What's new
By:
Filters

The Mayo Challenge

I thought that was a beautiful post, Julie. I can only say that we do what we do at the time. Sometimes we think we're doing the right thing and other times we know we're doing the wrong thing and in between we're just not sure. It is obvious that you valued the friendship, and your soft heart wanted to spare him the shame. You could have exposed him, but what would it have benefited? You all knew what was up, and you all knew you knew. I think you handled the situation with grace. Not everyone would agree with me. Some people would put more value on the inherent truth or honesty of the encounter. I really think it depends what you value most at the time. I don't think there is anything wrong with valuing the person. Perhaps it would have been kinder to confront him so he didn't have to live with the guilt, but the intention was to be merciful.

We all wonder that sort of stuff about our lives.

I for one don't blame anyone for Scientology except myself. It was destructive for me and my little kids beyond measure. I was vulnerable and gullible. But I made my own choices. Nobody put a gun to my head. There were so many bad choices I made every day. In the end there was the straw that broke the camel's back. The objection I couldn't push down any further. The final sum of the equation that my mind had been working on in the background for five years. I was a victim, but I was a willing victim, and I was also an oppressor. Somebody who spat out the catechism to 'raw meat' about Scientology being compatible with Christianity whilst remembering the staff briefing about how Jesus was a paedophile. Somebody who said you could keep your religion whilst knowing what Scientology said about 'other practices'. Somebody who sat there and said "If you buy this Dianetics book you can improve those areas of your graph" whilst knowing that reading the book would do nothing - and that even auditing would lead to a path that would cost way more than most could afford. That even if it worked - something I wasn't seeing in the 'OTs' around me - they would never have enough money to access the benefits. I told them that if they joined staff they would get up the Bridge, knowing that just didn't happen in real life. And I never really thought I was lying, yet I knew I wasn't being straight. This way of approaching 'the truth' as something that can be formed into whatever I need it to be, has caused me so much grief in my personal life really, and so much pain to those that have loved me.

Anyway, I digress. I just thought it was a lovely post that you made.
 
Purple Rain said:
I thought that was a beautiful post, Julie. I can only say that we do what we do at the time. Sometimes we think we're doing the right thing and other times we know we're doing the wrong thing and in between we're just not sure. It is obvious that you valued the friendship, and your soft heart wanted to spare him the shame. You could have exposed him, but what would it have benefited? You all knew what was up, and you all knew you knew. I think you handled the situation with grace. Not everyone would agree with me. Some people would put more value on the inherent truth or honesty of the encounter. I really think it depends what you value most at the time. I don't think there is anything wrong with valuing the person. Perhaps it would have been kinder to confront him so he didn't have to live with the guilt, but the intention was to be merciful.

We all wonder that sort of stuff about our lives.

I for one don't blame anyone for Scientology except myself. It was destructive for me and my little kids beyond measure. I was vulnerable and gullible. But I made my own choices. Nobody put a gun to my head. There were so many bad choices I made every day. In the end there was the straw that broke the camel's back. The objection I couldn't push down any further. The final sum of the equation that my mind had been working on in the background for five years. I was a victim, but I was a willing victim, and I was also an oppressor. Somebody who spat out the catechism to 'raw meat' about Scientology being compatible with Christianity whilst remembering the staff briefing about how Jesus was a paedophile. Somebody who said you could keep your religion whilst knowing what Scientology said about 'other practices'. Somebody who sat there and said "If you buy this Dianetics book you can improve those areas of your graph" whilst knowing that reading the book would do nothing - and that even auditing would lead to a path that would cost way more than most could afford. That even if it worked - something I wasn't seeing in the 'OTs' around me - they would never have enough money to access the benefits. I told them that if they joined staff they would get up the Bridge, knowing that just didn't happen in real life. And I never really thought I was lying, yet I knew I wasn't being straight. This way of approaching 'the truth' as something that can be formed into whatever I need it to be, has caused me so much grief in my personal life really, and so much pain to those that have loved me.

