|
In Reply to: interesting post on Moving On posted by Raymond Shaw on September 08, 2004 at 01:46:38:
I have intentionally stayed away from these discussions for awhile, mostly because I have already said so much on the topic. After a while it becomes redundant to continue the debate and I wasn’t sure if there was really much more to say about it. However there are some things I have been thinking about that may help explain my views in a bit more depth.
To start with, while it may seem to some that some opinions are born out of ignorance regarding the unique dynamics in cults and high demand organizations, that is not the case for me. I have read a great deal of literature on the subjects of mind control, cult recovery, authoritarianism and abusive religions. I have also talked in depth with many experts on both sides of the apostates vs. cult victims debate. I met the late Margaret Singer and have also met Steve Hassan and other experts. I have listened to lectures by many of these people and read a great deal of material and research, published and unpublished. In short I have thought a lot about these issues. This does not mean that my conclusions are accurate, but only that they are ones that I have come to slowly and after evaluating a great deal of information for myself.
The main conclusion I came to after reading, discussing and contemplating the current research and processes for cult recovery is that many of the models simply do not apply to people raised in these types of groups. One of the main differences is that while cult membership, no matter how brief or extensive, was a period of time in the life of a person who joined a group, with a beginning and an end, for someone raised in one, it was a continuous process. It was the culture we were born into, not an abusive experience in our lives. Many of the specific cult recovery models emphasize the need to reconnect with the person one was before the group broke down one’s personality and remade it in their own image. This concept is entirely irrelevant to us. Our earliest childhood memories are of the group and our core personalities, in many ways, have been irreversibly defined by the culture of the group.
This sounds like a subtle difference, but results in some major differences in perspective. In regards to abuse for example, because we were raised in this environment, abuse was not perceived as an external factor, but an internal and intimate one, closer to incest than assault by a stranger or acquaintance. Perhaps those who have experienced childhood abuse themselves can understand this somewhat. In a group like the Family, (and SGs I have talked to from other groups have reported similar experiences) the members of the group were part of the extended family to the child. There was a clear distinction between outsiders and insiders, adults in the group were safe and to be trusted, adults outside were not. In the Family, as well as in many other groups, the language spoken reinforced this, (“brother”, “sister”, “uncle”, “auntie”, “family member”, “grandpa”, “dad”, “mama”, etc.) A developing child does not have a clear sense of self as separate from their immediate family and the impact of this type of abuse is long term and devastating. As with incest or abuse within the nuclear or extended family, the abuser relied on the complicity of the of the family members to perpetrate their crimes and the child was consistently blamed (verbally or non-verbally) for their own abuse. One difference between the Family and other groups and abusive nuclear families is that the blueprints for our abuse were published and documented in the Family’s publications, and this single fact does show complicity (no matter what the reasons) on the part of Family members who continued to remain members of the group and fund the organization through their tithes.
Some of the people here who have told of their own childhood abuse have said that they were eventually able to come to terms with what was done to them and were able to understand that those who were complicit in their victimization, and even those who directly abused them, were themselves damaged and victims of abuse in their own past. Eventually perhaps some of us will get to that point as well. However, it takes time to heal and our own healing must take place on our own terms. Even if intellectually one can understand that the mother who should have been protecting you was herself terrorized and felt helpless, there is still an emotional feeling of betrayal and anger which can run very deep. They were the parent. The insistence that we all see ourselves as equally being victims is something that I reject. Comparing who has been hurt the most is not, IMO, relevant or useful and it is not that I don’t understand the pain FG exmembers have experienced, I do. However, the perspective is different and while each situation is unique, overall, just due to our relative ages and for the reasons stated above, it is not the same.
The difference in perspective is beginning to be understood by those with expertise in this field. Last year for the first time some of the counselors at AFF set up a SG only workshop for former members which I attended. It was a very unique and interesting experience and they repeated it again this year, which I was also able to attend. There are a number of studies currently underway specifically on people born and raised in cults and NRMs and this field is emerging as one in which research and training is desperately needed. In the years that I have been in touch with academics and experts in this field, I would say that this past year is the one in which these ideas and concepts are finally beginning to take root. Things have come a long way and are continuing to progress.
The question of responsibility is a major difference as well, and a point on which I disagree with many of the more traditional cult experts. I suppose one thing to remember is that someone working on their own recovery is bound to see things from their own perspective. Many of the experts are therapists themselves. Their views are taken from the perspective of the therapist working with the individual cult survivor. One thing about therapy is that it is by nature subjective. A therapist is your own personal advocate and it is their job to see things from your own perspective and what is best for you individually. Saying that one’s therapist says this or that about one’s self is a bit like saying your mother thinks you are the most handsome man ever; it’s not exactly an objective source. Every therapist I have been to has told me that I should close MovingOn and walk away from being involved with other ex-members. That is probably the most healthy option for me individually, but I cannot do that. The MovingOn site impacts many more people than just me and there is a larger perspective to take into consideration. I can try to minimize the stress by seeking out support and building safe guards into my own processes, and I can try to maintain an identity and sense of self separate from this environment, but I can’t only look at this from my own perspective.
