terror and the children
Posted by:
relish
()
Date: November 25, 2003 11:00PM
I did not engage in those conversations.
However I am interested in your response to my questions about enrolling your stepson in the Young Persons forum.
thanks
Relish
However I am interested in your response to my questions about enrolling your stepson in the Young Persons forum.
thanks
Relish
terror and the children
Posted by:
relish
()
Date: November 25, 2003 11:26PM
Further to my last post I am also interested in what you say about the father thinking it was rubbish even though he had not attended a course himself.
From what I know about Landmark your partner would have been actively encouraged during her Landmark training to try to facilitate a healthy relationship with her ex (the father) by bringing him along to Landmark sessions and (hopefully) enrolling him. Nearly every separated person I know who is involved in Landmark has tried to do this with ex partners.
Do you know did the father ever attend a Landmark session and make his own decisions about it and choose not to enrol in a course or did he always refuse any invitation? If he did attend some introductions etc then surely he is in a position of knowledge and it is quite within his parental rights/responsibilty to decide that it would not be in his son's interests to attend based on his opinion of what he saw.
I appreciate that you and your wife respected that the son wants his father's approval but have you considered the possibility that his father may be equally able to make decisions on what is healthy for his child just as your partner does as your child's mother. So rather than his decision not to attend just being about seeking approval it may be that his father's views on Landmark differed from you/your wife's view and that the child should be entitled to hear both negative and positive experiences before being signed up to join something which is potentially damaging (I know you realise that Landmark has caused emotional damage to some adults I also have heard of children being damaged through attendance - even most Landmarkers admit there is a risk to adults, children seem more vulnerable to me which is why I do not agree with children/young teenagers being enrolled).
My point is that as an adult you are able to make your own decisions but as a child the child tends to take what he hears from parents as gospel truth. Therefore if one respected and loved parent says Landmark is great then he will "want" to join until he hears another respected and loved parent say "its not so great in fact it is dangerous and I forbid you to attend". Then he will also believe that and end up confused.
What makes you think that the child was not equally trying to seek his mother and your approval by saying he wants to attend as he was later seeking his father's approval by saying he would not attend? Have you considered the possibility that he was just trying to get close to you/his mother by expressing in interest in Landmark. Presumably this happened while you were attending intensive training and you would probably have talked about it a lot at home.
I would like to hear your thoughts. I am not encouraging anyone to criticise you in response to my genuine questions.
Many thanks
Relish
From what I know about Landmark your partner would have been actively encouraged during her Landmark training to try to facilitate a healthy relationship with her ex (the father) by bringing him along to Landmark sessions and (hopefully) enrolling him. Nearly every separated person I know who is involved in Landmark has tried to do this with ex partners.
Do you know did the father ever attend a Landmark session and make his own decisions about it and choose not to enrol in a course or did he always refuse any invitation? If he did attend some introductions etc then surely he is in a position of knowledge and it is quite within his parental rights/responsibilty to decide that it would not be in his son's interests to attend based on his opinion of what he saw.
I appreciate that you and your wife respected that the son wants his father's approval but have you considered the possibility that his father may be equally able to make decisions on what is healthy for his child just as your partner does as your child's mother. So rather than his decision not to attend just being about seeking approval it may be that his father's views on Landmark differed from you/your wife's view and that the child should be entitled to hear both negative and positive experiences before being signed up to join something which is potentially damaging (I know you realise that Landmark has caused emotional damage to some adults I also have heard of children being damaged through attendance - even most Landmarkers admit there is a risk to adults, children seem more vulnerable to me which is why I do not agree with children/young teenagers being enrolled).
My point is that as an adult you are able to make your own decisions but as a child the child tends to take what he hears from parents as gospel truth. Therefore if one respected and loved parent says Landmark is great then he will "want" to join until he hears another respected and loved parent say "its not so great in fact it is dangerous and I forbid you to attend". Then he will also believe that and end up confused.
What makes you think that the child was not equally trying to seek his mother and your approval by saying he wants to attend as he was later seeking his father's approval by saying he would not attend? Have you considered the possibility that he was just trying to get close to you/his mother by expressing in interest in Landmark. Presumably this happened while you were attending intensive training and you would probably have talked about it a lot at home.
I would like to hear your thoughts. I am not encouraging anyone to criticise you in response to my genuine questions.
Many thanks
Relish
terror and the children
Posted by:
Guy
()
Date: November 26, 2003 12:59AM
Wolfy darling,
When you say:
"As far as I'm aware, I am one of the few posters here who's actually completed the Curriculum for Living. I find it amusing - ..."
You're not taking into account that some of us were actually paid to mess with your head and others'.
I don't guess about what we did. I don't conjecture about it.
I know what we did.
You don't know what you don't know.
Some of us actually know what you don't know.
Consider the possibility.
When you say:
"As far as I'm aware, I am one of the few posters here who's actually completed the Curriculum for Living. I find it amusing - ..."
You're not taking into account that some of us were actually paid to mess with your head and others'.
I don't guess about what we did. I don't conjecture about it.
I know what we did.
You don't know what you don't know.
Some of us actually know what you don't know.
Consider the possibility.
terror and the children
Posted by:
Hope
()
Date: November 26, 2003 10:10AM
Wolfy,
I did the Forum and seminar series and asked you questions somewhere in these threads, but you didn't reply.
I did the Forum and seminar series and asked you questions somewhere in these threads, but you didn't reply.
terror and the children
Posted by:
relish
()
Date: November 26, 2003 07:33PM
Wolfy that is a shame you won't post here again as I genuinely wanted to hear your views on my questions about your stepson. However nobody seems to want to talk about the actual topic of this thread anymore which is children they are too busy having the Landmark is great/Landmark is bad debate which is kind of frustrating.
Maybe you can send me your response privately.
Thanks
Relish
Maybe you can send me your response privately.
Thanks
Relish
terror and the children
Posted by:
elena
()
Date: November 27, 2003 09:21AM
You said:
>>I'm not sure that anyone here is genuinely interested in hearing what I have to say.>>
What you've posted here sounds like it came directly from the
Landmark "textbook." We've heard it all before. In exactly the
same words and phrases you've used. If we were interested
in hearing that, we could pay the money and attend a
Landmark seminar and hear it from the horse's mouth.
>>There seems to be a general concensus among the people that post here that LE is evil, it's hypnotic and about mind control.>>
Yes. Why would that be, do you think?
>>Everything I say is thrown back at me and refuted, even though it's my experience.>>
We are telling you that you have been tricked. One
can be tricked experiencially as easily as intellectually
or emotionally. Ask any magician.
>>You all have your point of view about LE, which is fine. I think it's wrong, but that's just my opinion. But there's no healthy debate or listening here - it's all dogmatic conspiracy theories, scare stories and wild accusations.>>
Do you think there is such a thing as "healthy debate"
when you are discussing your own involvment and
endorsement of a group known for its abuse and
exploitation? Would you want a "healthy debate"
about child or animal abuse? Werner Erhard figured
out a way to abuse adults, so he and his clones can
get away with it. Most people figure adults can take
care of themselves, and if they are tricked, fooled, or
taken advantage of, they deserve it.
>>As far as I'm aware, I am one of the few posters here who's actually completed the Curriculum for Living. I find it amusing - and rather sad at the same time - that so many people have opinions about me, and LE, without having much experience of either.
I don't recal being hostile to anyone, calling anyone a liar, being disrespectful or telling anyone how to live their life. But no matter what I say it seems that I'll be branded a flake.>>
Watch out! Tha Landmark "cops" will get you for that one.
They would say *YOU* ~created~ that, hehehehe.......
If I were a Landmark enthusiast, I would ask you: "Who
are you ~being~ make that happen. Just wait till you
try to explain this, you'll find out what it is you are really
up against. They'll call it *YOUR* ~racket.~
Has it occurred to you that you are defending an immoral and
unethical business that operates in a shadowy and ambiguous
territory between deception and contrivance, manipulation and
the fostering of dependence, cults and pyramid schemes?
>>That is not the ideal situation if you want to have dialogue with someone.>>
That's where you're wrong. Try speaking for yourself
without the Landmark "crutch."
>>I didn't disappear. I just decided there was no point posting any more since no one was interested in listening.>>
You'l lose an audience pretty quickly if you start with
the jargon.
>>I didn't have any project or agenda. It's sad that you see lies everywhere.
For me, posting here was never about "winning" and domination - unlike your good self. It was about balance and discussion.>>
As long as one person is handicapped and suffering
the affliction of a cult involvement, there is no such thing
as what you've stated.
And it's not sad at all to recognize whatever lies exist. It's
a survival advantage. What's sad is not recognizing them.
You end up with counterfeits.
>>I shan't post here again. I'll leave you to your fears and conspiracies and the "cult" of Rick Ross.
Jump on that all you like.