Anyway, I digress. I just thought it was a lovely post that you made.
Click to expand...

Great post Purple and I totally agree.
Living life with grace and honesty is a good thing and any scientologist who wants to use words like "airy fairy" and Theetie weetie" as put down concepts simply do not understand that much about life.

I think most of us did the best we could at the time. We did make our own choices to be sure, yet to be out now we also were willing to look. That's the important thing. :)
 
Posted by Julie Mayo

snipped

But I've wondered did I really handle that in the best way possible. I really do not know. The creator of "The Mayo Challenge" most likely isn't a very dear friend like Johnny. He is more likely just someone who has had a lot of disinformation about us and is just doing his job: trying to do us in.

But I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and at the same time I want to be more direct and not hide the obvious. I want to say: "Whoever you are, show what you have in your bag. Reveal your true identity. Tell us what orders you are following." Maybe then we can resolve our differences. Maybe we can be honest. Maybe we can both work towards a better world without strife.

This is a challenge to you, my friend, (I hope). You know our true identities. Reveal yours. Perhaps we can forgive each other and work together towards a brighter future. I have no bad will towards you. Peace.
Click to expand...


Like you TheRealNoUser is a very new poster and could be someone who is in the process of dumping the cult and is not obeying orders (OSA) at all, unfortunately anger can be a part of the process and though I regret that David was targeted it seemed to me to be an honest (from his viewpoint) communication about scientology which is (in part) what ESMB is here for.

Many of us choose to be anon for many reasons and that is completely acceptable here and means little in the grand scheme of things, it's a personal choice.

:unsure:

Welcome to ESMB, it can be a bit rough but most of us are big softies underneath all the bluff and bluster!


:welcome2:
 
I told you I was trouble said:
Like you TheRealNoUser is a very new poster and could be someone who is in the process of dumping the cult and is not obeying orders (OSA) at all, unfortunately anger can be a part of the process and though I regret that David was targeted it seemed to me to be an honest (from his viewpoint) communication about scientology which is (in part) what ESMB is here for.

Many of us choose to be anon for many reasons and that is completely acceptable here and means little in the grand scheme of things, it's a personal choice.

:unsure:

Welcome to ESMB, it can be a bit rough but most of us are big softies underneath all the bluff and bluster!


:welcome2:
Click to expand...

He's not a new poster (well, may be new - but only here). Look at this link here: http://ocmb.xenu.net/ocmb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=34580

(It's available from his post history)
 
I have had no great inside front row seat among the major players.

My only contact back in the day with David Mayo was as him being the CS and his reputation.

When DM declared war on the Mayos I was early on 7 and kept my mouth shut ( for selfish reasons). What was happening sounded so insane, but, I wanted my "bridge" and stayed the course with my ears closed and my eyes shut. ( I later looked back on this lack of action on my own part as a violation of my own personal integrity but that is a different ordeal )

Doesn't help me - and damn sure didn't help David & Julie - to think what could have been if I had just gone to Santa Barbara, been supportive, and joined many people who had been dear friends. Those once friends have long since disappear into the mist.

In any event, I never had any beef at all with the Mayos. From the viewpoint
back at the time and being " in ", LRH had trusted Mayo for years and years so it made no sense that LRH had "missed" Mayo for all those years.

And Lord knows he was not the first person who gained a reputation for being very good at what he did that all in a sudden got hit. That I saw but at the time I didn't know Hubbard was paranoid or that DM was on a purge to take over everything.

Lots of good people got hit back in the 80s - as had been in the 50s, 60s, 70s and then the 90s, 2000s, and here again 2010 and forward.

In my humble opinion, David Mayo was one of the people who not only tried to help but was also very capable of helping.

The detractors of David Mayo and his wife Julie ? Ah, they have yet among decent people to earn themselves any place of merit in the world.

I suspect that these days out here among the quiet people -as well as the rowdies - among the EXs that the Mayos will find vastly more support than detractors.

Just my unasked for 2 cents on this "topic".
 
