Quote
DayDreamer
I know... there's very little feedback at ALL about HAI. And I find that to be rather disturbing.

We've spoken on this, but just putting it out there for the group:
Yes, when I was looking into it, I was bugged by exactly this.
Few positive reports, and just the one negative one, and I think we could all agree he is his own worst enemy.

That's one reason I wrote up our story for libchrist, anonymized as "steve and betty".

Maybe HAI is a cult, at least from one point of view. They do seem to turn insular, and as a result they are their own worst enemy. They don't really promote the workshops much. That's too bad. But I just can't compare them to scientology or the other coercive bunches covered here.
MAYBE there are some subtle things going on, but it feels to me like those studies for cell phones and cancer. There's something going on, maybe, but it's so close to unobservable that a wise person would consider that the cheeseburger he had for lunch is a bigger threat.

Now DayDreamer and I are good friends, and yet we are pretty much polar opposites on monogamy. Lori and I were strictly monogamous for 30 years, and not from lack of options. Now we're poly, and enjoying it. Lori and I are more together that we've been in years. She has a boyfriend, I have a girlfriend, and I've learned about compersion.

Did HAI do this to us? No.. We chose it, after probably six months to a year of discussing where we were, and what we really wanted. HAI gave us the tools to work with, but we chose what to build.

I'm deeply thankful for our exposure to HAI. It's brought us back together again! It's opened us up to LIFE again!

Yes, we definitely are polar opposites on monogamy. I personally believe that being poly is trying to rationalize cheating. If one cannot be monogamous, then one should not marry. Seems simple enough.

I'm always puzzled as to why society in general seems to hold "cheating" as somehow a bit acceptable, or at least tolerable, but ethical non-monogamy is somehow worse. Then there's that whole double-standard where the cheating guy is a "stud", and a cheating woman is a "slut".
Seems to all link back to the concept that the woman is somehow the property of the guy.

Anyhoo, that's another debate :)
I'm glad you know what works for you, and as you know I encourage you to persue it.

Well, you already know that to ME, cheating is cheating is cheating. You can wrap it up in pretty words if you like, and it's still the same thing and NEVER acceptable.

To me, there's no such thing as ethical non-monogamy. It's pointless to be married to one person while having "relationships" (or just 'relations') with others. That cheapens the marriage to being nothing more than people who share a last name, a dwelling, a tax return, and a matched set of wedding bands.

But... you know how strict my position on monogamy is. Going to a topless bar counts as cheating. My lover sharing his sexuality with someone other than me is cheating, and an unforgiveable offense.

Ok - so Level 1 is about working and sharing with others - both opp. sex and same sex. It is about breaking down barriers so that you can feel OK about being nude with others - in a non-sexual way. It is about admitting one's inner most secrets - "tell your partner something that you would not like them to know about you." Share your genitals with your partners. Share a shower - invariably naked - with your small group partners without speaking. At the end, in a small group, lip kiss your partners - women to guys, women to women, guys to guys!! That kind of removes all barriers. Give everyone a 'melting' hug sans clothes - the kind of close hug that allows genitals to touch.

And why the safe sex talk - with handouts? "Always wear a condom" - er this is to knowledgeable adults not teenagers - so why the reminder if sex is not ultimately on the agenda?

Then on Level 2 you get to kiss the genitals of a sucession of partners - women to guys, women to women, guys to guys. Hang on this is not about polysex - or is it? Condoms and rubber dams included? Possibly not.

But then afterwards whilst trying to re-enter the real world your small group leader phones you up to see how you are coping; and wouldn't it be nice for you to book and pay for the next Level(s).

Meanwhile there are social events - parties, outings, further sharings. But only those who have attended at least Level 1 can participate - so partners, wives, girlf firnds, boy friends who have not been to Level 1 CANNOT attend with you.

So is HAI a cult - it cetainly seems so?

Found this on a thread about landmark, strikes a similar chord about HAI:

"I can't help but wonder how so many seemingly intelligent highly education, successful people can get so sucked in by this organisation. How did I get so sucked in?"

"Coercive groups target intelligent individuals, so it's not surprising that you and your friends are in that group."

"You're sucked in very gradually, over a period of time. Every little instance where you surrender control adds up. Even little things like wearing a name tag, following rules to speak into a microphone, arriving exactly on time, not getting up to pee when you have to, not taking aspirin when you have a headache, etc. , gradually erode your self-reliance and self-confidence. The more you agree to the XXX "rules," the more power you give over to the "leader." "

"It's not unlike an abusive marriage, where a partner is drawn in at first by somone's seeming love and acceptance...it's only gradually, over time, that the abusive person begins to show his or her true colors, becoming angry over little things, becoming more and more controlling, demanding more and more of your time, cutting you off from friends and family...by the time the abusive partner actually strikes out and hits his/her mate, they're "in love" and in too deep to realize what's happened."

"Remember, at first you only agreed to attend an introductory meeting. Then you only agreed to attend the XXX. But little by little, as you gave up control, you agreed to more seminars ... then volunteering / assisting ... and finally to a paid position in the organization. You had no idea what you were really getting into in the beginning. "

Which is exactly why I am no longer involved.

Quote
S_Byers666
So is HAI a cult - it cetainly seems so?

I wonder what the RickRoss definition of 'love bombing' is? This org. does seem to keep 'members' interested by love bombing them at every opportunity, by implying that love (and assumably sex) is available for the sking, and by restricting attendance at social events to 'members' only. Does this define a cult?

Beware of Love Bombing
Leonard Brenner

[www.watchman.org]

Love-bombing is characteristic of most cults. Prospects, recruits and members are drowned in a sea of love and caring.

Recently in an evangelical church I heard the pastor describe his visit to two cultic groups in which he praised their love-bombing and urged that his church adopt the same loving attitude towards visitors and members.

Should the evangelical church practice love-bombing? Is this what Christ meant when he said, "By this will all men know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another," (John 13:35)?

I've heard cult members say, "Of course we practice love-bombing: Who'd want to be in a group or church that practiced hate-bombing?" This attitude highlights a common misconception. Hate-bombing is not the opposite of love-bombing.

The opposite of love-bombing is unconditional love. Love-bombing is highly conditional.

The cults will love you to death while you represent a prospective convert to their group. As a member a tight family love will surround you as you faithfully promote their cause.

However, when it is clear that a prospect will not join the group or a member voices doubts, create waves, or leaves the group, all love ceases.

Indeed scorn is immediately heaped on these individuals and remaining members are told not to have any contact with them.

All time, effort and love-bombing is then directed towards new prospects and the faithful members. Is this the love evangelical churches should practice?

Unconditional love is what God practiced when he sent his Son to die for us "while we were yet sinners," (Romans 5:8).

He doesn't love us because we might become or are his faithful servants. He simply loves us. He will disapprove of our sin and approve of our faith but He will always love us.

Churches need to love visitors because they are humans created in God's image and not because they are prospective members. The love needs to continue if the visitor chooses to associate with another group of believers.

Problem members need to be loved even if they create problems or leave in a huff. Christians need to practice God's kind of love.

Beware of the love-bomb.

=========================

So in HAI 'love bombing' seems to be the core activity. I wonder what happens if someone decides to express doubts - is the 'love' withdrawn? What about unconditional love? Does HAI practice that I wonder?

=========================

No, the "love" isn't withdrawn. At least, it doesn't seem to be.

To me, however, the "love" itself seems faked, forced, and otherwise false. If it's not REAL love in the first place, then it doesn't really matter.

I'm sorry, but I do NOT believe that anyone can truly feel love for another person until after time is spent getting to truly know the person. SAYING "I love you" to someone you met 10 minutes ago is easy. Truly feeling it is not.

And the parties were not members only that I ever noticed. One week after a workshop there is a "completion" that is open only to those who attended the particular workshop. The party afterward is open to anyone. How else will they recruit new members?