatea...@videotron.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>R. Fransway a écrit dans le message <7ljp88$1q...@drn.newsguy.com>...
>> They can keep the
>>>little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
>>>either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty got
>>>used, and now he's out. That's cultish, and its bad. >Rebecca
>>>>
>>PEEP, PEEP, PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!
>>I guess it's buhbye time for me. Scotty, Jenny, wanna start a new cult?
>>
>>Anne
>>
>HummmmmmmmmWhat's ya thinkin of?
>How about Hanger-on'rs or
>Tie the Fat Bitch up and make her squeal...................
---snip phony crap------
yey, you all sound great, just like a couple of Manson girls.
I know a great site for you.
Yuch!>http://www.AA-Lamplighters.org
fke
> > a cult. The whole of NA is probably not.
Trusted Servant Cult:
ashtray emptier
greeters
key holder
coffee maker
chairperson
h&i panel member
h&i panel leader
pi panel member
pi panel leader
pi chairperson
lit chairperson
subcommittee members of:
pi,h&i,lit,add needs,
phoneline,policy,translations,etc
phone answerer
gsr and a
asr and a
rsr and a
treasurer and a
secretary and a
etc and a
Cult Bashers:
spectators
thanks for watching
fke
>
> >I agree that the "sponsorship family" thing is an extremely distasteful
> >by-product of what was initially a half-decent idea (sponsorship).
>
> it causes plenty of problems.
>
> I'm supposedly in Mr. Bill's sponsorship family, I'm ashamed to admit.
> But it ain't like I take sponsorship very seriously anyway.
shame's a nice principle to practice, john...
choices, dude.....choices.
fke
> Right? No leaders?
right...
thats what it says..."no leaders"
fke
>
> "I ain't told nobody not to reply to his posts".
>
> Oooooo liar, liar, pants on fire.
> Reese has been reamed so often by me (and others) and so
> freaked by it that he's taking the "high road" of ignoring
> his betters (comme moi) and telling his buds to stick by
> him if they wanna be friends- tho why anyone would wanna be
> his friend is beyond me. Deny it again, liar.
a liar usuall will
johnny is probably the most frequent liar on these lists..
on arna, anyway.
fke
> > then stop promoting na..
> > stop indoctrinating members.
>
> I meant the second two, not the first two. I don't think NA recruits
> members. But it *could* be *argued* that NA uses psychological
> coercion to indoctrinate and retain members. Haven't you heard people
> use the expression, "Well, my brain *needed* washing!"? I don't think
> everybody feels that way, but some do.
yeah, when i was new i said that....
i felt like a filthy disgusting disease...
saying shit like that had nothing to do with NA...
it had to do with how i felt about myself...
it seemed, back then, my other alternative was to
shoot myself or scratch my eyes out until i got to
my brain and could pluck it out of my head.
those were my ideas, not NA's.
>
> > >arguably #2,
> >
> > learn about anonymity then, would you?
>
> Again, I said "arguably." And not everybody in NA really learns about
> anonymity. And many learn about it and then forget about it. Would > you not agree?
how could i disagree?
:)
>
> > > and that's it. NA and AA have a few cult-like traits, but they are
> > > certainly not cults.
> >
> > it's unfortunate your experience makes you feel that
> > NA, as a whole, resembles any of the above...
>
> I don't think I mean NA as a whole, and I said "arguably" for each of
> the two I cited above. I've seen examples of those two things
> happening; but I don't think they apply to the NA program or to NA as a
> whole.
>
> > when you think about it....families are more
> > like cults based on the definitions above...
> > of course, NA is not disneyland and has it's sickos...
> > some of us are sicker than others..
> > BUT we're all sick enough.
>
> And NA groups and/or areas and/or regions are often just exactly that:
> Big, sometimes dysfunctional families.
>
> > we have one NA cultist/elitist in our area.
> > she causes more dissension than ive ever seen
> > in our area...
> > ever.
> > and i believe she does it intentionally..
> > she did in the two other states she moved from.
> > notoriety and shit.
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean. You mean she accuses NA of
> being a cult, or do you mean she has built a cult up within NA?
no, she has recently proven to me, once again, that
there are terrorist sponsors and cultish sponsorship
families.
she talks shit about our area wherever she goes..
