<snipped>
After that I realized that for the first time I had a model that
I could use in the most difficult situations and the understanding
would be based on that person’s grasp of the situation of the abused
woman. With this model/analogy, I could go on the “Oprah”
show and with that response she would get it, as would millions
of women watching the show. Nothing else would be needed. There
wouldn’t have to be arguments about “mind control” or
“brainwashing” and if it really exists. Abused women exist
and whatever keeps them there or brings them back, it happens. That
fact cannot be denied.
Now that I’ve made my point, let me expand it. In my opinion, this
model/analogy extends much further than the control of a cult. I
think it can be found in jobs where the person feels trapped and
wants to leave but can’t. There might be a difference that the “boss”
may not try to talk them back, but I think this model/analogy goes
farther than merely cults and abused women. That would be up to
others to pursue. My point is that I’m not targeting Scientology.
The model worked for me in my situation and I think it would help
others who have had difficulty understanding the “control”
they felt. It helped me because it lifted out of the subjects of
“mind control” and “brainwashing” and told me
that it was not exclusive to the cult. In turn, I understood – or
at least sympathized – with the plight of the abused woman. I no
longer wondered why they stayed or returned. I didn’t have an answer,
but I was no longer puzzled.
At my last deposition in Tampa, there was a point where this came
up. I don’t recall what it was but I was asked something that prompted
me to say that I thought the abused woman syndrome was a good model
for what I had experienced. Of course, there were the guffaws and
laughs of severe denial from their part. It is to be expected from
the abusers, isn’t it? No abusive husband admits to it and no abusive
cult will either and for the same reasons.
Before closing, let me make a couple more points of parallel.
No abusive relationship starts that way. In fact, the chances are
that if the guy had slapped her on the first date, there wouldn’t
be a second one. No, the abusive relationship starts with sweetness.
When I was reading about abusive relationships, that came up constantly,
how the guy was so nice and sweet. No, the abuse is gradual. It
starts with some criticism and when the woman accepts it, then there
is a little bit more. When she accepts that, the man does more as
he introduces CONTROL. If she protests, he backs off until he can
reestablish the control. It is called a GRADIENT. (Ironically, Scientologists
will be familiar with that word.) The woman comes to accept more
and more and becomes convinced that it is something SHE is doing
wrong. As it is increased, the sweetness tapers off until it is
finally dangled in front of her like a carrot. Somewhere along the
line, the physical abuse starts. If she breaks too hard, he is sweet
and comforting and maybe even apologetic, bringing her back under
control. That is the key. CONTROL. (Another word Scientologists
know well. Hubbard even had his own definition for it and processing
addressing control.) Then one day the beatings are regular and she
loses her self-respect and dignity.
Let me draw another parallel to my own situation. I mentioned
in one of my other posts to ARS that I am making with this one about
the woman who asked me if there was anything anyone could have said
to me to change my mind while I was in Scientology. No one had asked
me that and I realized – and told her – that no, there was nothing
anyone could have said.
That happens with the abused woman too. I read how they would later
recount the advice of friends who kept telling them that their
husband/lover was abusing them and that they should leave.
I don’t recall any who said, you know, you’re right! I’m going to leave him!
No, they explained the abuse! They would say – actually believing it, until
they finally escaped – that he was really a nice guy, that he was
misunderstood, that he was trying, that they would work things out,
etc., etc., etc.
You know who usually changes the woman’s mind? The abuser. Those
who flee – like Tina Turner – simply say one day, I’ve had enough,
and escape. Some do it sooner. Some later. Until that moment, they
rationalize their situation. Friends or family might be able to
intervene but not in the hard core cases. In those instances, the
abuser is the only one who can change the person’s mind.
Until then money and resources are also a factor. People stay in
abusive situations because they have no money or anywhere else to
go. Maybe if the abused woman had $100,000 in the bank she would
have given him the finger and taken off long before. But what abuser
would allow the woman to keep that money for herself? (I have yet
to learn of a Sea Organization member who escaped with ample personal
resources. The amount of money one has on joining – if any – is
quickly discovered and one is convinced to spend it on the cult,
thus effectively wiping out any resources.) These are the points
that have to be researched to understand this phenomenon and to
offer help.
Meanwhile you might ask, how can a person rationalize a beating?
Good question indeed. If the plight of the abused women had been
known longer than it has, maybe we would have a better understanding.
Each woman will have her own answer but until we get a grasp of
it the fact remains that it exists and there are some disturbing
parallels between them and cult members. I wasn’t “abused”
when I joined. It was like the “love bombing” found in
another cult. Everything is wonderful and the future is bright and
this is the place to be. Then one day, there is a little “correction.”
If one balks, one is talked through it gently until it is grasped
and one is willing to accept it. The next one is attached to that
one. (“Remember how well we did last time when you were able
to understand it and you had a win?”) And the next until one
day you find yourself working 12 hours a day at hard labor, under
guard, seven days a week, unable to talk to friends and family,
your body racked in pain and undergoing constant interrogation to
give up your “crimes” and you accept it as necessary for
your own “rehabilitation.” And if you try to escape and
they catch you, you can be talked back to the very same situation
and you convince yourself that this is right as you haul the next
load of rocks out in 110 degree heat and a blazing sun for $5 a
week. It is all part of your “rehabilitation.”
No, when people asked me how I could stay for so long when I knew
it was abusive, that’s a loaded question. I didn’t know it any more
than the abused woman knew it. I kept telling myself that they really
are okay, that it must be my fault, that it is being done to help
me and things really will get better. I carried that attitude right
into the RPF until one day I broke and decided to escape. Then they
talked me back and I was convinced that it would get better. All
they did was back up the gradient to where I would accept the control.
