What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
righttofight
()
Date: February 10, 2004 01:01AM
To respond to the title of this thread.
The person that started this? Probably a plant. People who find themselves on these sites were damaged by the LGATs. Not LGAT sales people. There is nobody on these sites to sell. So, it's masturbatory to read someone gloating about Landmark, Lifespring, MITT, Forum, etc. as the guy who started this thread. Who are they gloating to? A bunch of damaged human beings who were affected in sometimes a traumatic way by the disgustingly unethical nature of these training workshops.
It's like going into a throat cancer ward and bragging how it good it feels to light up a cigarette.
The person that started this? Probably a plant. People who find themselves on these sites were damaged by the LGATs. Not LGAT sales people. There is nobody on these sites to sell. So, it's masturbatory to read someone gloating about Landmark, Lifespring, MITT, Forum, etc. as the guy who started this thread. Who are they gloating to? A bunch of damaged human beings who were affected in sometimes a traumatic way by the disgustingly unethical nature of these training workshops.
It's like going into a throat cancer ward and bragging how it good it feels to light up a cigarette.
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
Hope
()
Date: February 10, 2004 02:03AM
Unfortunately, anyone can "hang out a shingle" as long as they don't claim to be a licensed psychologist when they are not. For instance, a naturopath can counsel. As long as he or she does not claim to be licensed psychologist, it's legal (depending on the state). What makes it very difficult to prove they are practicing psychology without a license is the mind-body-spirit approach that makes it nearly impossible to avoid talking about emotional and psych issues. A conscientious, law-abiding and professional ND or other holistic practitioner knows when to refer out, however, holistic medicine is a business, so how many actually believe they are not breaking the law by carrying out counselling?
LEC makes it clear the FLs are not licensed shrinks, that what they do is not therapy, yet they use tactics to a certain degree that a therapist might use. LEC forum leaders go to great lengths to dismiss and even ridicule traditional therapy as useless and adding to the problems of clients. Their "consent" states what they do is not therapy. Of course, they don't inform clients about what they do.
A possible legal argument would be to list the adverse reactions, just like drug companies do. However, that's hard to prove, too. It would require the fox to watch the chicken coop and keep numbers on casualties. They're a slick bunch.
LEC makes it clear the FLs are not licensed shrinks, that what they do is not therapy, yet they use tactics to a certain degree that a therapist might use. LEC forum leaders go to great lengths to dismiss and even ridicule traditional therapy as useless and adding to the problems of clients. Their "consent" states what they do is not therapy. Of course, they don't inform clients about what they do.
A possible legal argument would be to list the adverse reactions, just like drug companies do. However, that's hard to prove, too. It would require the fox to watch the chicken coop and keep numbers on casualties. They're a slick bunch.
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
JackSF
()
Date: February 10, 2004 02:36PM
It's nice to see that the threads I started here are still pretty active.
After being attacked on this board and on a Landmark board for not getting with the respective programs of either vilifying Landmark or supporting it, I took a break. Then I talked to my friend whose example led me to consider the Forum. She said that if I was concerned that Landmark was a cult, then that was totally appropriate and I should do whatever I needed to do to resolve that concern--however it turned out.
So I made a nuisance of myself in various Landmark settings asking staff, assistants, and participants whether Landmark was a cult. Although this didn't endear me to most of these people, they did give me more slack than I expected.
Their responses varied. Many pointed me towards the Landmark web page on the cult issue, but I waved that aside. Overall I wasn't persuaded by their responses--for the most part I've concluded that 'cult' is an imprecise and emotionally loaded term which is hard to prove or disprove--but I was impressed that they listened and didn't counter-attack on a personal level.
I also found that I liked them and found them interesting, and that the Landmark material was useful. So I'm continuing to participate, which no doubt puts me on the Dark Side of the Force in this group. There is not much to be done about that.
For the record I really was concerned that Landmark was a cult when I was posting here before. I'll keep my eyes open, but mostly I'm not worried about it now. Maybe I'll regret it, but that's where I am.
Jack
After being attacked on this board and on a Landmark board for not getting with the respective programs of either vilifying Landmark or supporting it, I took a break. Then I talked to my friend whose example led me to consider the Forum. She said that if I was concerned that Landmark was a cult, then that was totally appropriate and I should do whatever I needed to do to resolve that concern--however it turned out.