"there all unspiritual and make me feel isolated" blah
blah blah..
yeah, whats the one consisitent component in that statement?
her.
she's the same one i was talking about in the "clean date"
thread.
come to find out yesterday after talking to the sponsee,
sponsor terrorist also talked shit about the sponsee throughout
the sponsorship family...
so, ive learned something new this week...
that in some instances, there is a cult
of sponsorship...
i only know two of the six or seven guys my sponsor sponsors...
i know who his sponsor is
we strongly disagree on many things..
i know who his sponsor is...
ive said thirty words to him in my lifetime.
i already knew about sponsor terrorists...
>
> --
> Nick
fke
>
> No, that's because his posts aren't worth a crap, which I'm not to
> that would be a good way to get the arna'ers to reply to him--ie, to
> send out email telling them not to. In the past when people on arna
> have used that tactic, it ain't worked.
hahahahhaahahhha
you believed it was working when you did it...
you just made an ass out of yourself, though..
> Maybe fke can give him some tips on cybering as well as what type of
> keyboards are most resistant to having the keys stick after a build
> up.
stil lying...
nothing changes if nothing changes, eh johnny?
glad to see you havent lied about lying anyway..
boo and shit.
> Reese
fke
>
> On 3 Jul 1999 10:07:53 GMT, fke <msj...@nantucket.net> wrote:
>
> >john L. wrote:
> >
> >> Reese, among all his other "good" points, is a southern gentleman. > That is obvious.
> >
> >reese is far from a southern gentleman.
> >if he's far from anything, it's gentlmanliness.
> >
> >in my experience, he more resembles a northeastern,
> >midwestern, or western bigot.
> >maybe that's because he hides "his" southern nature.
> >then again, south carolina aint in the south.
> >
> >the real south...
> >alabama, mississippi, georgia, tennessee.
> I am from the south.........NC
> And your problem with Reese is that he wont cornhole you
hahahha
i knew that would dander someone...
reese maybe cruising for you and you may be liking it..
he gets all quiet and premature and shit when he does that..
Ned
R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> In article <7ljid0$pn0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ned says...
> >
> >
> >Anne is just agreeing with people you disagree with.
>
> How can you call "stupid bitch" an agreement or disagreement? You're
way
> off base here. Are you really following what's been going on?
You know where I started from.
>
> >ARNA is a public
> >forum to discuss NA and related recovery issues.
>
> Excuse me, but have you read ARNA lately Ned? I'm the only one around
> here who discusses recovery issues, and I haven't been here for
months. If
> it wasn't for Beth, Derek, and Damian invading ARAA and ARFS, I
wouldn't
> be here at all, but now I need some breathing room. You better learn
the
> ropes before you start blabbing stuff you know nothing about.
I know quite a bit about what goes on around here. It's not like it's
changed in the past x number of years. Same old shit recycled day in and
day out. You seem to think I'm blaming you for what goes on. Actually, I
just want both sides of the recovery issue to act like adults. I can't
make anyone do that, but I can argue for it. Calling people a cult when
there is evidence to the contrary, as I said in the other post, is
nothing but a childish game of name calling and empty rhetoric. No one
recovered from addiction by being called a cult or calling some one
elses recovery method a cult. That's why these people hate you so much
and why they troll on over to arf12s.
>
> >I'm sure that if it
> >were a cult, and you were busting them, they would have taken you off
> >the forum.
>
> You can't take people off a recovery forum for discussing recovery.
And
> I'm just telling the truth, which always flies.
By definition, a public forum cannot be a cult. a) no one decides what
goes and what doesn't b) no one is making any money off of it and c) the
"us vs. them" mentality is an imaginary game projected onto the forum.
It doesn't exist.
>
> >Irrational idea #5: The idea that emotional misery comes from
external
> >pressures and that you have little ability to control or change your
> >feelings.
>
> That is a SMART philosphy I don't agree with, and its off-topic here
Ned.
> This group is to discuss NA recovery, not SMART recovery.
I can discuss what ever I like. Stop me.
Also, one
of the
> deadliest things you can tell someone is that they can control what
> emotions rise. You can control what you do, but not what you feel. If
you
> want to argue about that, take it to ARFS, or, better yet,
alt.recovery.
> rational. That's what those groups are for.
This is cross-posted to arna and arf12s because the topic of discussion
includes both groups. But I'll save any response to your comments about
emotions for another thread. I agree.
>
> >You have to consider that for many people, NA/AA lead to a better
life.
>
> No, I don't have to consider them. They can consider each other.
