Quote
Happie
I thought the purpose of this forum was for helping to target and disclose cult activity. This bit about Guru G and the dissatisfaction some have about her counseling activities seems far removed from the purpose of this forum and the 'cause' appears to have moved into an arena of something entirely different. Dissatisfaction about someone's practices is not a basis for cult activities, especially when it was never, as all have said here, a mandatory practice or required element of the group. There are an untold number of stories about people without licenses that operate all kinds of businesses in this country....does that make them all cult leaders?
Happie,
I'm glad you've brought up these questions. It's a common misconception that all cults have to be religiously oriented. Some are political cults (for example, the LaRouche movement) where the leader purports to have all the answers to the world's political problems. Some are therapy cults, such as the Center for Feeling Therapy. Some are UFO cults, like the Raelians or Heaven's gate. Some groups are religious in nature, but even they often use supposedly secular fronts as a means of recruitment.
Take Scientology for instance. Most people probably think it's a religion with religious origins. In fact, it started off as a self help group. It only became a religion once the tax benefits became evident. Even to this day, it's recruitment often originates from "personality tests" or front groups such as Narconon, a drug treatment program. Even their practices resemble quack-therapy far more than they resemble religion (for example, the e-meter).
Another example would be Synanon. Originally starting off as a drug treatment program, Synanon later became a "church" for much the same reasons as Scientology. I have to wonder whether Guru G's counseling services are merely a path she uses to guide members into her more spiritual beliefs. These recruitment paths are just one reason of many that Guru G's counseling services and practices are relevant.
You say that dissatisfaction by itself is no indication that a group is a cult or cult-like. I completely agree. What's important is not the dissatisfaction itself, but what caused the dissatisfaction. Here the causes of the dissatisfaction are very much indicative of cult-like behavior. Let's take Rick Ross's
warning signs, for instance and apply those to what Guru G has said, and what her ex-followers have said.
Quote
Rick Ross Warning Signs
1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.
2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.
3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.
4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.
5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.
6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough".
9. The group/leader is always right.
10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.
1. Who is Guru G accountable to? It seems to me she is only accountable to herself.
2. In my previous detailed posts about Guru G's video, it's clear that criticism is not tolerated. She in no uncertain terms claims that no criticism of her is valid. One does not criticize the Guru even if they are doing things that are wrong.
3. Guru G has not made any financial disclosures. I'm not saying that she should be found guilty by this point alone, or that absence of evidence is somehow evidence in itself, but when combined with these other points, it raises definite questions, especially when former members have related stories of significant financial contributions.
4. Guru G has made it clear that it is her belief that a majority of those who leave the group will fail and go back to her old ways. She has also implied that she has been persecuted. See my previous posts where she is quoted on this.
5. Guru G has made it clear that those who leave are sick, or have ulterior motives for doing so. She has gone so far as to publish private letters and reveal the confidential details of former member's lives to try and make her case. See my previous posts on her video for quotations of her on this, as well as Diddly's posts. I won't post or link to any of the information Guru G has released, but suffice to say it exists and if you look you can find it.
6. Former members are being consistent with what they are saying about Guru G.
7. No. Not on this, but then again, she's running a small group.
As far as 8, 9, and 10 go. I can't really speak to that. Perhaps some former members can elaborate as to whether this is the case. It certainly seems from her video that she believes that she is always right, and critics are always wrong. All this being said, by no means am I saying that Guru G is running a cult. I'm not saying she's not either. I don't think there is enough evidence one way or the other to make a distinction, however there are definite warning signs there, and I think it warrants further inquiry.
I also realize that many current members who might be browsing this forum might flinch at my quoting Rick Ross as evidence against their Guru. To these skeptics, I would recommend doing your own research on cults and cult-like groups. A good place to start might be with books by Margaret T. Singer, Janja Lalich, Robert J. Lifton, or Paul Morantz. After all, if there Guru G is not running a cult, or a cult-like group, a book will certainly not cause any harm.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/2013 07:30PM by psyborgue.