one matter I had not put up, because I had thought of it...

the founder of CuddleParty, has a business right? if he maintains a tense atmosphere where anyone feels threatened, his business will collapse fast.

(ditto if an assault takes place, by the way.)

I think the emphasis on using yes and no tends to indicate that they know that you cannot secondguess the feelings/thoughts of others.

again if the customers leave the event feeling bad or dirty then the events couldn't sustain itself. maybe it can't. for the moment it can.

also, I think I would feel a lot more easy leaving an event for which you paid thirty dollars than a couple hundred. and they must know this.

yeah, I know that I said I wouldn't go into this any more.

Quote

Waiting until there's proof of harm? Is that what you recommend when hearing of a questionable group run by a cult adherent?

"questionable" meaning a subjective assessment of questionable. loaded word, that.

as far as the cult adherent part, let me stress that you do not know either of the founders, one of whom has taken (and, I guess, liked taking) a few Landmark courses.

Quote

How much do you wanna bet they'd pass off any feelings of discomfort or harm as being the victim's problem, rather than being cause by their involvement in the Cuddle Party?

see above. I don't know them.

Quote
Acid Reindeer
one matter I had not put up, because I had thought of it...

the founder of CuddleParty, has a business right? if he maintains a tense atmosphere where anyone feels threatened, his business will collapse fast.

(ditto if an assault takes place, by the way.)

I think the emphasis on using yes and no tends to indicate that they know that you cannot secondguess the feelings/thoughts of others.

again if the customers leave the event feeling bad or dirty then the events couldn't sustain itself. maybe it can't. for the moment it can.

also, I think I would feel a lot more easy leaving an event for which you paid thirty dollars than a couple hundred. and they must know this.
<snip>

A business can succeed offering a low cost, destructive product if the progress of destruction is long term and the addiction is sufficient. Cigarette companies are examples of this type of endeavor.

-- Caligari

Quote
Acid Reindeer
the founder of CuddleParty, has a business right? if he maintains a tense atmosphere where anyone feels threatened, his business will collapse fast.

(ditto if an assault takes place, by the way.)

You're forgetting the assaults and nervous breakdowns that have happened as a result of the Forum and other cults...yet LEC and other cults are still in business and are in fact growing?

Quote

again if the customers leave the event feeling bad or dirty then the events couldn't sustain itself. maybe it can't. for the moment it can.

People have left feeling bad or dirty or feeling that the whole experience was "creepy." But if enough people say it was fun, they can stay in business. How often is Landmark's "survey" of supposedly satisfied customers offered as "proof" that the people who claim it harmed them must be wrong?

Quote

also, I think I would feel a lot more easy leaving an event for which you paid thirty dollars than a couple hundred. and they must know this.

Yup. Clever marketing.

Quote

"questionable" meaning a subjective assessment of questionable. loaded word, that.

Another argument I hear quite often in defense of LEC.

Quote

as far as the cult adherent part, let me stress that you do not know either of the founders, one of whom has taken (and, I guess, liked taking) a few Landmark courses.

We can deduce from the fact that they've created Cuddle Party in the image of LEC's "sexuality" training that they at least completed the Forum...very likely the Advanced Course...and the sexuality training. They liked it enough (or saw dollar signs enough) to repackage parts of it as their own "creation."

I'm not saying this group is a full-blown cult or LGAT...I don't think anyone here has said that. But its activities are questionable and are pretty obviously based on LEC "training" and tenets.

Caligari,

apples and oranges.

by the time the scandals came about est, the company already had a solid existence and a hardcore of dedicated followers.

Cuddle Party has no such solid base.

and no one subjects them to seventy-two hours (plus, if you count the cost-free introductory events and homework) of thought reform.

sort of like claiming the three hour introductory meeting counts the same as the first seventy-two hour course.

(as I said, analogies don't work, but this give some rought idea.)

the number of journalists who may have attended the parties will have a different perspective than the actual paying customers. the journalists won't have shown up because of their own bias but because they have a story to tell.

(surely you have noticed that journalists who attend the Forum tend to have a more jaundiced view of Landmark? I flash back to a newspaper article on Vissapana meditation where, again, you have a more cynical point of view than the average participant in Vissapana.)

Quote

Quote

"questionable" meaning a subjective assessment of questionable. loaded word, that.

Another argument I hear quite often in defense of LEC.

maybe they have a point.

if you have a critique of Landmark then use some facts, not scare words like questionable.

Quote

We can deduce from the fact that they've created Cuddle Party in the image of LEC's "sexuality" training that they at least completed the Forum...very likely the Advanced Course...and the sexuality training. They liked it enough (or saw dollar signs enough) to repackage parts of it as their own "creation."

why don't you read what it says on the bios on the site, then?

that would clear that up.

I do not know what goes on in the Landmark sexuality training so I won't comment on this at all.

Quote
Acid Reindeer
Caligari,

apples and oranges.

by the time the scandals came about est, the company already had a solid existence and a hardcore of dedicated followers.
<snip>

You don't appear to be responding to me.

-- Caligari

Quote
Acid Reindeer
by the time the scandals came about est, the company already had a solid existence and a hardcore of dedicated followers.

Cuddle Party has no such solid base.

I find it amazing that you're still arguing this. You must have a lot invested in defending your experiences in alternate sexual activities.