> If they really have better lives, they probably aren't paying any
attention
> to me, and they certainly aren't here reading this. The people
> I'm considering are those who can't make it because they get caught up
> with sponsors similar to some of these creeps here. (and I'm *not*
saying
> everyone here is a creep)
So, there are sponsors out there who do help people to make it, yes?
Awhile back, Damian and his wife got the
cops
> called on them for their behavior toward a sponsee. Also, awhile
> back some of them were actively participating in some sick, sick
stuff, and
> sponsoring people for god sake. I'm talking hideous, serial killer
type stuff,
> that gets talked about in alt.torture. Do you think this is okay?
On this point, you are right. I don't know what you're talking about. It
also is not what I'm talking about in this thread. I would be curious
how you came upon this information. Are you certain it's valid?
Could it just be someone screwing around on the net?
I don't think any kind of abuse is acceptable.
Frankly
> I think the NA way of life as per what these folks have just might
kill more
> people than it helps. The only stats anyone has shows that, at best,
NA and
> AA offer nothing at all toward higher rates of recovery.
Statistics can say whatever the author wants to. I also would like to
say that sponsors like the ones you describe above are not
representative of AA/NA anymore than arna is representative of recovery
in general.
Sincerely,
Ned
>
> Rebecca
>
> Yuch!>http://www.AA-Lamplighters.org
> Wow! Check out>http://www.churchofgodanonymous.org/index2.html
> Join 12-step-free zone mailing list!
> List Archive: http://www.egroups.com/group/12-step-free/
>
>
fke
> If we were going to come up with a collection of sayings in which fke
> reveals himself as not quite the sharpest knife in the drawer, his
> statement that "south carolina aint in the south" wouldn't even stand
> out amongst all the other stuff.
dude, i said the "real" south...
wannabe...
knock yourself out...
you keep killin yourself trying to prove im not the sharpest
knife in the drawer..
i never ran for nor was nominated for the sharpest knife in
the drawer position...
stop nominating me as a target..
it reveals your personality..
as you said in another post..
shame shame shame
> And let's not forget that fke is an example of what we have on the
> wsc, which is now carving up the world into NA zones, geographic
> zones.
dude...
i wasnt part of designating zones
neither was any rsr or alternate at the time...
tell you what, johnny..
show us your homework..
what year were the regions designated as zones?
what year was the proposal made?
who made it?
you dont know..
admit that you dont know
admit that you had to ask someone
admit that you blow lotsa hot air..
and then shut up or something
or
continue lying...
>
> Is there any better example of the problem with NA world service than
> that we've got this guy on the wsc? Well, yeah, there is: namely the
> fact that wso thinks it has the perfect right to keep financial
> information secret.
dude, go balance your checkbook or something and stop
whining about money.
you always whine about money.
> But then, the reason wso is able to get by with such stuff as that is
> because we've got people like fke, who don't know up from down, on the
> wsc.
i know up from down, johnny...
and i dont practice it on newcomers.
:)
fucker.
the real south my eye.
>
> Reese
who thinks people believe his claim that fke is in his killfile..
be the drawer, johnny..
then it wont matter how sharp you are...
Ken Robertson
<snip>
>All of this is interesting, Ned, but I don't think AA as a whole is a cult.
>You're barking up the wrong tree.
>NA might be now that the leaders are making so many rules. However, I do
>think arna is a cult. This is what makes Anne and others like her a
>cultist. That is what I meant when I referred to the way
>arna reacts to critisism of NA. Arna actually should not have the NA
>name attached to it.
>
<snip>
ARNA is not a cult
ARNA has
no financial obligation
no charasmatic leader
no leader at all in fact
no organization
no recruiting
no form of banning someone
there may be a small group within ARNA who keep each other excited
with thier own self importance .
but one hardly has to respect or even aknowledge
thier existance to participate in ARNA .
ARNA is nothing more than a bunch of opinions all in the same place.
( plus some advertisements , " warm-fuzzy-quotes " , or the occasional
rampant flood of 20 or more extreamly long winded - way too detailed
accounts of some long past wedding / vacation / NA event / etc... )
surrounded by lots of posts by people pretending to be some other
person.
You'r taking it all to hard.
jazzzman
Aw, she's just continuing to prove that she hasn't a clue....
"Our leaders are...."
--
jazzzman
http://home.earthlink.net/~tigernest/control.html
Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort
of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle.
Helen Keller (1880-1968), U.S. blind/deaf author, lecturer.
