I live in Tulsa, OK and I was part of an AA group that was more like a cult than it was AA, it is called "The Going To Any Lengths Group". If you didn't dress a certain way, speak a certain way, have the "right" sponsor, and follow the rules that they have set down then you were badgered until you gave in and if you didn't then you did not exist and were not welcome. I stayed for 6 years, what finally made me leave was when the leader told a man in the prensence of my son he didn't care if he had to miss his kids birthday party, he needed to be at the meeting. My son asked me a few days later because it was close to his birthday if we needed to reschedule his party because of the meeting, that was a wake up call for me at just how much control I had allow those people to control my life. I have since left and have been gone for 3 years, I have not heard from anyone from that group. This group has other groups like it or they say they are like it all over the country but I do not know if they are as extreme.[/b]

I have just left the AA cult - and I am still be bit disturbed by it all, and very angry. I have not been to a meeting in a about a year now, though I have still stayed sober. Have you been here:

orange-papers.org

A great website for all of those who did not get to the 'broad highway'.

You take care, MJ

In the town I live in, it isn't any particular group that promotes destructive or cultish behavior; rather, destructive behavior seems to be pervasive in all meetings at the local "Alano club", and cultish dogmatism is the rule at many meetings taking place outside the club.

I heard, every time I went to the Alano Club, admonishments to "make the group your higher power", "where did your best thinking get you?", and "surrender, surrender", "trust us, trust us", etc., etc.
The behavior of members was frequently totally out of control; the 13th step was commonly practiced. I even saw a couple of fights during meetings.

Many people preferred the Alano club groups to other groups because at "the club" you got "love-bombed"; most of the outside groups had members who were very stand-offish, (having been burned themselves, perhaps?), and it was difficult to get to know people there. Few members at these "orderly" meetings wanted to sponsor newcomers. But almost everyone would tell you to "get a sponsor".

They loved newcomers at the Alano club, and people of both sexes would offer to sponsor any young, attractive, or well-heeled newcomer.
A newcomer woman would find herself mobbed by men willing to "befriend" her. I would guess that a newcomer man, (if he was attractive), got the same treatment from the women, but that was more subtly done.

Then there was the fundamentalism of the "old-timers"; most old-timers would not agree to sponsor a newcomer, (whether the "old-timer" went to the Alano club or not), but they would "take your inventory" for you, and beat you with "the big book", and tell you to "fake it till you make it", and, (worst of all), tell you you "weren't working the program" if you encountered problems.

I could go on and on.
I watched newcomer after newcomer walk in, get used and abused, and disappear. Most didn't last a year.
A few killed themselves. I remember at least 3 suicides of people I knew, and even more failed "attempts".
Some people sold drugs at "the club".

I don't pretend to have a solution.
I just think AA can be very dangerous.

Quote
barabara
In the town I live in, it isn't any particular group that promotes destructive or cultish behavior; rather, destructive behavior seems to be pervasive in all meetings at the local "Alano club", and cultish dogmatism is the rule at many meetings taking place outside the club.

I heard, every time I went to the Alano Club, admonishments to "make the group your higher power", "where did your best thinking get you?", and "surrender, surrender", "trust us, trust us", etc., etc.
The behavior of members was frequently totally out of control; the 13th step was commonly practiced. I even saw a couple of fights during meetings.

Many people preferred the Alano club groups to other groups because at "the club" you got "love-bombed"; most of the outside groups had members who were very stand-offish, (having been burned themselves, perhaps?), and it was difficult to get to know people there. Few members at these "orderly" meetings wanted to sponsor newcomers. But almost everyone would tell you to "get a sponsor".

They loved newcomers at the Alano club, and people of both sexes would offer to sponsor any young, attractive, or well-heeled newcomer.
A newcomer woman would find herself mobbed by men willing to "befriend" her. I would guess that a newcomer man, (if he was attractive), got the same treatment from the women, but that was more subtly done.

Then there was the fundamentalism of the "old-timers"; most old-timers would not agree to sponsor a newcomer, (whether the "old-timer" went to the Alano club or not), but they would "take your inventory" for you, and beat you with "the big book", and tell you to "fake it till you make it", and, (worst of all), tell you you "weren't working the program" if you encountered problems.

I could go on and on.
I watched newcomer after newcomer walk in, get used and abused, and disappear. Most didn't last a year.
A few killed themselves. I remember at least 3 suicides of people I knew, and even more failed "attempts".
Some people sold drugs at "the club".

I don't pretend to have a solution.
I just think AA can be very dangerous.

I don't doubt your experiance Barbara, It sounds like the "Alono" club was a crappy place with crappy sobriety and a breeding ground for TROUBLE.

I don't do "AA clubs," or clubs that are not a part of AA but made up of AA members who hold AA meetings at their club.

A wize sponsor told me somthing long ago that I still follow, If you are working the AA program you don't have time to "hang out" at AA clubs!

Clubs are a place that present opportunity for trouble!