Similarly, the explanations regarding control given by many of the experts seem to largely remove responsibility from former members and help them personally to move on, without taking into consideration the impact of their actions on children and others. It is true that people within controlling environments can be led to do things that they would never normally do. I am aware of the Stanford experiment and other studies showing how ordinary people can do horrible things when put into abnormal situations. While understanding why and how is helpful to put some sort of context to the actions of individuals, it’s not fair to expect someone who was hurt by those actions to understand the why. Even if one does understand intellectually, the deep emotions of betrayal and hurt are not something that just go away. Accepting responsibility for one’s own culpability does begin to relieve the victim of the blame that others have placed on them and that they may have even placed on themselves for so long. A simple acknowledgement without all the disclaimers and “buts” goes a long way towards healing.
As an example of this, there was a recent discussion on MovingOn regarding children in the care of older children. The entire thread is a bit convoluted, but one of the most thoughtful comments was from Lauren.
She said: “I remember a specific incident that took place when I was 12 years old. I was responsible not only for a large group of kids, but for a mealtime scenario that involved three classes, innumerable plates of food and a very crowded situation. One kid was acting up and I sent him to the corner. And then I forgot about him. What was probably about 45 minutes later, one of the other kids told me that this boy was standing in the corner crying. And so I went over to him, asked him if he was ready to behave and sent him to his seat. For all I know that situation traumatized the poor kid. He may have hated me, may have lived in fear of me, I don’t know, because at the time I did not apologize to him or tell him that it was a mistake. The only reason that I even remember this particular moment of time is because I felt so incredibly guilty about what I had done. I was 12 years old. I should never have had that kind of responsibility, but there it happened, and it was my fault. And if it ever comes up, all I can truly say is that I am sorry. I held the power.”
She went on to say: “In the cruel world that we grew up in, those on the receiving end of our authority will have memories quite different from those of our own. It’s very easy for those who had authority to claim that they were kind, just, protective or just plain brainwashed. But it’s not about us – it’s not about the people who had the authority. It is about those who didn’t. The point is not what we thought we were, but the effect that we had on those in our care.”
(The entire thread is here: http://www.movingon.org/article.asp?sID=4&Cat=24&ID=300#comments )
If someone who was only 12 years old at the time, who had no other comparison but the Family and was subject to a level of indoctrination and control that cannot be understood by someone who was not a 12 year old in the Family, can take responsibility for their own actions as they affected others, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask the same of those who were in their 20’s, 30’s and 40’s. I do understand the control the Family exerted over many people, especially women. However having been both a child and young woman in the Family, I can say that in my experience there was a world of difference in the choices and the level of autonomy I had. I do not beat myself up for the choices I made or feel the need to continually remind myself and everyone else of how wrong many of my actions were. However I do take responsibility for my own behavior.
I have said this before, but to blame the Family completely for all my actions robs me of the good as well as the bad. To remove one’s responsibility is also to remove one’s humanity. Even after going through some of the most intensive “brainwashing” programs (which I was clearly told were thought and behavioral reform programs), I was not a mindless robot, but still made choices every day about what I did or did not do. There were many times when my conscience asserted itself and I did the right thing, and there were other times when I did not. I can’t take credit for the good without assuming responsibility for the bad.
Perhaps another explanation for the anger directed towards the FG generation can be seen in the many reactions on this web site to James Penn and other “leaders”. There is a definite undercurrent of resentment and anger towards the leaders of the Family. These are people who had control over others. I think that many people do understand that those in positions of leadership often had a very difficult time and were subjected to a great deal of abuse and control themselves. There was always some series about some leader who was being “exposed” by Berg and Zerby for something. Some of the individual people in leadership roles were kind and decent. However, there is not a lot of sympathy from what I have seen towards these people because ultimately, they had the control over your lives. They were one step up the ladder from you, we were one step down. They were your oppressors. You were ours.
Finally, I have often thought recently that it seems a little unfair to many FG exmembers that their opinions and views on their own recovery provoke such strong reactions in many of the second generation. One of the things that has been helpful with MovingOn is that it is our own space and is clearly stated as such. We can rant and express strong views without worrying about offending FG exmembers and I think that is needed. Similarly, perhaps a discussion board that is defined as your own space would be useful? Sometimes when issues are too raw to discuss, listening without having to say anything or respond can provide insight on another perspective without being drawn into a debate or argument or feeling that you have to defend your point of view. When it comes to recovery sometimes it’s not about what is right or what is wrong, but more what is true. While I may disagree with many people, reading what they have to say does provide a different perspective and makes me think, which is a good thing. I have found personally that being able to frankly express my own views without having to couch it in disclaimers can be very healing. Just a thought.