The Story of My Life, pt. 3, "Personality" (1903).
Jenni
>In article <37800867....@news.newsguy.com>, je...@net999.com says...
>>
>>On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 17:28:20 -0400, "Anne" <chatea...@videotron.ca>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>R. Fransway a écrit dans le message <7ljp88$1q...@drn.newsguy.com>...
>>> They can keep the
>>>>little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
>>>>either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty got
>>>>used, and now he's out. That's cultish, and its bad. >Rebecca
>>>>>
>>>PEEP, PEEP, PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!
>>>I guess it's buhbye time for me. Scotty, Jenny, wanna start a new cult?
>>>
>>>Anne
>>>
>>HummmmmmmmmWhat's ya thinkin of?
>>How about Hanger-on'rs or
>>Tie the Fat Bitch up and make her squeal...................
>
>---snip phony crap------
>
>yey, you all sound great, just like a couple of Manson girls.
>
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Poor Fran.........get a life k?
And no you can't join us in some lezie fun....hehehe
>I know a great site for you.
>
aussie steve
newcomers."
I laughed.
Come on, fke, spill- what's the story on this? Who did he
root?
Dirty minds want to know.
as
R. Fransway
>I know quite a bit about what goes on around here. It's not like it's
>changed in the past x number of years. Same old shit recycled day in and
>day out. You seem to think I'm blaming you for what goes on. Actually, I
>just want both sides of the recovery issue to act like adults. I can't
>make anyone do that, but I can argue for it. Calling people a cult when
>there is evidence to the contrary, as I said in the other post, is
>nothing but a childish game of name calling and empty rhetoric. No one
>recovered from addiction by being called a cult or calling some one
>elses recovery method a cult. That's why these people hate you so much
>and why they troll on over to arf12s.
The only types of people who hate others for calling them cultists, are
real cultists. That's fine. You can expect a scientologist to hate
those who call them cultists, and you can expect the same thing from
arnaers. You see, Ned, people who aren't cultists know that, and have
no reason to hate someone who misapplies a name to them.
Also, they troll arf12s whether I'm here or not. You're falling into the
same trap of scapegoating one person for the actions of other adults.
You act like they are children who need to be manipulated by certain
ways of speaking. They aren't. They are adults who can handle the chance
to look at themselves if they so desire. If not, at least make room for
others who can.
>
>So, there are sponsors out there who do help people to make it, yes?
Yeah, but I doubt any of them are here.
>
>
> Awhile back, Damian and his wife got the
>cops
>> called on them for their behavior toward a sponsee. Also, awhile
>> back some of them were actively participating in some sick, sick
>stuff, and
>> sponsoring people for god sake. I'm talking hideous, serial killer
>type stuff,
>> that gets talked about in alt.torture. Do you think this is okay?
>
>On this point, you are right. I don't know what you're talking about. It
>also is not what I'm talking about in this thread. I would be curious
>how you came upon this information. Are you certain it's valid?
>Could it just be someone screwing around on the net?
Nope. Admitted right here on arna itself.
>
>I don't think any kind of abuse is acceptable.
>
>
>Frankly
>> I think the NA way of life as per what these folks have just might
>kill more
>> people than it helps. The only stats anyone has shows that, at best,
>NA and
>> AA offer nothing at all toward higher rates of recovery.
>
>Statistics can say whatever the author wants to.
That's not true, although its a very popular thing to say about stats
you don't like. Face it, Ned, the accumulated controlled stats we do
have all point in the same direction. 12-step groups statistically do
nothing, or less than nothing, toward sobriety outcomes.
>I also would like to
>say that sponsors like the ones you describe above are not
>representative of AA/NA anymore than arna is representative of recovery
>in general.
Again, I would have to say you are wrong. So many, many complaints about
sponsors
come on the net and elsewhere that a good proposal might be to dispense
with the sponsorship system in 12-step groups.
Rebecca
R. Fransway
kro...@dhc.net says...
hahahahahahh! Hahahah!
Actually you're right. ARNA only resembles a cult.
Or an attempted cult. That's it, By Jove!
ARNA--Attempted cult!
PETER BARRY
inflammatory. I think some of the definitions that have been used to
define cult in this thread are the one's used to define destructive
cults. On the other hand, a cult is the first step in a spiritual
movement gravitating towards being a religion, an admitted great danger
for NA or AA.