So I made a nuisance of myself in various Landmark settings asking staff, assistants, and participants whether Landmark was a cult. Although this didn't endear me to most of these people, they did give me more slack than I expected.
Their responses varied. Many pointed me towards the Landmark web page on the cult issue, but I waved that aside. Overall I wasn't persuaded by their responses--for the most part I've concluded that 'cult' is an imprecise and emotionally loaded term which is hard to prove or disprove--but I was impressed that they listened and didn't counter-attack on a personal level.
I also found that I liked them and found them interesting, and that the Landmark material was useful. So I'm continuing to participate, which no doubt puts me on the Dark Side of the Force in this group. There is not much to be done about that.
For the record I really was concerned that Landmark was a cult when I was posting here before. I'll keep my eyes open, but mostly I'm not worried about it now. Maybe I'll regret it, but that's where I am.
Jack
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
elena
()
Date: February 11, 2004 12:46AM
Much, Mr. JackSF
Have at it. The world is full of people who will join whatever idiotic fad presents itself. This was true in the 1970s and is true today for Landmark. They thrive as long as there are non-descriminating, non-critical, not-too-concerned egotists such as yourself who are suckers for the pitch and imagine themselves immune or above the unsavory aspects of involvement, or imagine they can use the techniques taught to enhance their own abilities to manipulate and/or exploit people.
Landmark does attract a fair contingency of certain types. They must tailor or target their programs to these people. I would be worried excepting that, oh wait..... if I were one of these types I wouldn't care one bit.
Just let loose a bit of jargon or distorted Landmarky logic so that those of us who are so inclined can make for the exit if we bump up against you.
Ellen
Have at it. The world is full of people who will join whatever idiotic fad presents itself. This was true in the 1970s and is true today for Landmark. They thrive as long as there are non-descriminating, non-critical, not-too-concerned egotists such as yourself who are suckers for the pitch and imagine themselves immune or above the unsavory aspects of involvement, or imagine they can use the techniques taught to enhance their own abilities to manipulate and/or exploit people.
Landmark does attract a fair contingency of certain types. They must tailor or target their programs to these people. I would be worried excepting that, oh wait..... if I were one of these types I wouldn't care one bit.
Just let loose a bit of jargon or distorted Landmarky logic so that those of us who are so inclined can make for the exit if we bump up against you.
Ellen
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
elena
()
Date: February 11, 2004 01:46AM
>>To respond to the title of this thread.
The person that started this? Probably a plant. People who find themselves on these sites were damaged by the LGATs. Not LGAT sales people. There is nobody on these sites to sell. So, it's masturbatory to read someone gloating about Landmark, Lifespring, MITT, Forum, etc. as the guy who started this thread. Who are they gloating to? A bunch of damaged human beings who were affected in sometimes a traumatic way by the disgustingly unethical nature of these training workshops.
It's like going into a throat cancer ward and bragging how it good it feels to light up a cigarette.>>>
Close enough. He's a "provocateur," in his own mind. Or just someone who enjoys stirring up trouble and annoying people, to the rest of us. He fancies himself above both Landmarkers and critics. He thinks he is superior and able to see things in what he imagines is an objective way. He's really just a small-time egotist who gets off on thinking he is better. If I were a Landmarker I'd say he was a big-time racketeer.
Ellen
The person that started this? Probably a plant. People who find themselves on these sites were damaged by the LGATs. Not LGAT sales people. There is nobody on these sites to sell. So, it's masturbatory to read someone gloating about Landmark, Lifespring, MITT, Forum, etc. as the guy who started this thread. Who are they gloating to? A bunch of damaged human beings who were affected in sometimes a traumatic way by the disgustingly unethical nature of these training workshops.
It's like going into a throat cancer ward and bragging how it good it feels to light up a cigarette.>>>
Close enough. He's a "provocateur," in his own mind. Or just someone who enjoys stirring up trouble and annoying people, to the rest of us. He fancies himself above both Landmarkers and critics. He thinks he is superior and able to see things in what he imagines is an objective way. He's really just a small-time egotist who gets off on thinking he is better. If I were a Landmarker I'd say he was a big-time racketeer.
Ellen
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
JackSF
()
Date: February 11, 2004 06:17AM
>The person that started this? Probably a plant.
No, just a guy who felt confused and ambivalent about Landmark after taking the Forum recently and est some years before.
I was surfing for material on Landmark and this site had some of the best material I could find. Much of the criticism of Landmark here resonated with me. I added some criticism of my own. (See "Landmark Manipulation Techniques.")
Someone asked what I liked about Landmark, so I started this topic. I didn't realize that there were de facto rules against saying anything good about Landmark.
Jack
No, just a guy who felt confused and ambivalent about Landmark after taking the Forum recently and est some years before.
I was surfing for material on Landmark and this site had some of the best material I could find. Much of the criticism of Landmark here resonated with me. I added some criticism of my own. (See "Landmark Manipulation Techniques.")
Someone asked what I liked about Landmark, so I started this topic. I didn't realize that there were de facto rules against saying anything good about Landmark.
Jack
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
MarkusWelch
()
Date: February 11, 2004 12:18PM
Hope,
You come to one of the conclusions I have think. If they can be proven in court to be practicing psychology, no matter the degree, w/o a license, perhaps this is the avenue.
In fact one question to ask future and past participants is obvious along those lines considering the psych waiver.
But this would place emphasis on the current laws and what is known about this type of psychology, which is where I made my comments on what types of actions should be considered good, regardless of law, and regardless of how much we know about psychology, and we know plenty imo. The emphasis must be on avoiding them, regardless of law, and regardless of what anyone says about psychology. Some day there could be a law requiring attendance and consensus in the psychology/psychiatry community, and perhaps political community, that it is somehow good. These days that would not surprise me.
BR,
Markus
You come to one of the conclusions I have think. If they can be proven in court to be practicing psychology, no matter the degree, w/o a license, perhaps this is the avenue.
In fact one question to ask future and past participants is obvious along those lines considering the psych waiver.
But this would place emphasis on the current laws and what is known about this type of psychology, which is where I made my comments on what types of actions should be considered good, regardless of law, and regardless of how much we know about psychology, and we know plenty imo. The emphasis must be on avoiding them, regardless of law, and regardless of what anyone says about psychology. Some day there could be a law requiring attendance and consensus in the psychology/psychiatry community, and perhaps political community, that it is somehow good. These days that would not surprise me.
BR,
Markus
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
MarkusWelch
()
Date: February 11, 2004 12:33PM
Quote
JackSF
It's nice to see that the threads I started here are still pretty active.
After being attacked on this board and on a Landmark board for not getting with the respective programs of either vilifying Landmark or supporting it, I took a break. Then I talked to my friend whose example led me to consider the Forum. She said that if I was concerned that Landmark was a cult, then that was totally appropriate and I should do whatever I needed to do to resolve that concern--however it turned out.
So I made a nuisance of myself in various Landmark settings asking staff, assistants, and participants whether Landmark was a cult. Although this didn't endear me to most of these people, they did give me more slack than I expected.
Their responses varied. Many pointed me towards the Landmark web page on the cult issue, but I waved that aside. Overall I wasn't persuaded by their responses--for the most part I've concluded that 'cult' is an imprecise and emotionally loaded term which is hard to prove or disprove--but I was impressed that they listened and didn't counter-attack on a personal level.
I also found that I liked them and found them interesting, and that the Landmark material was useful. So I'm continuing to participate, which no doubt puts me on the Dark Side of the Force in this group. There is not much to be done about that.
For the record I really was concerned that Landmark was a cult when I was posting here before. I'll keep my eyes open, but mostly I'm not worried about it now. Maybe I'll regret it, but that's where I am.
Jack
Jack,
You do see that you waved aside the answers to your questions FROM OTHERS regarding the cultic aspect. Why would we (or should we) suspect your behavior here to be any different? Because our ears are physically different?
Regards,
Markus
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
JackSF
()
Date: February 12, 2004 02:14AM
>You do see that you waved aside the answers to your
>questions FROM OTHERS regarding the cultic aspect.
I listened, but just because people here answer my questions doesn't mean that I have to accept those answers anymore than I have to accept whatever I hear from Landmark people.