Purple Rain said:
I thought that was a beautiful post, Julie. I can only say that we do what we do at the time. Sometimes we think we're doing the right thing and other times we know we're doing the wrong thing and in between we're just not sure. It is obvious that you valued the friendship, and your soft heart wanted to spare him the shame. You could have exposed him, but what would it have benefited? You all knew what was up, and you all knew you knew. I think you handled the situation with grace. Not everyone would agree with me. Some people would put more value on the inherent truth or honesty of the encounter. I really think it depends what you value most at the time. I don't think there is anything wrong with valuing the person. Perhaps it would have been kinder to confront him so he didn't have to live with the guilt, but the intention was to be merciful.

We all wonder that sort of stuff about our lives.

I for one don't blame anyone for Scientology except myself. It was destructive for me and my little kids beyond measure. I was vulnerable and gullible. But I made my own choices. Nobody put a gun to my head. There were so many bad choices I made every day. In the end there was the straw that broke the camel's back. The objection I couldn't push down any further. The final sum of the equation that my mind had been working on in the background for five years. I was a victim, but I was a willing victim, and I was also an oppressor. Somebody who spat out the catechism to 'raw meat' about Scientology being compatible with Christianity whilst remembering the staff briefing about how Jesus was a paedophile. Somebody who said you could keep your religion whilst knowing what Scientology said about 'other practices'. Somebody who sat there and said "If you buy this Dianetics book you can improve those areas of your graph" whilst knowing that reading the book would do nothing - and that even auditing would lead to a path that would cost way more than most could afford. That even if it worked - something I wasn't seeing in the 'OTs' around me - they would never have enough money to access the benefits. I told them that if they joined staff they would get up the Bridge, knowing that just didn't happen in real life. And I never really thought I was lying, yet I knew I wasn't being straight. This way of approaching 'the truth' as something that can be formed into whatever I need it to be, has caused me so much grief in my personal life really, and so much pain to those that have loved me.

Anyway, I digress. I just thought it was a lovely post that you made.
Click to expand...

Great post, Purple.

Hi Julie, welcome to the board.
 
David Mayo said:
I acknowledge that you are right in that I worked in a cult that was destructive in some ways but I don't agree that it was only destructive. It was also constructive in some ways. While it is true that I worked in it, it is not true that I 'helped create the cult ...' But tell me how you think I may have done that? and what you think I should have done?

I am willing to listen to what you have to say. And I may learn from it.

David
Click to expand...

*swoon*.

The ability to see that you may be wrong is nice to see in action.
 
David Mayo said:
I acknowledge that you are right in that I worked in a cult that was destructive in some ways but I don't agree that it was only destructive. It was also constructive in some ways. While it is true that I worked in it, it is not true that I 'helped create the cult ...' But tell me how you think I may have done that? and what you think I should have done?

I am willing to listen to what you have to say. And I may learn from it.

David
Click to expand...

I'm willing to take up the challange a bit here.

You DID "help create the cult" David. There are lots of examples.

Here's one:

Remember the Survival Rundown? - a rehash of TRs, CCHs, Objective processes. YOU promoted this - remember? at the Hollywood Paladium - you were the Senior C/S Int and YOU gave the release event address wearing a Safari outfit! HaHa.

EXCEPT!!!!!!!!!!! I was BRAND NEW. My first ever event. And YES:duh: I went and DID that piece of shit, cult-indoctrination program.

Since leaving the Church, have you studied any critical reviews of these processes? Do you still believe in these things?

Can you challange this conclusion here?

Quote: "The TRs (Training Routines) are part of the most basic Scientology training, and are repeated to increasingly stringent standards at higher levels. They are billed as a way to improve communication skills, but their real purpose is to plant the seeds for thought control."

More here: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/TR/index.html

Let's start with that.

More to come.

P.S. I helped create the cult too. I was a registrar for 17 years.:omg:
 
This is NOT OK !!!! said:
I'm willing to take up the challange a bit here.

You DID "help create the cult" David. There are lots of examples.

Here's one:

Remember the Survival Rundown? - a rehash of TRs, CCHs, Objective processes. YOU promoted this - remember? at the Hollywood Paladium - you were the Senior C/S Int and YOU gave the release event address wearing a Safari outfit! HaHa.

EXCEPT!!!!!!!!!!! I was BRAND NEW. My first ever event. And YES:duh: I went and DID that piece of shit, cult-indoctrination program.

Since leaving the Church, have you studied any critical reviews of these processes? Do you still believe in these things?

Can you challange this conclusion here?

Quote: "The TRs (Training Routines) are part of the most basic Scientology training, and are repeated to increasingly stringent standards at higher levels. They are billed as a way to improve communication skills, but their real purpose is to plant the seeds for thought control."

More here: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/TR/index.html

Let's start with that.

More to come.

P.S. I helped create the cult too. I was a registrar for 17 years.:omg:
Click to expand...

It's easy to revise your views regarding what you were doing, later. Was "creating the cult" what you thought you were doing at that time? I doubt it. Did your actions contribute to Hubbard's (and his successors) efforts to "create the cult"? Probably.

I'd suggest that people who are feeling major guilt about helping to create the cult, or supporting the cult, take a look at that as a possible "wrong indication". Unless it was your knowing intent to help create a cult, I would say characterizing it that way is a good way of dragging yourself through the mud

I, for one, wasn't trying to "create a cult". Whenever the thought that this might be the case entered my mind, it was deeply troubling. HCO and Qual did their best (and later OSA as well) to disabuse me of this notion, but my concern about it being a cult kept coming back! To Scientologists, this meant I was "in doubt", perhaps having accepted an "enemy line" from "suppressive persons". Once I became alarmed that my own sense that "something was wrong" was being eroded, rather than addressed, I jettisoned.

Did you stay in after your alarms went off? Does this make you more complicit? Perhaps. Don't accept other people's (or even your own) "wrong indications" about it, though. Guilt is a dandy trap, but I'd rather play tennis.
 
This is NOT OK !!!! said:
I'm willing to take up the challange a bit here.

You DID "help create the cult" David. There are lots of examples.

Here's one:

Remember the Survival Rundown? - a rehash of TRs, CCHs, Objective processes. YOU promoted this - remember? at the Hollywood Paladium - you were the Senior C/S Int and YOU gave the release event address wearing a Safari outfit! HaHa.

EXCEPT!!!!!!!!!!! I was BRAND NEW. My first ever event. And YES:duh: I went and DID that piece of shit, cult-indoctrination program.

Since leaving the Church, have you studied any critical reviews of these processes? Do you still believe in these things?

Can you challange this conclusion here?

Quote: "The TRs (Training Routines) are part of the most basic Scientology training, and are repeated to increasingly stringent standards at higher levels. They are billed as a way to improve communication skills, but their real purpose is to plant the seeds for thought control."

More here: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Secrets/TR/index.html

Let's start with that.

More to come.

P.S. I helped create the cult too. I was a registrar for 17 years.:omg:
Click to expand...

We all helped ("create the cult", too)

I can see that Mayo was a major player there.

- Well, he's now here. He speaks. He feels responsible for the thing he's helped to create. - Why keep pointing fingers at him?

I'm responsible for being a part of Gold (with it's releases after 1997). - Are you gonna shoot me for being a part of Gold? Or May be Marc Headley? Or Jeff Hawkins? Or many others who were all participants in the scheme?

It takes soul and power to forgive to get over all those "mishappenstances" that took place.
 
Pooks said:
. . .
The problem is that David Mayo has a gag order that would choke a dinosaur
. . .
Click to expand...

David and Julie didn't have to register here under their own names. In fact, few people do so. I wonder why they both did? Nobody demands to see proof of credentials from a person who just calls herself Myrtle_the_Turtle, or something.