It is highly likely that such a direction will come from the grass roots
level, for without a messianic leader, folklore and myth will be the
main agent for an insidious change. Spying the distant horizon for how
such simple ideas can take hold and evolve into a rigid system of belief
and ritual takes vigilance. Take, for example, at least where I live,
the current fashion of referring to a few lines from the basic text as
'the third step prayer'. Soon, we may find laminated cards with this
so-called prayer on it being sold at conventions. This is one example,
an egregious one, for official prayers are a hallmard of religion.
Another: the generally held views of what a higher power is or isn't.
Over time, a sometimes due to peer pressure, a singular concept may
dominate, if one does not already. In a grouping such as NA or AA, ideas
and beliefs are refined rapidly, for the generational times are brief,
and motiffs in thought and speech gain great currency very quickly.
"Working the steps" and the layers of folklore involved in the process
where I live, I find especially disturbing; rigid and binding, the
dominant local version has turned the Basic Text into a template for
interpreting the lore itself. Sponsors hold secret knowledge and mete
our homework assignments to their thralls, with little or no concern for
the manner in which learnging styles vary from one individual to the
next. One need not be an epystimologist to discenn such a need.
Also what I have seen here, in the ng, is a defense of the ideals, as
stated in NA literature, when the practices of the fellowship are what
is being called into question. Bill Wilson said AA would always learn
more from its critics than from its cheerleaders.
Pockets of NA or AA, be it a group, clubhouse, area, or valley or town,
all need to be concerned with tribalism that leads to exclusionary
practices. Especially if the locale develops an insider language so
opaque that the fifth tradition lays in waste.
Peter
R. Fransway
says...
>
>I would like to weigh in here. The use of the word 'cult' is doubtless
>inflammatory.
Actually, in the case of 12-step groups, the word "cult" can be exchanged
with "failed groups" or "unhealthy groups." This will avoid the
connotations of Jim Jones-style mass suicides. Actually, AA and NA
result in a much lower percentage of suicides that the Jim Jones cult.
You certainly have weighed in--there's a lot of good thinking material
here. Tell us, what changes do you think would improve the groups, and
how could these changes be implemented.
One thing I think would result in some improvement is to abolish official
"sponsorship."
fke
>
> "i know up from down, johnny... and i dont practice it on
> newcomers."
>
> I laughed.
>
> Come on, fke, spill- what's the story on this? Who did he
> root?
>
> Dirty minds want to know.
> as
ask him....
fke
> Or an attempted cult. That's it, By Jove!
>
> ARNA--Attempted cult!
>
> Rebecca
>
we promise to write it down for the archives rebecca..
just in case you lose that brass plaque you made
commending yourself for such brilliance.
Mike
Jenni <je...@net999.com> wrote in message
news:3780c30f....@news.newsguy.com...
> On 4 Jul 1999 01:24:06 -0700, R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <37800867....@news.newsguy.com>, je...@net999.com
says...
> >>
> >>On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 17:28:20 -0400, "Anne" <chatea...@videotron.ca>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>R. Fransway a écrit dans le message <7ljp88$1q...@drn.newsguy.com>...
> >>> They can keep the
> >>>>little obedient hangers-on like Anne and Jenny. The first peep out of
> >>>>either one of them though, and they'll be out too. Just like Scotty
got
> >>>>used, and now he's out. That's cultish, and its bad. >Rebecca
> >>>>>
> >>>PEEP, PEEP, PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!
> >>>I guess it's buhbye time for me. Scotty, Jenny, wanna start a new
cult?
> >>>
> >>>Anne
> >>>
> >>HummmmmmmmmWhat's ya thinkin of?
> >>How about Hanger-on'rs or
> >>Tie the Fat Bitch up and make her squeal...................
> >
> >---snip phony crap------
> >
> >yey, you all sound great, just like a couple of Manson girls.
> >
> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Poor Fran.........get a life k?
> And no you can't join us in some lezie fun....hehehe
Jenni
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh not really.
Jenni
Things that make you go HUMMMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Ned
"fifi_jojo" <fifi...@tesco.net> wrote:
> Thats the most sensible post Ive read here for a while, perhaps we
should
> all keep a copy and read it once in a while when the old arguments
surface
>
> Ned wrote in message <7lipqu$gbh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >While 12 step groups may have their problems, as all beliefs systems
and
> >philosophies do, I can't see how calling these folks a cult everyday
> >does anyone any good. I list a couple reasons why below:
> >
Thanks, Fifi. It's good to know someone out there was actually listening
and not just reacting.