Colter
Colter

Quote

Then there was the fundamentalism of the "old-timers"; most old-timers would not agree to sponsor a newcomer, (whether the "old-timer" went to the Alano club or not), but they would "take your inventory" for you, and beat you with "the big book", and tell you to "fake it till you make it", and, (worst of all), tell you you "weren't working the program" if you encountered problems.

An additional problem in many programs is that they consider questioning the program problematic. So if you are trying to figure out what is going on you are told you aren't "working the program"...circular thinking.

colter:

Quote

A wize sponsor told me somthing long ago that I still follow, If you are working the AA program you don't have time to "hang out" at AA clubs!

Clubs are a place that present opportunity for trouble!

Naturally!
Once again you find a way to put the blame back on the ones claiming to have been harmed and on those doing the criticizing.

"They weren't working the program"

For your information, the Alano Club is where the[b:12e8ca6232] vast majority [/b:12e8ca6232]of the AA, NA, Alanon, Alateen, and CODA meetings occur here.
Not to mention [b:12e8ca6232]ALL the AA functions and ALL the speaker meetings.
[/b:12e8ca6232]
If you are "working the program", you cannot [b:12e8ca6232]avoid[/b:12e8ca6232] going to the Alano Club, unless you only go to one or two meetings a week, or leave town.
**********************
[b:12e8ca6232]OK, colter, I think I'm beginning to understand you a little.[/color:12e8ca6232][/b:12e8ca6232]

Maybe you're [b:12e8ca6232]not[/b:12e8ca6232] actually pointing the finger at us.

Isn't there some way that the newcomer could be, not necessarily guaranteed, but at least given a fighting chance, to avoid some of these pitfalls we have been discussing?

As it stands, a newcomer's experience relies so much on chance;
-whether or not he is in an area with good AA
-whether or not the first people he meets are "helpers or users"
-whether or not he will be bashed over the head with the big book right from the get-go
-whether or not he will fall into the hands of AA "cult" types

I was told to watch out, and I did.
Others were no so lucky.
If AA was more willing to look at these issues, and less inclined to react defensively when they are presented, a solution might be possible, don't you think?

I have no desire to dismantle AA.
I have no intention of going back, as my experiences were so distressing, but I would not want to see it eliminated, because it [b:12e8ca6232]does[/b:12e8ca6232] help some.
I truly wish we (my family and friends) had had a wonderful recovery in AA, but we didn't. I don't see why others should have to suffer the same fate.
**************************************
On a lighter note....
Here are some guys who seem to have found their own answers, meeting-wise:

Quote

I recently heard about a new AA meeting in my local area called the "Kill Bill meeting".
It was started by a couple of court-ordered AA members who objected to what one of them calls "the archaic and blatantly condescending religious slant of the Big Book and the steps". They think Bill Wilson was a fanatic and that Dr. Bob was a quack.

I spoke to one of the guys, and he said they recommend against sponsorship, don't advocate working any steps, and never read from the Big Book. They printed up a pamphlet of their own stories.

The only AA readings they do are taken from the non-religious parts of the AA website.
He told me their only slogan is "Just Don't drink, cause you might go to jail", and that attendance is not required for anyone who wants to have their court slip signed.

They talk only if someone feels like it at the meetings, and he said the meetings sometimes barely last long enough for the signing of court slips.

I don't know whether or not they have the approval of intergroup or the higher ups, but he tells me that so far the courts are accepting the signed slips, because it's a valid AA meeting.
They hold meetings outdoors in a local park. Sobriety is required to attend, at least at meetings.

Maybe AA isn't all bad after all.

I must first admit to a rather jaded opinion. I'm trying to remain open-minded about the help 12-step programs may provide because I'm sure there is some limited benefit.

However, it is my firm opinion that AA (and other 12-step influenced programs) consist of people who have convinced themself that performing certain arbitrary tasks such as attending meetings and praying on your knees will cure them of their problems. Thus convinced, the prophecy becomes fulfilled. It is also my opinion that there are safer, more effective things one can become attached to than AA.

Whether AA as a whole demands certain things of the meeting attendee is a moot point. That is because the organization is arranged such that gurus pop up even where none are officially recognized, the same group-speak language is forced into members' psyche, the same types of predators show up at the same types of meetings all across the country. Sure, there's no organizational reference to things such as "13th Stepping." But in the same way many Christian organizations come up with similar rules using one book (the Bible) many AA meeting groups fall into the same patterns using THEIR book (The Big Book). So much so that there is a commonly understood phrase for the sexual predator in the group.

AA likely has a lower success rate than spontaneous remission. So it's not even NECESSARY to subject yourself to it's cult atmosphere in order to get better. The problem is that the members are so convinced via the cult practices of separating people from other opinions, claiming a "one true way," etc. that it's the only solution that they've permeated medical personel, courts, and everyone else that any problem drinking requires cult membership. No one REALIZES that the success rate is so low...from current members who will swear this isn't true to people who have never had any contact or KNOWN anyone who had contact with the "program."

Newsflash: It's not a "program." It's a religion. No "disease" (which is how AA defines any and all problem drinking) requires a daily visit to a doctor or hospital every single day of the week. Likewise no "disease" requires a daily meeting with an entire group of people who are at LEAST as "sick" as you are. Yes, diabetics must take insulin. But not all diabetics require it in the same form, in the same dose, at the same times.

