Voicing the opinions of Past members

Discussion in 'Welcome, Media People and Researchers, Ask Here fo' started by sarah.glenmore, May 1, 2017.

View Users: View Users
  1. sarah.glenmore

    sarah.glenmore New Member

    Hi all,

    I am currently doing research into how membership in Scientology affects its members long term. I am new to this forum. I have had the opportunity to read through many users blogs. Thank you to all who have shared their experiences. This information has helped me create a survey. Please consider taking my survey. My hopes is to voice the opinions of those who have been involved in this organization first hand, instead of the media "gossip" of those who have been members.

    All identities will be left anonymous. Please let me know if you have any questions! Or let me know if you want to pm me with more info about your experiences.

    Thanks, Sarah

    Last edited: May 1, 2017
  2. Knows

    Knows Gold Meritorious Patron

    Can you tell us about yourself and verify your identity. Send us your credentials and resume - something so we know who you are.

    DO you know about OSA?

    Fair Game?
  3. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    That's an interesting survey Sarah, I hope we can see the results one day.

    It looks like you missed a 'scale' on the trust question. :)

    Ex-scientologists do not as a rule give away personal information freely, and there is good reason for that. You will probably get more responses with some information about how you intend to use the data etc.

    Good luck with this!

    Oh, and it's not a religion, it's a nasty corporation cloaked as one.
  4. sarah.glenmore

    sarah.glenmore New Member


    I am a student at the University of Denver and am currently enrolled in a research and writing course, in which we are studying sub-cultures. I have attached all the information on protocol for the research I am conducting below. Please let me know if you have any other questions.

    University of Denver Writing Program
    IRB Introduction and Research Limitation for WRIT Courses

    The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Denver (DU) is responsible for protecting the rights and safety of individuals participating in research projects that involve human participants. Currently, the IRB requires training and board approval for any project that is intended to be published outside of the classroom setting and that identifies a subject/participant by name or that involves manipulating a subject’s environment.

    For the purposes of this class, you will be limited in the field research you conduct. The first limitation is that the research that you conduct is limited to interviews, observation, and/or anonymous surveys. The second limitation is that the research that you conduct is at the discretion of the instructor. This means that research questions and procedures need to be approved by your instructor before you administer them.

    You must abide by the following guidelines at all times. Your questions or observations related to this research cannot include anybody who cannot provide legal consent including those under institutional care; those less than 18 years of age; or those who are mentally or physically disabled. Additionally, you cannot target or ask about certain participant behaviors or traits:

    • Sexually explicit materials or questions
    • Questions about sexual abuse
    • Questions about drug use
    • Questions about illegal behavior
    • Questions about suicide or suicidal thoughts
    Finally, you cannot conduct an observation, interview, or survey in which “the risks of harm anticipated in the proposed research are not greater, considering probability and magnitude, than those ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of routine physical or psychological examinations or tests” (IRB website, DU).

    IRB Survey/Questionnaire/Poll Statement
    The following passage must be read or printed on every survey or poll you conduct:

    By completing the following questions, you are also granting consent for this information to be used as part of a research project that I am completing for a course at the University of Denver. Your participation is completely voluntary. The information you provide may be used in a project and may be published online and/or in print, but your identity will remain anonymous. While profile information you volunteer in this survey may be included in my writing project (i.e. your age, sex, class standing, etc.), your name and identity will NOT be used or reported. If at any time you do not want to answer a question, or do not want to complete the questionnaire, you do not have to.

  5. sarah.glenmore

    sarah.glenmore New Member

    Thank you so much for responding! If you care to ellaborate on any of your responses please pm me. I will be happy to share the results once i get them!

    Thanks again,

  6. Free to shine

    Free to shine Shiny & Free

    Thanks for the info, I'll do that when I get a moment.
  7. programmer_guy

    programmer_guy True Ex-Scientologist

    I answered her PM questions to me.
  8. Hypatia

    Hypatia Pagan

    I looked it over. It doesn't ask for name or address. So unless she's harvesting IP addresses, I don't see a problem.
  9. Free Being Me

    Free Being Me Crusader

    FIFY. $cientology is a cult.
  10. Churchill

    Churchill Gold Meritorious Patron

    You should understand that the fear and anxiety that people have expressed in their comments here are a genuine reflection of the truly vindictive nature of Scientology, which is notorious for retaliation against ex-members who speak out.

    Good luck to you.
  11. TheOriginalBigBlue

    TheOriginalBigBlue Gold Meritorious Patron

    This is the part that is a potential problem. The risks associated with talking about Scientology are greater than those encountered in ordinary life. The Church is very diligent about identifying detractors so they can be added to the Dead File or SP List and there are real life consequences for doing so.

    In either case, I encourage your effort.

  12. tesseract

    tesseract Patron with Horrors

    If I read between the lines here, it looks like you, or your teachers, might be of the opinion that scientology or "NRMs" ("new religious movements") generally are getting a rough deal in the media, and possibly even that besaid "gossip" includes productions like "Going Clear" and Leah Remini's series and accordingly most testimonies on TV or in magazines are "just gossip" and not to be trusted.
    I'm sorry but that's what it looks like. A bit... :wink2:
    Aside from not every gossipy headline about Tom Cruise & Co. being truthful, for better or worse (something that happens to all celebrities), this is inappropriate. Or how many similar testimonies of exes with torn apart families, finances and health are still needed until we can call them reliable witnesses?!
    With "a rough deal" I wasn't intentionally quoting that twat Reza Aslan here and see no connection but it's literally what he recently said in a badly researched, superficial episode of his serial. And it is not true. The organization "Church of Scientology" absolutely gets from the media what it deserves. After so many decades of fear - finally!