Agape,
Ned
David Kay
> I guess I should apologize for the ad hominem attack and the passing
> of judgment there. I guess the fact that Aussie Steve is a pill
> popping crackhead doesn't have anything to do with his posts being
> pretty much total crap.
What's your excuse?
jersey devil
R. Fransway <rfr...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> I've had the argument with others that bad behavior in NA is not the
> program itself. But I think that's a cop-out. What is NA, if not the
> people who make it up? Its not as if abuse is an infrequent
> occurrence--it happens so often that most people are used to it and it
> does't even seem like abuse anymore. Getting dumped by sponsors,
> attacked at meetings, not accepted as you are, 13th stepping,
> spreading of venereal disease, suicidesm malicious ostrasism--sure,
> these things happen in the world too. But the rest of the world isn't
> claiming they found clean living through a spiritual program. Whether
> you like it or not, trust levels are higher among those who
> enter NA rooms than they would be if they were to enter the average
> dark alley. Look around you right now and see the abuse.
First of all, none of these abuses are part of NA doctrine. Thus, they
must be the exclusive jurisdiction of NA members; and I submit to you
that the vast majority of NA members at least frown upon or actively
attempt to discourage such behavior.
I thought about your question of a few days ago, the question of what NA
groups could do to avoid the abuses. I don't think there's much they
can -- or should -- do. If NA groups get into the business of dictating
members' behavior, then they will have completely missed the point of
the whole program. And if you think NA's a cult now, just imagine how
it will be if you start giving NA members the power to discipline or
reward other members for behavior.
I believe that, in large areas at least, members' peers apply a great
deal of pressure on them if they are doing harmful things. People get
reputations as 13th-Steppers. They get reputations as chicken-hawks.
They get reputations for bizarre behavior with sponsees. They might be
allowed to continue this behavior, but they find themselves so isolated
from the mainstream of their areas that finding new victims becomes more
and more difficult.
This does not mean that the abuses will stop. I do not believe that
they will ever stop. As you said, trust levels are very high in NA and
in other recovery communities. The individual member has such a level
of autonomy that, if he is so inclined, he can wreak havoc on a great
many members. But other members also have power, the power to warn
newcomers of potential dangers; and they already exercise this power
liberally.
As for more subtle abuses -- like some of the "sponsorship family"
shenanigans and non-serial 13th-Stepping, those are much more difficult
to identify and prevent. Maybe less of an emphasis should be placed on
sponsorship and home groups and late-night hanging out.
But again I submit to you that, as long as NA the other A's are
group-oriented, these problems will arise. Regardless of the nature of
the group, people form into cliques whenever herded into large groups.
They have sex with each other. They choose de facto leaders. They pick
scapegoats. The best I can do is try to be a good example, to tell
people, for example, that I don't go to any sponsor for career advice or
love advice.
> >I don't know what you mean by "the Trusted Servants."
>
> The people who are "not leaders" of course. I'm surprised you don't
> know what trusted servants are. Ask Reese. NA-Admin is full of them.
> He knows what they are. But they don't govern. Right? No leaders?
Well, frankly, I've been out of the NA-service loop for quite some time.
If these peckerwoods have any effect on my life, it is not noticed by
me.
> >> No, but cultish groups or cultist withing groups are much more
> >> likely to respond like a hive of insects when disturbed. The wish
> >> to deny horrors and hide them from outsiders is definitely a cult
> >> characteristic, and also, characteristic of dysfunctional families.
> >
> >What you're saying is true. However, I don't believe arna really
> >fits that mold. I've criticized NA in arna and gotten simple
> >responses like "Fuck you" from some arna members and then more
> >thoughtful responses from others. There was no group mind.
>
> Sure there is. The group mind fascilitates scapegoating, and no one
> dares to disagree or defend. Has anyone but me spoken up for Fke
> lately? How about Theo?
Actually, some have. But even if nobody had, arna would still not be a
cult. It is no different from the schoolbus I rode when I was a kid.
We had scapegoats, kids we emotionally abused all the time. There was
this one kid we called "Stanky Spears" because he lived in a trailer and
he sometimes came on the bus smelling bad. Every day when this poor
little bastard got on the bus, everybody on the bus pretended to lower
oxygen masks from the roof and breathe through them loudly while he
walked down the aisle of the bus. I still think about the damage this
must have done to this kid.
