My friend who is rather involved in Landmark is celebrating her birthday a week early so she can do a three-day seminar during her actual birthday (doesn't that sound like [i:7afd9925c1]too[/i:7afd9925c1] much fun?).
I'm wondering just how good or bad of an idea it would be to pick up one of these anti-cult type books that I'm reading about in previous posts as a birthday present.
Ideas? Suggestions?
Thanks.

Leftcoast8,

i think that giving your friend such a present on their 'birthday' would most likely make your friend distance themself from you mentally if not physically. Even more so, as you mention that this person is already involved in Landmark.
Have you yet discussed in a calm way, any concerns about the program with your friend?
If not, then it might be best to bring up one point of concern and concentrate on this one point first with your friend.
As long as your friend is within the Landmark environment, it's going to be difficult. Is there an opportunity to get your friend away from the environment, say, for a weekend away together?
That might be the best place to begin bringing up your concerns.
I'm in the same place myself at the moment, and i feel that educating my family re coercive persuasion groups in general (and not focusing on the group my family is involved with, initially) is a good way to begin.
As you mentioned in your post, these books will explain the manipulations/environment which run across all coercive persuasion type groups.

Quote
orangeperuviscacha
i think that giving your friend such a present on their 'birthday' would most likely make your friend distance themself from you mentally if not physically.

leftcoast,

My experience with my loved one would have me concur with orangeperuviscacha. I have given some (but not a lot) reading material to my friend, in hopes that something other than me (it was clear I would never be listened to) would turn the lights back on. I also asked her to read Erhard's biography and the rebuttal, [i:49fcb7d0cd][u:49fcb7d0cd]Outrageous Betrayal[/u:49fcb7d0cd][/i:49fcb7d0cd]. I thought the biography would show just what a narcissistic bastard he is, and the rebuttal would drive that home even further.

She read the biography, and has chosen to "interpret" it in a very positive way -- not at all surprising given what I've now learned. Everything else I've given her has been interpreted similarly -- if it confronts her they are either wrong or "that's their experience/interpretation/story." She can even manage to twist it to support her at times. Very astute mental gymnastics. Objective examination is out of the question.

What I'm trying to say bottom line is that your friend will likely take whatever you give her and interpret it in the redemptive light of Landmark. She will make it mean whatever she needs to make it mean to keep her new mental/philosophical integrity (I mean that in the sense of integrated -- together -- not in the sense of "keeping your word"). This may be something completely different from what it actually means or says. If she is "rather involved," I suspect that all things must bow to her new philosphical god.

This doesn't mean give up. It means it is going to be very hard. Experiement. Gently try different things and see what gains you an edge to work on. Make sure you give her something positive to come back to, otherwise why would she? First and foremost educate yourself. Read all you can. One book I would suggest for you is [i:49fcb7d0cd][u:49fcb7d0cd]New Age Religion and Western Culture[/u:49fcb7d0cd][/i:49fcb7d0cd] by Wouter Hanegraaff. This is a little heady but very good. The Human Potential groups are covered, but puts them in a bigger context. But prepare yourself for the most probable scenario: you will find less and less to share and talk about and will eventually drift apart.

-lightwolf

Thanks for both of your opinions. That's pretty much what I was expecting to hear. I've tried talking with her--both gently and sternly. It's clear to me that what I say doesn't register with her. For instance, she recently went on a cleaning spree, and I noticed in previous posts that that can sometimes be assigned as homework. I asked her about it, and she jokingly replied "Yeah, Landmark is a crazy room-cleaning cult." When I responded by asking if she then agreed it was a cult, I was rebuffed with what can only be summarized as: You have your [wrong] idea, and you're entitled to it [even though you're wrong]. And I'm not going to argue with you. [Because I know you're wrong.]
I guess she's in a little deeper than I thought.

Quote
leftcoast8
"Yeah, Landmark is a crazy room-cleaning cult."

LOL! :lol:

My friend is always "decluttering" too. Must be an extention of how they exercise control using the seminar room setup. Check the link on that:
[www.u.arizona.edu]

Quote
leftcoast8
"You have your [wrong] idea, and you're entitled to it [even though you're wrong]

Yep -- "You have your experience, I have mine." That's their theme song evidently.

