Quote
bonnie
An AA group is no different than the gang down at the Tavern, except for the fact that most of them probably aren't drunk.

There are different kinds of "drunk" aren't there? :wink:

Bonnie,

Your description of the AA groups sounds very much like an LGAT!
It is very manipulative and emotionally abusive, IMO.

"Sounds like a LGAT".
That's exactly what I was thinking, just today. There are a lot of people who say AA doesn't fit the cult profile, because of the no-leader, no money-grubbing aspects.
(Well, MAYBE no money-grubbing; a lot of money IS collected, and goes to Intergroup, National groups, etc., as well as lining the pockets of unscrupulous AA members, which I have personally observed.)

What about LGATS? Like AA, they don't have all of the Cult-definition signs, either.

I think AA groups can be very manipulative and coercive, just like an LGAT.
I also think that even if you go into a meeting with your defenses up, you are taking the risk of being infected by the indoctrination techniques and "group-think".

AA was designed to help the low-bottom drunk who had no other options. That's the only kind of person I would recommend AA to. Those who have nothing to lose.

I knew someone whose husband had been an AA member for years, and she seemed very invested not so much in AA but in their methodology, and the insistence on confession/admission/surrender. (She ran a small metaphysical cult I joined briefly, and she insisted everyone read the AA "Big Book" whether they were an addict or not.) I told her that I felt AA members simply swapped one addiction for another, and were now addicted to the AA group and meetings. She immediately agreed, then turned angry and damn near chewed my head off! She later wrote an extremely nasty "you are no longer a member" letter to me.

Since the similarities to LGATs is brought up, I've seen in churches that the AA members often become members of A Course in Miracles study groups, and vice versa. Lots of cross-pollination (and both groups seem to require submission or surrender to the ideas in a big blue book)! ACIM has also been connected in some methods to the Forum, and that's an LGAT. So there ya go!

This is getting too strange. I'm glad I belong to NO groups!

After observing AA meetings, I have a theory that certain personality types have different reactions to to thought-altering (cultic) aspects of the program.
Those who seem to be helped most from the program appeared to me to be less vulnerable and more well-defended than those who did not benefit or were harmed. They played along, accepted the "group-think".
They didn't question the program.

The types as I see it;

1.[b:64db5e1d1c]"I Got It!" [/b:64db5e1d1c]
There was one type of AA member who seemed to very quickly learn how to fit in.
They did not seem to be the most honest people, and did not reveal their own weaknesses like others did. They did not question the group-think, slogans, or steps like some others. They seemed to have the ability to accept the group consensus to a greater degree than those who failed to "get it".
(I always thought that it was the more "honest" members who suffered the greatest harm.)
These strong-ego members often stayed in the program for long periods of time, even life. They were often group leaders, and involved in 12-step work. They claimed to lead well-adjusted lives outside of AA.
These people were not easy to get close to, and were usually very picky about who they assisted or befriended.

2.[b:64db5e1d1c] "What's in it for me?" [/b:64db5e1d1c]
Predatorial personality types were probably in the minority, but were very visible at meetings. These dishonest people may or may not have been "helped" by the program; most claimed to be sober, but whether or not they actually were is impossible to prove. They existed at all levels of involvement. Some were newcomers, some were heavily involved in 12-step work or held office at the local level. These were the people who "met you at the door", so to speak. They were the friendliest members, and usually gravitated towards the most vulnerable newcomers. The most visible type of predatorial behavior involved using meetings to gain access to potential sex-partners.
Predators traded information among their friends, and intimate details told to one predator would be passed to the next. A predator would be able to fashion his approach based on this information. They could then pretend to be the type of person a particular newcomer would be attracted to.
I have read that certain cults use this technique on prospective initiates.

3. [b:64db5e1d1c]"Please, help me!"[/b:64db5e1d1c]
The more vulnerable types who appeared to accept the other members at face value seemed to me to be harmed the most. These types were the ones who tended to accept blame for their actions, and were probably natural "scapegoats". Their ego-defenses were not as strong as those of others. They tended to talk more about their own weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and many openly questioned the program.
The worst damage happened to those who revealed themselves to be lonely, confused, and needy. [Women were especially vulnerable to sexual predators.]
Those who were harmed were blamed for it and told that they did not work the steps properly.

It's possible that even those who fit in well were lonely and needy as well, but those stronger egos did not talk about it in meetings, or if they did, did not display the same degree of emotional vulnerability.
The program claims to be about "total honesty", but those who admitted to any weakness were preyed upon by other less scrupulous members. AA is not the safest place to indulge in total honesty.

4.[b:64db5e1d1c]"Please sign my attendance slip?"[/b:64db5e1d1c]
Court-ordered participants behaved in a variety of ways. Some just filled seats. Some were actively predatorial.
I have been told that my assessment of AA is incorrect, or that my experience was unusual. Like I said, I went to a lot of meetings all over the country, and in my experience these behaviors existed everywhere I went.

An older man who had once been involved in AA summed it up like this:
"Those people like to play games".