It's all empty and meaningless. >>
So, if you post something, it's "balanced" and a "discussion,"
but whenever something you don't like gets posted, it's
empty and meaningless. Look at what you are depending
on to determine the meaning of things. An uneducated,
unprincipled, used-car salesman/con-artist.
Ellen
>>I'm not sure that anyone here is genuinely interested in hearing what I have to say.>>
What you've posted here sounds like it came directly from the
Landmark "textbook." We've heard it all before. In exactly the
same words and phrases you've used. If we were interested
in hearing that, we could pay the money and attend a
Landmark seminar and hear it from the horse's mouth.
>>There seems to be a general concensus among the people that post here that LE is evil, it's hypnotic and about mind control.>>
Yes. Why would that be, do you think?
>>Everything I say is thrown back at me and refuted, even though it's my experience.>>
We are telling you that you have been tricked. One
can be tricked experiencially as easily as intellectually
or emotionally. Ask any magician.
>>You all have your point of view about LE, which is fine. I think it's wrong, but that's just my opinion. But there's no healthy debate or listening here - it's all dogmatic conspiracy theories, scare stories and wild accusations.>>
Do you think there is such a thing as "healthy debate"
when you are discussing your own involvment and
endorsement of a group known for its abuse and
exploitation? Would you want a "healthy debate"
about child or animal abuse? Werner Erhard figured
out a way to abuse adults, so he and his clones can
get away with it. Most people figure adults can take
care of themselves, and if they are tricked, fooled, or
taken advantage of, they deserve it.
>>As far as I'm aware, I am one of the few posters here who's actually completed the Curriculum for Living. I find it amusing - and rather sad at the same time - that so many people have opinions about me, and LE, without having much experience of either.
I don't recal being hostile to anyone, calling anyone a liar, being disrespectful or telling anyone how to live their life. But no matter what I say it seems that I'll be branded a flake.>>
Watch out! Tha Landmark "cops" will get you for that one.
They would say *YOU* ~created~ that, hehehehe.......
If I were a Landmark enthusiast, I would ask you: "Who
are you ~being~ make that happen. Just wait till you
try to explain this, you'll find out what it is you are really
up against. They'll call it *YOUR* ~racket.~
Has it occurred to you that you are defending an immoral and
unethical business that operates in a shadowy and ambiguous
territory between deception and contrivance, manipulation and
the fostering of dependence, cults and pyramid schemes?
>>That is not the ideal situation if you want to have dialogue with someone.>>
That's where you're wrong. Try speaking for yourself
without the Landmark "crutch."
>>I didn't disappear. I just decided there was no point posting any more since no one was interested in listening.>>
You'l lose an audience pretty quickly if you start with
the jargon.
>>I didn't have any project or agenda. It's sad that you see lies everywhere.
For me, posting here was never about "winning" and domination - unlike your good self. It was about balance and discussion.>>
As long as one person is handicapped and suffering
the affliction of a cult involvement, there is no such thing
as what you've stated.
And it's not sad at all to recognize whatever lies exist. It's
a survival advantage. What's sad is not recognizing them.
You end up with counterfeits.
>>I shan't post here again. I'll leave you to your fears and conspiracies and the "cult" of Rick Ross.
Jump on that all you like.
It's all empty and meaningless. >>
So, if you post something, it's "balanced" and a "discussion,"
but whenever something you don't like gets posted, it's
empty and meaningless. Look at what you are depending
on to determine the meaning of things. An uneducated,
unprincipled, used-car salesman/con-artist.
Ellen
terror and the children
Posted by:
JackSF
()
Date: November 27, 2003 11:26AM
Hi Wolfy!
Frankly I'm glad you're here and I would like it if the others would ease up on you a bit.
I sympathize. I'm the lone wolf on a Yahoo Landmark group, taking a lot of flak, and maybe I'll even be kicked out or be hassled so much I'll lose interest. I'm not trying to be kicked out, but there is a human group dynamic whereby those who don't fit in, get squeezed to the point where they force themselves to fit in or they are squeezed out.
Actually there is much that I like about Landmark otherwise I wouldn't continue with its programs. I'm fairly schizophrenic in this regard. I may end up leaving, as I left est, but for now I'm interested. I'll see where it goes and keep my eyes open as I do.
Jack
Frankly I'm glad you're here and I would like it if the others would ease up on you a bit.
I sympathize. I'm the lone wolf on a Yahoo Landmark group, taking a lot of flak, and maybe I'll even be kicked out or be hassled so much I'll lose interest. I'm not trying to be kicked out, but there is a human group dynamic whereby those who don't fit in, get squeezed to the point where they force themselves to fit in or they are squeezed out.
Actually there is much that I like about Landmark otherwise I wouldn't continue with its programs. I'm fairly schizophrenic in this regard. I may end up leaving, as I left est, but for now I'm interested. I'll see where it goes and keep my eyes open as I do.
Jack
terror and the children
Posted by:
patrick-darcy
()
Date: November 27, 2003 12:32PM
jack, what is it about est and
landmark that draws u in.
landmark that draws u in.
terror and the children
Posted by:
JackSF
()
Date: November 29, 2003 04:40AM
>i understand that the young peoples forum
>is basically the same as the forum for adults.
>
>imagine those children are dropped to their
>knees in terror and then taken to histerical
>laughter as they are the ones doing the terror.
Patrick is refering to what used to be called the "Fear Process" in est. I don't remember what they call it in the Forum. In any event you can find it described on pp 106, 107 of [u:089b5351c5]The Book of est[/u:089b5351c5] by Luke Rhinehart.
(This book is out of print but you can find used copies available from Amazon. Just about everything in the est Training and much that occurs in the Forum and Advanced Course is recreated in [u:089b5351c5]The Book of est[/u:089b5351c5]. It's an excellent book for those interested. I highly recommend it.)
The "Fear Process" is really not a big deal. Just about all children have been through far worse in movie theaters. The Fear Process been toned down in the Forum to the point where at's barely frightening at all. In my Forum it was a tedious bust--hardly anyone got past heavy breathing and a few chuckles.
The only real panic I sensed was from the Forum leader in the face of such a non-responsive audience. However, except for me and maybe a few other reviewers in the group, no one knew that she was bombing. When it was finally over, we got to go on break.
>is basically the same as the forum for adults.
>
>imagine those children are dropped to their
>knees in terror and then taken to histerical
>laughter as they are the ones doing the terror.
Patrick is refering to what used to be called the "Fear Process" in est. I don't remember what they call it in the Forum. In any event you can find it described on pp 106, 107 of [u:089b5351c5]The Book of est[/u:089b5351c5] by Luke Rhinehart.
(This book is out of print but you can find used copies available from Amazon. Just about everything in the est Training and much that occurs in the Forum and Advanced Course is recreated in [u:089b5351c5]The Book of est[/u:089b5351c5]. It's an excellent book for those interested. I highly recommend it.)
The "Fear Process" is really not a big deal. Just about all children have been through far worse in movie theaters. The Fear Process been toned down in the Forum to the point where at's barely frightening at all. In my Forum it was a tedious bust--hardly anyone got past heavy breathing and a few chuckles.
The only real panic I sensed was from the Forum leader in the face of such a non-responsive audience. However, except for me and maybe a few other reviewers in the group, no one knew that she was bombing. When it was finally over, we got to go on break.
terror and the children
Posted by:
Guy
()
Date: November 30, 2003 04:58AM
Oh please don't go Wolfy...
Save me from these horrible evil cynical and resigned miscreants that think that the darlings of Landmark would want anything but the worlds and mine best interests at heart...
It's horrible how Werner was made to suffer exile from his homeland just for his "creation's" sake. He is suffering for you and me down on that horrible island covering his sorrow as best he can with all that empty and meaningless money that he had to take for you to see what kind of a**holes we really are.
You're the one who is right Wolfy, don't give up on us. We just want to be enrolled in the possibility and we're afraid that if we give in you'll hurt us. It's playing hard to get I know, but I'm sure you're the one that will make us see the error of our ways.
Don't give up on us....
Think of mankind...
Think of the possibility of who we can be but will probably never live up to.
Think of the children...
Save me from these horrible evil cynical and resigned miscreants that think that the darlings of Landmark would want anything but the worlds and mine best interests at heart...
It's horrible how Werner was made to suffer exile from his homeland just for his "creation's" sake. He is suffering for you and me down on that horrible island covering his sorrow as best he can with all that empty and meaningless money that he had to take for you to see what kind of a**holes we really are.
You're the one who is right Wolfy, don't give up on us. We just want to be enrolled in the possibility and we're afraid that if we give in you'll hurt us. It's playing hard to get I know, but I'm sure you're the one that will make us see the error of our ways.
Don't give up on us....
Think of mankind...
Think of the possibility of who we can be but will probably never live up to.
Think of the children...
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.