>Close enough. He's a "provocateur," in his own mind. Or just
>someone who enjoys stirring up trouble and annoying people, to the
>rest of us. He fancies himself above both Landmarkers and critics.
>He thinks he is superior and able to see things in what he imagines
>is an objective way. He's really just a small-time egotist who gets
>off on thinking he is better. If I were a Landmarker I'd say he was
>a big-time racketeer.
Actually I fancy myself as a person who aspires to think for himself in a complex world where most things--including Landmark--are not entirely black or white. As part of that aspiration, I talk to different people with different opinions and come to my own conclusions. I don't claim to that my conclusions are necessarily right or better than other people's. And I do think that people can come to different conclusions in good conscience.
Is dissent possible in this forum? Or must it always be met with derision and ad hominem attacks such as the above?
>questions FROM OTHERS regarding the cultic aspect.
I listened, but just because people here answer my questions doesn't mean that I have to accept those answers anymore than I have to accept whatever I hear from Landmark people.
>Close enough. He's a "provocateur," in his own mind. Or just
>someone who enjoys stirring up trouble and annoying people, to the
>rest of us. He fancies himself above both Landmarkers and critics.
>He thinks he is superior and able to see things in what he imagines
>is an objective way. He's really just a small-time egotist who gets
>off on thinking he is better. If I were a Landmarker I'd say he was
>a big-time racketeer.
Actually I fancy myself as a person who aspires to think for himself in a complex world where most things--including Landmark--are not entirely black or white. As part of that aspiration, I talk to different people with different opinions and come to my own conclusions. I don't claim to that my conclusions are necessarily right or better than other people's. And I do think that people can come to different conclusions in good conscience.
Is dissent possible in this forum? Or must it always be met with derision and ad hominem attacks such as the above?
What's Good About Landmark?
Posted by:
elena
()
Date: February 12, 2004 11:49PM
Jack,
Never mind the 45 people who got food poisoning at the Landmark "restaurant" because it is owned and operated by people who write their own rules concerning food hygiene and "think" they ~create their own reality~ when they dip the meat in Clorox or spice up the sauce to cover the taint, YOU still want to talk about their great recipe for Oso Bucco.
It's tiresome. Hashed and rehashed a generation ago. The "ideas" and "ideology" are sophomoric. The basic psychology too contrived and manipulated to be of much use in any real sense. Who wants a midnight call from some Forum zombie trying to establish contact as some kind of Forum "project?"
What is your point, exactly. Why do you post here? Nobody cares that you "got" something good from the Forum. We've heard it all before. Over and over. Each and every cult member in each and every cult in the whole wide world is convinced he or she is getting and has gotten something good from their involvement. Untill they have suffered or sacrificed past a certain point, admit that they were fooled and exploited, step away and look at it from a distance or in the cold, clear light of dawn. Then there is no point in listing the positive aspects of that involvement.
Wake up. Get a clue. You are like a snake-oil customer who wants to talk about the great cure you got from the medicine when you were afflicted with a self-limiting illness that would have gotten better anyway.
Ellen
Never mind the 45 people who got food poisoning at the Landmark "restaurant" because it is owned and operated by people who write their own rules concerning food hygiene and "think" they ~create their own reality~ when they dip the meat in Clorox or spice up the sauce to cover the taint, YOU still want to talk about their great recipe for Oso Bucco.
It's tiresome. Hashed and rehashed a generation ago. The "ideas" and "ideology" are sophomoric. The basic psychology too contrived and manipulated to be of much use in any real sense. Who wants a midnight call from some Forum zombie trying to establish contact as some kind of Forum "project?"
What is your point, exactly. Why do you post here? Nobody cares that you "got" something good from the Forum. We've heard it all before. Over and over. Each and every cult member in each and every cult in the whole wide world is convinced he or she is getting and has gotten something good from their involvement. Untill they have suffered or sacrificed past a certain point, admit that they were fooled and exploited, step away and look at it from a distance or in the cold, clear light of dawn. Then there is no point in listing the positive aspects of that involvement.
Wake up. Get a clue. You are like a snake-oil customer who wants to talk about the great cure you got from the medicine when you were afflicted with a self-limiting illness that would have gotten better anyway.
Ellen
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.