    FYI, I am just a cult watcher, not an ex.
    I don't think anyone here or in other fora and blogs will take issue if you don't call it a religion, not even the independent scientologists, who, like CoS scientologists, consider it a "precise science" or "technology".
    If any scientologist, famous or not, calls it "my religion" then this is solely for PR reasons. They are briefed on that! A few may, with time, actually believe it as "their" truth and keep parroting it literally "in good faith". But that makes no difference about the deceptive nature of the instructions that came from the past and present leadership.
    The acquisition of religious cloaking and tax exemption was a deliberate move of Hubbard and until today it doesn't just prevent them from paying taxes, it also provides, through some awful American "traditions", great protection for CoS from the law. Its effect is enormous and the IRS is unlikely to revoke it because its budget is too limited to fight this one organization for years or decades. This is why the "religion" label riles people that much. And above all, scientologists don't even think it is a religion! This is why exes - and cult watchers - are taking such issue with anyone who parrots what only some religious scholars and CoS itself are promoting, - that it is a religion, just like any other cult.
    For now this is just the explanation of how a detail in your post is seen as controverse or inappropriate, but please consider changing this in your actual work when presenting and analyzing the results - it will make a difference, and help people to understand what scientology really is, according to the collected testimonies, - without triggering their "respect and don't criticize all things religious" buttons which, sadly to say, are very eminent in many US Americans and also in various other countries.

    If you find the word "cult" too harsh, what about "the organization" or even "the controverse organization" (German standard model - LOL).
    A formulation like "the scientology organization" or "the organization "Church of Scientology"" is neutral and will still allow people to judge for themselves whether this organization and its philosophy is benevolent or abusive, honest or deceptive, and whether it works "as advertised" or not.
    The term "high control group" is used by cult experts to provide a factual and neutral description of such organizations. Consider using and explaining it!
    If your teachers take issue with "cult", 1) challenge them on it, and 2) please consider using "organization" or another neutral term, possibly "high control group".
    If you just use its official name repeatedly, "Church of Scientology", provide some explanations that this is its official name and not a choice if yours, and give explanations what actually you're calling a church there.
    Taking what is seen by most as an abusive cult (and "a technology" by scientologists) and calling it "the scientology religion", or even "the NRM (new religious movement) scientology" gives it an unfair advantage in the USA, where "respeccc" for religion is so deeply embedded in the behavior of so many people. Get it?

    Thanks for what you're doing! :thankyou:
    Last edited: May 1, 2017
  13. sarah.glenmore

    sarah.glenmore New Member

    Thank you so much for your help programmer_guy!
  14. hummingbird

    hummingbird Patron with Honors

    I did the survey. I've been out 34 years. Recovered from the friend loss, and built a new life. No family is in.

    F*ck them.


    For the rest of you, the survey seems really benign. Just one page. Check it out, you might feel okay answering.
  15. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    These (admirable) guidelines should be juxtaposed with, for example, the cult's Life History questions that all staff have to fill out.

    An early version at http://www.lermanet.com/cos/form.htm

    . . .

    4. Medical history: Please list in chronological order any
    illness, accidents, permanent injury, etc, you have had,
    from birth to PT by month and year. Include all childhood
    illnesses (i.e. mumps, measels, chicken pox, etc). List
    the names and location of any hospitals and sanitoria you
    have been in. State also the approximate frequency that
    you have had colds, aches and regular pains during your
    life, with the time periods. List also any corrective
    surgery you have had and where done.

    . . .

    11. Give a general 2-D [sexual] history for yourself, including your
    earliest sexual experience of any kind, when you started
    dating, and the names of all persons involved. Make a
    chronological list by month/year of the names of all
    persons with whom you have had sexual relationships and
    what you engaged in. Approximate the number of times you
    carried on any kind of activity, and note any perversions
    you engaged in: WHO, WHAT, HOW OFTEN. Be as complete as
    you can.

    12. Note any instances of homosexual activity from earliest
    time to PT [present time]. Give WHO, WHAT and HOW OFTEN.

    . . .

    PART V
    1. Please list all drugs you have taken, including medicine
    with month/yr time periods as closely as possible. Use
    headings as in the illustration below.

    . . .

    For anyone that doesn't know, this needs to get answered in full, truthfully. It will most likely be checked with an e-meter, with penalties for falsifying or omitting data. You may be able to fudge it, but in my opinion people tend not to.

  16. Dulloldfart

    Dulloldfart Squirrel Extraordinaire

    Yep. There's me (twice) at 0:18. :)

  17. strativarius

    strativarius Comfortably Numb

    Are you kidding me? I mentioned in a post about a week or so ago how much scn has changed since I was involved. I joined staff on at least two separate occasions in the 60's/70's and I was never asked to fill in a questionnaire that looked anything like the above.

    As far as perversions are concerned the details of my relationship with my pet donkey has got fuck all to do with the CofS!
  18. hummingbird

    hummingbird Patron with Honors

    Me too, strati. I joined in '73 and was never asked stuff like that. That may have made me run the other way screaming!
  19. WhatWall

    WhatWall Silver Meritorious Patron

    How old is this list?
  20. strativarius

    strativarius Comfortably Numb

    Yeah, right, why bother with the pretence of auditing? They can just say 'Thank you for filling out this questionnaire. Now that we have your confession in writing to all these criminal offences and sexual perversions, just hand over all of your money or we'll let your nearest and dearest know and splash it all over social media'.