AA is harmful...it KEEPS more people from getting better than it helps. It keeps other potential solutions, some of which are probably just as accessible and just as cheap as AA, from reaching both the problem drinker and the public in general.

I know there will be comments about all the GOOD AA does. I concede that it's true...there are AA attendees who remain sober and lead happy lives. It does not follow that 1) AA helps the majority of people who walk through it's doors, or 2) All those who stay are helped. I also feel that those who continuously define themselves by a made up "disease" for years on end could be doing something more productive with their time and could remain sober without AA.

LJMcB:

You made a potentially misleading statement and it needed to be responded to here.

AA is not a "cult."

See [www.culteducation.com]

Here is what it says in context:

[b:a46f57fe5f]Defining a Cult [/b:a46f57fe5f]

Question: Isn't the word "cult" a pejorative label used to discriminate against new religious movements?

Answer: No. It is disingenuous to ignore the historical significance and modern day applications of the word cult. Today many controversial groups, that have been called "cults", are seeking to either eliminate the word, or create through fear of litigation a reluctance to use the term. Some cult apologists have literally said that "'cult' is a four letter word," and should be replaced by the politically correct title "new religious movement" (NRM). However, historically cults have always been with us and they continue to be a part of the world today.

Question: How is the word "cult" defined?

Webster's Dictionary defines a cult as:

"1. A formal religious veneration 2. A system of religious beliefs and rituals also its body of adherents; 3. A religion regarded as "unorthodox or spurious."; 4. A system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator; 5. a: A great devotion to a person, idea, thing; esp.: such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad, b: A usually small circle of persons united by devotion or allegiance to an artistic or intellectual movement or figure."

This definition obviously could include everything from Barbie collectors to old "Deadheads," "Trekkies" to diehard Elvis fans. American history might also include within such a definition the devoted followers of Mary Baker Eddy the founder of Christian Science, or the Mormons united through their devotion to Joseph Smith. Both these religious groups were once largely regarded as "unorthodox or spurious." However, the most important concern today is not simply who might be somewhat "cultic" in their devotion now or historically, but what groups might represent potential problems regarding personal or public safety. That is, groups that are potentially unsafe and/or destructive.

Psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton, who wrote the definitive book about thought reform (often called "brainwashing") also wrote a paper about cult formation. Lifton defined a cult as having the following three characteristics:

1. A charismatic leader, who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose power.

2. A process [is in use] call[ed] coercive persuasion or thought reform.

3. Economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.

Question: Don't some groups once seen as "cults" often move more into the mainstream, becoming generally respected sects or religions?

Answer: Yes. There are certainly examples of groups that were once perhaps thought of as "cults" that have evolved into relatively mainstream sects or religions. Such examples as the Seventh Day Adventists once led by Ellen White, or the Mormons, also known as the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints.

But it is also important to note that some groups, which may have once been labeled as "cults" continue to be controversial due to their unsafe or destructive practices. Two examples of groups that continue to be problematic and often destructive are the former Russellites, now known as "Jehovah's Witnesses," that once prohibited organ transplants and still expects its members to refuse blood transfusions, which has resulted in numerous deaths. And the Christian Scientists founded by Mary Baker Eddy who often reject medical treatment, again resulting in the loss of life. Some groups may say they have renounced unsafe or destructive practices, only to be exposed later as guilty of the same extremes and abuses.

If you don't like AA and feel it is a bad group or movement, that's one thing, but please don't attempt to place a false label on the group. It's really not useful for the purpose of meaningful discussion here.

AA doesn't meet the criteria for a cult, nor does it utilize thought reform per the definition of experts in the field.

A fair, objective and accurate statement might be; AA is an organization that has a belief system/philosophy, and it indoctrinates and expects its members to accept that belief system.

Subsequently, you might point out why you don't like AA or its beliefs.

That would then be your opinion about AA.

I believe AA fits every criteria you have laid out for the definition of "cult." I also don't care what you call it. It's not a cult? Okay...then it's a detrimental organization with cult-like qualities that keeps people from achieving the very goal the enter to achieve.

I don't believe that all experts on the subject accept the fact that AA is not a cult. It's not "potentially" misleading to disagree with your assessment...it's just my opinion and the opinion of many others based on the criteria you yourself laid out.

Sure, the Branch Davidians were a more destructive cult than AA. And John Wayne Gacey killed more people than Richard Speck. That doesn't mean they're not both killers.

LJMcB:

Please point me to a place where a well-known and credible cult expert has said "AA is a cult."

Someone who has lectured specifically on the topic of cults and/or has been qualified and accepted as a court expert witness.

It does matter what you call AA.

Please don't attempt to apply a label that isn't accurate. It doesn't serve the purporse of meaningful discussion here.

That is, if you want meaningful discussion.

If you feel that "it's a detrimental organization" that would be something to discuss and explain your views about.

But please leave the word "cult" out.

There is no basis to reasonably apply that word to AA objectively.