But was that bus a cult? No. We were a bunch of kids trying to
distract our peers from our own shortcomings by finding a target and
relentlessly attacking that target. In some instances arna is as bad as
that schoolbus, but that doesn't make it a cult.
>How about Tom? What about him? Has anyone pointed out that if Beth and
>Damian had let Tom and Derek fight it out alone on ARAA, he would never
>have ended up sending posts back here? Tom gets blamed, and we cover
>up who really is to blame.
I don't know anything about any of this, nor do I care.
> Why can't the malicious among you fight their own battles? Why do you
> have to approach every problem with mob action?
> That's cultishness. That's cult activity. Beth Baxter and Damian
> never fight thier own battles alone--they can't. They've always got
> an entourage of cultish sickos to fight for them.
I don't know that I agree with you. Again, I know next to nothing about
the recent spats.
One thing, though: How do you define "arna?" About whom are you
speaking when you say "arna?" You're not talking about all regular
posters, are you? Are you just talking about Derek, Beth and Damian?
We probably shouldn't even be discussing the nature of "arna" without
first defining what "arna" is.
> >> This put Jenny in a terrible dillema. Now she can't decide whether
> >> I'm fat or ugly or not.
> >
> >I see your point here. But I submit to you that really this is just
> >group behavior that one sees all the time; it may be "cultish," if
> >you like, but I don't think it makes arna a cult.
>
> Its not just group behavior. Jenny used to be a nice person. There is
> not other group in the world, other than a cult, when we would find
> Jenny saying something like this to the group scapegoat, Fke:
>
> >And your problem with Reese is that he wont cornhole you.
> The only reason Jenny hates Fke is because Reese and the rest of the >
> group do.
>
> This is sickening. This is cult behavior.
I disagree. There are plenty of other places in the world where you see
such behavior. Schoolbuses, high school locker rooms, juries, offices,
comedy acts, governments, etc. I'm not saying it's desirable behavior.
I'm just saying it's more common than you want to admit. Again, it may
be cult-like, but scapegoating is only one small aspect of cult
behavior. To say arna is a cult because it picks scapegoats is like
saying an apple is a fire truck because it is red. If you want to see
some truly cult-like newsgroups, go check out alt.fan.karl-malden.nose
or alt.romath. They've got many more cult characteristics than arna.
> >I'm not saying it's fair to you, but you have set yourself up as a
> >lightning rod for criticism. Other arfers criticize the 12-Step
> >programs, and they don't have web pages about them. By running
> >point,you've subjected yourself to this sort of abuse. Again, I'm
> >not saying it's fair.
>
> And you can't say its true either. That's tantamount to enabling and
> making excuses for malicious, criminal behavior. Making a website
> about an organization is much different than a sneaky, malicious plan
> to obtain and use copyrighted material to injure a person. As far as
> the stock stepper statement that people such as myself "set themselves
> up," you are using a cliche that when analyzed shows you its
> silliness.
Now, I'm a clueless newbie to this arna thing, so I don't know the
history of your battles with arna. I don't know anything about any
criminal behavior. But I have seen plenty of examples of what happens
when people stick their necks out for anything. Rush Limbaugh is
belittled for his physical appearance by people who claim to disagree
only with his ideas. Celebrities - entertainers, sports figures,
politicians, etc. -- are constantly roasted and caricaturized by
comedians and the media. I'm not saying this is right. I'm just saying
it happens and it happens often. If you place yourself in the public
eye and make controversial statements, you have to expect to get some
negative feedback. I don't think this concept is silly at all.
> What you are in essence saying is that abusers are like lightening,
> mindless, consciousless, accidents of evolution who have no inner
> control will strike certain elements specifically set-up for them.
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. When have you ever known the
members of a lynch mob to stop and consider their motivations or the
repercussions of their actions?
> People in this world are held responsible for their actions. My zine
> was designed to link articles on alternative recovery methods, and to
> liberate people from the steps. My site is within the realm of fair,
> informative presentation of not widely used information about
> recovery, and what can be expected from recovery. The only thing you
> can say about Derek and Beth's stolen pictures is that they are more
> related to thier minds and their personal vendettas than my site.
That may be so; I have no idea. If so, then is that not simply a matter
between you and Derek and Beth? Isn't it overly simplistic to paint all
of arna with the same brush? Of course, that gets us back to your
definition of "arna."