While the scandals may have become public after est had an established base, the abuse was going on from the very beginning. That means a lot of bad stuff was happening before the public heard about it. Also, from the CP website:

""I must say I had a blast last Saturday. I see myself growing into a cuddle addict. Is that part of the intention?"

If you read articles about the phenomenon, you'd know that there is indeed a core group of "addicts" who go from party to party.

Quote

and no one subjects them to seventy-two hours (plus, if you count the cost-free introductory events and homework) of thought reform.

No, not that we know of, and nobody here has claimed they do. We've only put up a red flag because Cuddle Parties seem to be based on LGAT doctrine and LEC sexuality trianing.

Quote

sort of like claiming the three hour introductory meeting counts the same as the first seventy-two hour course.

Again, nobody has made such a comparison or claim.

Quote

the number of journalists who may have attended the parties will have a different perspective than the actual paying customers. the journalists won't have shown up because of their own bias but because they have a story to tell.

No kidding. And this is true of the journalists who wrote about est and the psychologists who attended the Forum. Are you saying their opinions are invalid because they went with intentions different than the usual paying customer?

Quote

Quote

Another argument I hear quite often in defense of LEC.

maybe they have a point.

if you have a critique of Landmark then use some facts, not scare words like questionable.

Wow.

Quote

why don't you read what it says on the bios on the site, then?

"He enrolled in an intensive six-month coaching and leadership training program at Landmark Education..."

Which means he did at least the Forum, the Advanced Course, and leadership training—is it SELP? I can't be bothered looking it up. So he was pretty heavily involved. From his bio:

"His mission is to teach men and women how to create safe space for themselves and one another, in order to be more fully self-expressed, sexually self-expressed, intimate, related and playful."

This sounds almost word-for-word like the LEC website.

Quote

I do not know what goes on in the Landmark sexuality training so I won't comment on this at all.

But you've been commenting on it all along.

on a relative scale, a group like Landmark may seem iffy but Cuddle Party may seem as borderline deviant.

if they make any mis-steps, they'll have no more Cuddle Party and I think they know it.

they cannot afford to make mistakes like the big cults do, does not answer your question?

Quote
glam

Quote
Acid Reindeer
by the time the scandals came about est, the company already had a solid existence and a hardcore of dedicated followers.

Cuddle Party has no such solid base.

I find it amazing that you're still arguing this. You must have a lot invested in defending your experiences in alternate sexual activities.

yeah, actually I do.

Quote

While the scandals may have become public after est had an established base, the abuse was going on from the very beginning.

the topic had to do with what effect these abuses had on est's public image rather than the abuse itself.

Quote

""I must say I had a blast last Saturday. I see myself growing into a cuddle addict. Is that part of the intention?"

If you read articles about the phenomenon, you'd know that there is indeed a core group of "addicts" who go from party to party.

scary. possibly some plants, too.

Quote

No kidding. And this is true of the journalists who wrote about est and the psychologists who attended the Forum. Are you saying their opinions are invalid because they went with intentions different than the usual paying customer?

no.

journalists do tend to have the outsider stance going on which enables them to miss the point. this can enable them to see around corners that insiders couldn't. it also means that they miss some things, as well. also, they often plain old don't have knowledge of the subject.

Quote

Quote

if you have a critique of Landmark then use some facts, not scare words like questionable.

Wow.

Quote


then don't use facts, then.

Quote

"His mission is to teach men and women how to create safe space for themselves and one another, in order to be more fully self-expressed, sexually self-expressed, intimate, related and playful."

This sounds almost word-for-word like the LEC website.

it sounds like a lot of new age talk, up to and including the Landmark site.

Quote

Quote

I do not know what goes on in the Landmark sexuality training so I won't comment on this at all.

But you've been commenting on it all along.

I only know (or remember) one thing supposedly taught in the est sexuality training.

leader making a copulation gesture with his or her fingers and saying, "sex is just bodies, nothing but fucking" or words to that effect.

I think I read this on alt.fan.landmark. more than this I do not know.

Quote
Acid Reindeer
the topic had to do with what effect these abuses had on est's public image rather than the abuse itself.

What effect did it have? Landmark is alive and thriving. Amazing, but after all the bad press, all they needed was a new name and they're doing just fine.

Quote

Quote

if you have a critique of Landmark then use some facts, not scare words like questionable.

Wow.

Quote


then don't use facts, then.

My goodness, what do you consider facts? There are plently of articles about Landmark and other LGATs here at RRI, including some written by psychologists and experts in the field. I'm assuming you've read at least some of them. Now it sounds like you're defending Landmark. Are you?

Quote

it sounds like a lot of new age talk, up to and including the Landmark site.

Again, it sounds like you're defending Landmark.

Quote

I only know (or remember) one thing supposedly taught in the est sexuality training.

leader making a copulation gesture with his or her fingers and saying, "sex is just bodies, nothing but fucking" or words to that effect.

Yeah...from my friend, who took the sexuality training (as did his wife), he "learned" that sex is just "f-ing," "learned" to disrespect his wife, who previous to the LEC training he had nothing but high praise for, "learned" that basically women are all alike, they all use you, all you're doing is "f-ing," it doesn't mean anything, and in his words, his marriage would keep working "as long as she puts out."

This from a man who truly loved his wife, moved across the world to be with her, loved his kids, respected women. They twisted his entire way of looking at his marriage and his intimate relations with his wife, the mother of his children. Fabulous. :roll:

I don't defend Landmark, I defend using good arguments against Landmark. making arguments they cannot easily pick apart.