That is another place where I find that the “mind control/brainwashing”
models break down. It is crucial in cult control that the person
feel in control and in fact IS “in control.” One is always
making the decision to stay. To that degree, it is “consensual.”
But how “consensual” is the abused woman? Just because
she has the freedom to drive to the store and back and no one is
keeping her in chains, does that mean she is “consenting”
to her situation? Can the husband argue that he isn’t “controlling”
her because she has that freedom? Then what IS “consent”?
That may be a legal quandary as much as a psychological one but
I don’t think we are ready to walk away from the woman being beaten,
saying she is “consenting to it,” are we?
Thanks to video cameras, we can watch shows like “Cops”
where the police are called out to a real life “domestic disturbance.”
If you have watched that show enough, you finally saw the all-to-familiar
scene of the woman with a bloody nose who has clearly been beaten
(the cops were called by neighbors hearing the fight) and is standing
there explaining it all away, insisting that the police take no
action. No, she’s fine, she says. No, it’s nothing. To the questions
from the police about the bloody nose or the swelling around the
eyes, she’ll say anything but the facts, that he was beating her.
Do we need more evidence? There are the very people – the police
- who can take him off to jail and end the abuse if she will simply
speak up and she refuses while wiping the blood from her nose or
pulling the torn clothing up around her shoulder and telling them
that everything is okay. Of course, the police cannot legally intervene
unless she complains and she will not.
Now let me make a harrowing admission. If the police had shown
up that day when I was at the motel trying to escape, when the security
guards were parked outside to make sure I didn’t disappear on them,
and if the police had asked me if everything was okay or if I needed
any help, do you know what I would have said and done? The same
thing as that woman. No, it’s fine, I would have said. I’ll handle
it. It stuns me to think it, let alone say it right now, but that
is the truth. That is exactly what I would have done. And do you
know why? Because I didn’t want to be in trouble with the cult.
If you can figure that one out, give it to the experts.
That is why people who flee the cult – even into the arms of the
authorities – can be talked back. They can no more say “help
me” than the woman standing there with a bloody nose can tell
the police. Give them a few days rest and time to get their wits
about them and maybe they can. That is why those first few hours
or days are crucial. The more time the person gets away from the
person suppressing them, the more they recover their own sense of
self. That, of course, infuriates the abuser, until he/they finally
give up and look for their next victim. Meanwhile, some degree of
control remains until the person finally sheds it.
And don’t think that all abused women are abused physically. The
abuse might be merely verbal, with other controls like control of
money, sleep, clothing, friends, beliefs, free time etc. (Gee, sound
familiar?)
Now if one were interested in studying the “abused woman”
syndrome, who would one study? This may sound like a ridiculous
question but it goes to a point the cult is making.
First of all, one has to decide if such women exist. (This may
sound like I’m contradicting myself but hang on.) How does one decide?
The obvious answer would seem to be the stories of women themselves.
But can we believe them? Maybe they are making it up. So let’s ignore
them for the moment and go to marriages/relationships and ask the
women, are you abused? Let’s ask the men, are you abusing this woman?
What sort of answer will we get? Done in this way, we can conclusively
“prove” that there are no abused women because all of
the women – including the ones with the bloody noses – will deny
it as will the men. Case closed. No woman is abused.
That is exactly what the cult is doing. They are saying that those
who have left and claim abuse are “apostates” (one who
has abandoned one’s belief or cause) and can’t be believed. (They
even paid some “experts” to “conclude” this.)
Meanwhile, they will suggest, all you have to do is ask Scientologists
if they feel abused. In fact, you can even go into the RPF and ask
and chances are (unless there is one rocky one who will be quickly
stashed somewhere else) they will respond to the man and woman that
they are not being abused. Case closed. No one is abused.
In other words, as long as we listen to someone who has abandoned
a belief or a cause (from a marriage to a “religion”)
cannot be believed.
And that is one of the reasons why abused women were not believed
until just a few years ago. Think on that. Women have been abused
for thousands of years and it wasn’t until a few years ago that
it was even admitted that it happened and that something should
be done about it. How many women went to the police and were turned
away or were killed or destroyed before someone believed them? How
many have simply fled and disappeared and are still too ashamed
to talk, preferring to just live quiet lives where they can choose
their own friends, have their own bank accounts, pick their own
meals, select their own clothes, keep private diaries and not have
to answer or explain themselves again? Can anyone imagine what a
joy that is to a person whose life was controlled down to the point
of what it was they could say or believe, where their very thoughts
and opinions were monitored, that they can now forget it? How many
women are out there? Compare that to how many go to the authorities
or champion the cause of abused women and take it to the media and
the courts. How many of THOSE are there? Three? Five? Ten? Should
these “apostates” be believed?
How many ex-cult members are there? How many have of them have
spoken out? Three? Five? Ten? Should these “apostates”
be believed?
I think there are many, many reasons to draw a parallel between
the two groups not only in their situation but in those who speak
out and I hope that this might spark some interest within some professional
circle. I’m no more an “expert” on sociological parallels
than that woman with the bloody nose is an expert but we do have
a level of understanding.
Robert Vaughn Young
2/22/00
copyright (c) Robert Vaughn Young
all rights reserved
http://freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/s/scientology/rvymodel/
)
The notion that we must transform humanity into some new species (Homo Novus) in order to survive is false and self-defeating. Yes, we all have both harmful and helpful traits and impulses that we learn to control and modulate as part of our basic socialization.
(I put myself in that camp~ 
)