In a sense, they pulled in any suspicion that they have been met with, because many people were bound to react to such an interesting pair of arrivals. To many, it must either seem very naive for a person operating under a gagging order... or very much like they want to cause a sensation. But: whatever! Having David Mayo as a regular poster on ESMB is likely to get more people, including present-day Scientology victims, reading here. And once a person starts to access information from the real world, they tend to rapidly wake up and cease to be a 'clam'. So I'm delighted to see 'em here!

However, I'm sure they can ask Emma for replacement accounts if they decide that anonymity (at least initially) would help to defuse matters, or to protect them from CofS and its Mafia lawyers. There's also wikileaks, for a safe way to drop information into the public domain without being personally associated with it...

And, for what it's worth, I wish Miscavige's coup d'état had failed, back in the day. I think Hubbardism is deeply flawed and would have failed either way, but I believe that less people would have suffered along the way.

Say what you can, when you can. But stay safe.
 
imo having been a Sea Org member I've been member of a criminal organization. Was that my intention when I joined? Certainly not. And it was hard for me when I realized it, I had reasons to regret and felt stupid. I remember one specific situation when I could have left and should have left. I was exhausted to the point I wasn't even able to perform a thought or feel anything, so I continued for a while although from that point on I knew SO wasn't the right place to be. If there ever (which I doubt) were the possibility to improve or learn in Scientology, I didn't have the opportunity while on staff. And when I was out, there was a whole world opening up to see and to learn from. I wouldn't consult any of Hubbards writings anymore. The moment I left is a memory of triumph. But it's long ago and I've met some great people there, who were in the same trap.
 
I am so new here, and I can not expose who I am, so I am at a disadvantage, none the less this thread hit me and I must comment

These are the concerns the OP brought up in me. I made them questions as Emma asked.

I wish I could have spent more time on this post.

David.

1. Do you still believe in body thetans, from one of your posts it looks not?

2. If you do not believe n BT’s, when did you realize this, and how do you feel about the effect of running these processes on people, how detrimental is the action.

3. Do you not feel some responsibility; given it looks like you were a big factor in the creation of NOTs.

4. I ran a lot of past track, a lot, and I feel this has been the most traumatic thing for me to confront at this time “case wise” as separate from the betrayal, can you advise me on this?

I am definitely not a plant, I am someone floundering in the backwash of having been a very committed Scio, and the OP opened up all those wounds that are festering.

I have a responsibility to the people I brought in or convinced to stay in. I have apologized profusely to the only person I am able to at this time, there will be more of that later.

I believe all of us exes are guilty of promoting the cult to some degree or another and I definitely am. Some of us are more culpable than others to the degree that we knew it was not what it claimed and yet we kept on promoting and supporting. Maybe the original poster is upset because of this, or maybe he is a plant, I have no idea, but I know at this point in time I can relate to what he said.

I could never condemn you David without condemning myself as I am culpable of this for at least 3 years and 50 people. I am working now so I can handle what will come to pass when I out myself. I wish I was stronger, alas I am not.

5. David, how culpable are you?

Finally, and maybe this should have been first. Welcome David and Julie, I am quite glad you are here and I hope your being here makes it easier for people who are lurking and searching to find the answers they need to know the truth about Scientology and how to recover. I am one of them and that is why I have asked these questions.


Good day.


Ethicsbait.

Purple Rain, you can digress anytime as far as I am concerned.

I had the same reading as you trouble.
 
morizo said:
imo having been a Sea Org member I've been member of a criminal organization. Was that my intention when I joined? Certainly not. And it was hard for me when I realized it, I had reasons to regret and felt stupid. I remember one specific situation when I could have left and should have left. I was exhausted to the point I wasn't even able to perform a thought or feel anything, so I continued for a while although from that point on I knew SO wasn't the right place to be. If there ever (which I doubt) were the possibility to improve or learn in Scientology, I didn't have the opportunity while on staff. And when I was out, there was a whole world opening up to see and to learn from. I wouldn't consult any of Hubbards writings anymore. The moment I left is a memory of triumph. But it's long ago and I've met some great people there, who were in the same trap.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing! :thumbsup:

Scn is not the only trap around here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top