The method of confrontation using questioning of ones beliefs is still used by the group. The aim is not to replace the belief of the individual with some other belief but to have them question it for themself.
This can leave people feeling shaken up. And there is a power imbalance between the person doing the questioning and the person responding to the questions. If used improperly, this can destablize people and make them feel dependent upon the questioner.
"Celibacy is also important with the men'
Is celibacy a source of status? Are the fellows expacted to go without in the hope that someday it will all be worthwhile? Thats a recipe for oppression, IMO
Two, who sets the guidelines/expectations about celibacy?
It is interesting that you state that 'celibacy is also important with the men'. Is there a different set of sexual guidelines for women? Who set those guidelines?
If the fellows are encouraged to put a premium on celibacy, what happens to their partners if the partner doesnt like being celibate?
One person who was in a totally different group said that it can be a real source of trouble if the men are expected to be celibate, the women are not, and the leader (male) is allowed to be the only sexual alpha male in the group. This can cause the celibate men to become passive. Jealousy and frustration can be easily turned upon oneself rather than, more productively, asking 'Who is benefitting from telling ME
that celibacy confers more benefits than being sexually active with a consenting partner."