> From thier behavior you can also conclude that years and years of
> clean time in NA does absolutely nothing to improve character.
Clean time alone doesn't do a thing for character. It's actually been
known to erode character if not accompanied by some active pursuit of
personal growth.
> Nick, I realize you think that much of the behavior here is common in
> any group. You don't like the word "cult." In that case, why don't
> you think about some of these questions asked by John Goldhammer, who
> recently published a book on group health. These questions are fool
> for thought. If you're honest with yourself, you can apply most of the
> dynamics in arna in these questions.
>
> Characteristics of Failing Groups
> (families, churches, self-help groups)
First of all, arna is a newsgroup. I know some friendships have
developed within arna, but it is a glorified bulletin board for
discussion of recovery issues. It is not a self-help group or a family
or a church. Don't you think there's a distinction?
Also, we still need to define "arna."
> 1) Abusive Relationships
>SNIP another discussion of scapegoating<
I think we've discussed this enough. I agree that you have been made a
scapegoat. However, I have not noticed that other posters in arna have
been attacked if they do not participate in lynching you.
> 3) Rigidity
>SNIP discussion of rules, standards, etc.<
I've never read the arna FAQ, but no one told me of any rules to follow
when I started posting here. I've never noticed any squashing of
spontaneity or risk-taking here. I've noticed that some people might
raise hell about it, but what difference does that make? Criticism is
not authority.
> 4) Silence
>
> People don't speak up at appropriate times in appropriate situations
> with appropriate people. Results: Repeated "unanimous" decisions that
> get undermined, sabotaging supporters.
You could make the argument that people don't speak up at appropriate
times in appropriate situations, but isn't that true for any newsgroup?
Also, I haven't noticed any "decisions" made by arna recently.
> 5) Repression
>SNIP<
> 6) Rationalization and Denial
>SNIP<
These could certainly apply to individuals in arna (or any other group).
I have not seen examples of their application to arna as a whole.
> 7) Triangulation
>
> Triangulation is using "go-betweens" to communicate indirectly with
>other parties.
>SNIP<
> 8) Double Messages
>SNIP<
> 9) Martyrdom
Again, I'm a newbie. I've never seen examples of these.
> 10) Entanglement: The "Hooterville Syndrome"
>
> This is the situation where everyone knows everyone else's business
> but the information is never accurate, relevant, timely or
> constructively directed.
The newbie excuse again. I don't know what you know about what
everybody in arna knows about everybody else in arna. I'd sure love to
hear it, though!
> 11) Elevations of Dysfunctional Leaders
>
> When certain attention-seeking individuals can't find attention in
> their family, job, or elsewhere, the newsgroup becomes a
> convenient-and easy-place for such "attention addicts" to get their
> attention by becoming a Chairman of a congregational group. By not
> saying "no" to such incompetents, the newsgoup succumbs to an
> inordinate amount of shitposts, flamewars, and other types of >
associated narcissistic fallout.
Welcome to usenet, baby.
> 12) Inability to Grasp a Positive Vision.
>
> Those entrenched in perfectionism, procedures, victimization and
> control will be too pre-occupied to deal with positive things such as
> present and future organizational vision. Instead, there's a
> self-defeating zealous preoccupation with the past and present which
> leaves no possibility for deliberating regarding the future.
Again, is arna an organization? Does it need to have a vision?
Granted, sitting around bashing other people does distract from arna's
purpose as a discussion group; but discussions carry on nonetheless.
> Anyway, if you need help applying this to the dynamics of arna, or
> even your home group, let me know and I'll try to help.
Well, I am curious about how you apply these things to arna.
As for my home group, I don't have one. This is by my choice. I don't
need anybody to explain to me the problems with NA groups. I have been
a member of a few home groups, and I've seen plenty of problems,
including some of the 12 behaviors described above.
Nonetheless, nothing will change the fact that the 12 Steps changed my
life in an utterly positive direction and gave me a relationship with
God. I believe that the NA program was designed to give people a
relationship with God which would make all other considerations - like
group dynamics - be revealed for the pointless games that they are. I
am able to separate my personal program of growth from some of the
things I see in NA.
Let me also say that I have seen plenty of healthy group behavior in NA.
My original and abiding objection is to the labeling of arna as a cult.
I understand that your experiences here have been unpleasant, and I
am not trying to defend anyone's behavior; but it is overly simplistic
to call arna a cult.
--
Nick