Great observations, Bonnie! I'd have to say those descriptions pretty well fit church-goers by and large, also.

[www.lewrockwell.com]
The Exoteric and the Esoteric
*******************
[I have paraphrased a portion of this webpage.]

A religious cult has two sets of creeds, the exoteric and the esoteric. The exoteric creed is the one offered to the public and is used to attract new members.
The esoteric, hidden creed is known only by full-fledged cult members. This is the hidden agenda of the cult.
When the two are in contradiction it can result in havoc in the minds and lives of cult members.
*******************
I found this excerpt from a page devoted to analysis of the Ayn Rand cult, but in my experience it applies to AA as well.

AA is portrayed to the public as a self-help organization intended to free members from the disease of addiction to alcohol. As such, it is used widely by the courts and the psychiatric community as a dumping ground for recalcitrant alcoholics and addicts in a last-, (or sometimes first-), ditch effort to deal with the difficult problem of addiction.

The hidden agenda seems to be ignored by the non-involved public, and indeed by many members, but it becomes apparent very early in AA involvement. This agenda includes slavic adherence to dogma invented by Bill Wilson, unflagging faith in God, and lifetime dedication to bringing new members into the fold ( the esoteric creed).

The esoteric and exoteric creeds of AA may or may not be in actual contradiction, but consider this:
AA promotes itself publicly as a simple program by which the alcoholic can free himself from his disease, (the exoteric creed). Once you dive into the Big Book, however, you find out that long term remission requires "total surrender" to "this simple program" and lifetime dedication to "helping the alcoholic who still suffers".
Long-time AA members are well aware of the way new members are captured by deception, and jokes are made referring to this.
I recall one old-timer saying that once you come to your first meeting, you're hooked. "Once you come here, we've got you! You'll never get away."

Of course, there is a type of AA member who can mouth the slogans and agenda without taking it all too seriously. These people would scoff at the notion that AA is cult-like. Perhaps they are not dissimilar to members of other cults who are willing to agree in order to reap the benefits of cult-involvement without becoming too closely entangled in the bonds of cult adherence. In some cults, this might result in financial gain. (In AA, there are those members who skim collection money as well, but I don't know how common this it. I have been witness to the theft of collection money by those running the meetings.)

The main benefit of detached involvement would seem to be social; you can keep a large group of social contacts this way, and, if you are of an egotistical bent, lord it over newcomers and feel spiritually and morally superior to a constantly increasing number of new acquaintances. (I witnessed this behavior frequently in AA, as well as in another cult I was involved with.)

There is a hierarchy in AA, however well-disguised it may be. There are also gurus, the first being, of course, the now deceased Bill Wilson, who wrote the Big Book. This AA bible is touted by AA members as being a guidebook on how to achieve spirituality and the last word on the disease of alcoholism.

Interesting post, bonnie. I think a lot of religious and "self help" groups have both exoteric and esoteric teachings. AA does seem to have a way of hooking people in for life, instead of simply helping them dry up, heal and move on. That alone makes it a negative cult.

I quit using the Peruvian Powder on July 27th 1979 after a four year fight,and have been clean since. Never went to AA,NA or anything like it,but I have been around a lot of dope fiends. There are two types from my experience. The kind like me,who used for fun and got in over their heads,and the type that use to help them get along with and relate to other people due to something they feel is missing inside them?

The latter generally are the type,IMO,that end up in 12 Step groups as they were using their substance of choice to fit in in the first place. The group replaces the drinking/get high buddies.

The "for fun" kind,like me generally revert back to the friends they had before they started using (if it's not too late),or move on to a group of new friends.

Personally,I think some of the therapy that structured programs provide is positive thing. Is the group-think and dependance on the program that bothers me.

I ended up going to therapy for a failing marriage years later that helped me more in dealing w/ the guilt from my drug using days than it did the marriage,which went by the wayside? I wish I'd done the therapy thing when I quit in hindsite,but I didn't want to be indoctornated into a "program" to get it.

Hi people,

Nice to be here, this is my first post. I've read a fair amount on some other threads and stumbled onto this one, it has some good stuff on it and even some funny stuff.

I've been in AA for 21 years and been to all kinds of meetings. I've been through many phases in my recovery "rigidity" being one of them.

If AA is a cult then drinking is a cult as well. I da-no folks, compare a drunk who's dyeing from alcoholism to a guy or girl who's been sober in the AA cult for a couple of years?????

When I got to AA my brain needed washing and I needed structure to boot. There's not a day that goes by that I don't forget to express my gratitude to God and AA for being sober. I have a wife, 3 beautiful children a nice home, a garden, a crappy golf swing and I own my own company now. When I came to the AA cult a was drunk, horribly self centered, broke, unemployed, in trouble and nuts.

AA taught me that being happy in life was about service to others for fun and for free, about loving people even my enemies and not holding grudges, about gaining true independence of the spirit by relying on my own personal concept of God not one given to me second hand.

Maybe you guys take this cult term to far, a generic definition may be helpful here.

Colter