Again, I am fascintated by how they seem to create the same reality for themselves. And I would find that attractive because . . . ? :roll:

-lightwolf :)

Quote
leftcoast8
Thanks for both of your opinions. That's pretty much what I was expecting to hear. I've tried talking with her--both gently and sternly. It's clear to me that what I say doesn't register with her. For instance, she recently went on a cleaning spree, and I noticed in previous posts that that can sometimes be assigned as homework. I asked her about it, and she jokingly replied "Yeah, Landmark is a crazy room-cleaning cult." When I responded by asking if she then agreed it was a cult, I was rebuffed with what can only be summarized as: You have your [wrong] idea, and you're entitled to it [even though you're wrong]. And I'm not going to argue with you. [Because I know you're wrong.]
I guess she's in a little deeper than I thought.

You should remind her about one of the basic LE's commandments:

"Give up being right even when you know you were"

How's that for flawed logic??? LE participants are incapable of self-reference even though they were endoctrinated by the use of destabilizing self-reference and flawed logic. It's the old "liar paradox" :

"Believe me when I tell you that I am not being honest with you".

or this more actualized sentence used by the newly reformed LF program:

"Remember this is not the truth"!!!

I'm always amazed to see how self-reference (flawed) logic is projected onto participants but that in return, they cannot make self reference to themselves and see how inconsistent and illogic their own lines of reasoning are.

As if something blew up inside their brain.

Quote
midonov123

As if something blew up inside their brain.

Conway and Siegelman called it "snapping" and included Werner Erhard's est in their 1976 book on the subject.



Ellen

Quote
leftcoast8
Thanks for both of your opinions. That's pretty much what I was expecting to hear. I've tried talking with her--both gently and sternly. It's clear to me that what I say doesn't register with her. For instance, she recently went on a cleaning spree, and I noticed in previous posts that that can sometimes be assigned as homework. I asked her about it, and she jokingly replied "Yeah, Landmark is a crazy room-cleaning cult."

This is a reflection within Landmark of Werner Erhard's preoccupation with order and cleanliness. Though he probably never did a load of wash or picked up a sock, he was a stern task-master, demanding strict adherence to his so-called standards. He was famous for issuing "edicts" to his staff regarding minor details of housekeeping. As Landmark is really all about "re-creating" Werner and furthering his "work," they continue to observe with reverence his obsessive, anal-retentive habits.


Ellen

It's not easy for me to describe the twisted thinking that was taught in the Lifespring spinoff I was involved in, and many here say it so well. But I want to try describing one thing.

Incidentally, I am really amazed that, based on what people say about LE, CONtext sounds just like LE (which is now morphing because the leader, Randy Revell, died). All these LGATs sound essentially the same.

In CONtext, as in Landmark, we create our reality. My sister got INTO it just before I got OUT (I had recruited her years before but all she'd done was an "intro" course so she wasn't hooked back then.)

Following the reprogramming her personality changed and, being on my way [i:1db392302d]out [/i:1db392302d]of the trance, I found it impossible to relate to her. So many here have spoken to this issue in ways that are helpful and validating for me. This is all hindsight for me too, because she got in/I got out over 4 years ago.

Once she got out of the course, she figured she created her reality. This is where the insanity comes in that, as I watched it, pushed me further and further out of the trance. At that time I didn't know anything about LGATs, thought reform, etc. I only knew that something was terribly wrong with CONtext's "teachings".

The insanity: In CONtext, I am 100% accountable. I create my reality. My relationships are what I make them. I am the source. When the relationship with my sister blew apart, did she hold herself accountable for it? NO! She held ME accountable!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHA! She was so god-like when she was transformed that she was in a bind. How could she do anything wrong, insensitively, inappropriately? She viewed herself as a compassionate leader and I saw her as a heartless grandiose irrational narcissist.

skeptic

Skeptic -

You mentioned that LE is changing because of the death of a leader - any idea how the organization is poised to change? Suggestions for further research? I'm working on an article about the company as we speak...

Lucas