Does anyone knows what are the basics of the RELATIONSHIP SEMINARS.
I don't know the basics of the Relationship seminar per se, but I have some secondhand knowledge. The basic teaching seems to be "accept your partner as they are", which seems good at the surface, but I think they subtly add things to this that make it not so good. My gf was big on telling me that she "accepted me exactly the way I was," while at other times telling me I should take the forum so that we would have something to share, until I told her to never ask me again.
She was taking the relationship seminar when we first started going out. One of the concepts that she raised was "Potentially Endearing Qualities." These are things you don't accept in your partner (such as annoying behaviors, incommunicativity, whatever) but should learn to. When this first came up, I suggested she just tell me if I do something that irriates her, and I can decide to work on it or not, and she can decide to accept it or not, but to be in a dialog together to work it out. But what I saw was a tendency to stuff the annoyance, because "I'm not irriated, this is a 'Potentially Endearing Qualitiy' of my mate, and I must accept it -- something would be wrong with me if I can't love this too . . . ." This of course would eventually lead to a "breakdown" (Landmark term). Like most LGAT philosphy, the "Potentially Endearing Qualities" concept can be traced back to the "I'm OK, you're OK" concept.
Another concept they teach is that successful realtionships are made up of a series of well-handled "breakdowns." Analysis of the "breakdown" is in typical LGAT fashion (read racket, winning formula, etc.).
Of course communcation is stressed. But evidently not TRUE communication where people sometimes confront each other or bring up difficult issues and work things out. What I see as a reucurring them is that those who pursue "mystery" and "knowledge" and join things that LGATs are actually intolerant of mystery and knowledge. The same seems to be true of communication. They take courses such as these to "improve communication" but seem intolerant of REAL communication that is sometimes messy and real and human. Maybe they want to "create their own reality" because they cannot deal with REAL REALITY. Just a thought . . . .
In the end, it seems to be a seminar that teaches more scripts (behavioral and verbal) to follow, rather than real skills.
Anyway, that's my "experience." :wink: