Free Speech on ESMB

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Why is it that people will say "I had wins on this OT level or that OT level", "I had wins with this auditing or that routine", rather than give a description of the experience they had?


For a long time now I've considered it to be a self esteem issue ... completing something (and scientology is all about "completions") then being handed a large certificate to rapturous applause at "graduation" is enough to make them feel really good about themselves. The further they travel up "the bridge" the harder it is to get to the destination but the admiration and respect they get as they do so grows exponentially, starting at the comm course.

That admiration and respect (which is often a very new experience for the person on the receiving end) persists while they stay connected to other scientologists and their org. Even out in the real world those close to the person would probably notice a difference in the overall self esteem level of the person.

Perhaps that beatific smile that "oatees" fall back on when asked for a description of what has changed for them is the replacement for original low self esteem which has been genuinely boosted by scientology.

It's a very expensive way (in more ways than one) to achieve it.




:confused2:
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
I'm a born proselytizer. Its a part of helping the world to be a better place. Which critics also do. Despite agreeing with mostly all critical
commentary, fundamentally I've seen and experienced much benefit from
Scn. I've also seen much stupid bullshit in the name of Scn. For example Communicater I/C posted Lana M's comments re stupid A-J checks. Dunno what the fuck they are doing with them now. I used to do them in about 5 minutes, and then tell the recipient "go see the course sup" or whatever.

If one does Scn with the purpose of helping another expand in
whatever way they want you can get great results. Client centered.
Most of the FZ is like that. I promote to those who have an interest.
They can then find out for themselves. No declares disconnections
and mostly no rip offs.

For example I had great wins on OT 2&3. I'd love others to have the same. Had these wins despite no belief in Xenu. Go figure?


Terril, you had me interested in getting services in the FZ until you said "No declares".

Getting SP Declared was by far the best thing CoS ever did for me. And while kind of a steep gradient it honestly put me on the road to real freedom.

OK, I am being kind of a smart-ass in the way I'm conveying it, what I said IS the truth.

I certainly didn't see things that way at that time I was handed the Goldenrod, but can look back now and honestly say that that was the best thing that could have happened to me as a scientologist. (other than not getting involved in the first place)

I'm quite sure that my needle's floating. Can you contact me by Skype and do an exam? :biggrin:

Edit: I'd better add on to this comment (lest anyone misunderstand) that I was only kidding about any interest in FZ services. :p
 
Last edited:

Boomima

Patron with Honors
There is a huge difference between tolerance and criticism free posting. Anyone can post anything here that does not violate the rules. However, you can't post here and expect not to have what you write analyzed and critiqued. That's not people being mean; this is what happens when there is a free flow of information and opinions. Issues in threads really seem to happen when other people get butthurt and outraged on behalf of other people because there are contrary opinions being posted. If you want an echo chamber, try Facebook.

I think that Terrill actually faces most of the criticism and tweaking he gets with grace. When he's violated the rules, he gets modded and moves on.
 

renegade

Silver Meritorious Patron
For a long time now I've considered it to be a self esteem issue ... completing something (and scientology is all about "completions") then being handed a large certificate to rapturous applause at "graduation" is enough to make them feel really good about themselves. The further they travel up "the bridge" the harder it is to get to the destination but the admiration and respect they get as they do so grows exponentially, starting at the comm course.

That admiration and respect (which is often a very new experience for the person on the receiving end) persists while they stay connected to other scientologists and their org. Even out in the real world those close to the person would probably notice a difference in the overall self esteem level of the person.

Perhaps that beatific smile that "oatees" fall back on when asked for a description of what has changed for them is the replacement for original low self esteem which has been genuinely boosted by scientology.

It's a very expensive way (in more ways than one) to achieve it.
:confused2:

Sounds like paying through the nose for 15 minutes of fame.

What happens to self-esteem when you are told, "Sorry, you're not Clear and need to redo your Bridge?"
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Sounds like paying through the nose for 15 minutes of fame.

What happens to self-esteem when you are told, "Sorry, you're not Clear and need to redo your Bridge?"


Lol, I suppose momentarily it drops ... but it soon gets boosted back up because by then the person is thoroughly indoctrinated and uses the "tehk" and any support system he has set up to handle himself and "get his ethics back in" and get back to it, so it isn't 15 minutes ... done "correctly" it will last a lifetime and that was my point.

We've all seen obese teenagers that wander around with their wobbly bits on full show in shorts or really low cut jeans (often with high cut tops) because someone (probably a well intention-ed mummy) has repeatedly told them they are beautiful and gorgeous and should dress however they like ... and they have totally bought that they look good and often have an arrogant "look at me" attitude that can be quite stunning. That (to me) is the equivalent of the beatific smirk of an "oatee". Whether they truly believe they look good is another thing.

I believe that self esteem is a huge issue and some people do respond to any positive reinforcement even if it's actually doing them more harm than good. Others can often see what is happening ... but can't really see a way to say so without causing offence and looking like the bad guy.



:)
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Because they are not sure WTF happened, They're just all keyed out and shit.:yes::coolwink:

It's because the cult forbids discussing one's case and also has a prohibition against discussing anything confidential.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but from what I recall, those are two major reasons.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
Lol, I suppose momentarily it drops ... but it soon gets boosted back up because by then the person is thoroughly indoctrinated and uses the "tehk" and any support system he has set up to handle himself and "get his ethics back in" and get back to it, so it isn't 15 minutes ... done "correctly" it will last a lifetime and that was my point.

We've all seen obese teenagers that wander around with their wobbly bits on full show in shorts or really low cut jeans (often with high cut tops) because someone (probably a well intention-ed mummy) has repeatedly told them they are beautiful and gorgeous and should dress however they like ... and they have totally bought that they look good and often have an arrogant "look at me" attitude that can be quite stunning. That (to me) is the equivalent of the beatific smirk of an "oatee". Whether they truly believe they look good is another thing.

I believe that self esteem is a huge issue and some people do respond to any positive reinforcement even if it's actually doing them more harm than good. Others can often see what is happening ... but can't really see a way to say so without causing offence and looking like the bad guy.
:)

Maybe, but at the risk of going off-topic here I think the other extreme is far worse - there are plenty of OK-looking people who have been convinced by the media etc. that they look terrible.
 

eldritch cuckoo

brainslugged reptilian
Commander Birdsong gets a hell of a lot of wtf's, flames and flack from members here but carries on posting regardless, and he's been doing that for quite some time. What his reasons for sticking around are I have no idea. Maybe - and I apologise for sounding for once like a bleedin' scieno - any communication is better than none.

I used to be on a woman's message board and there was a guy who hung around it all the time. Had totally the opposite viewpoint of everyone. He was slammed and ridiculed and virtually screamed at. Didn't seem to faze him. He kept coming back anyway.

I guess some people like that sort of thing.


"Perhaps one did not want to be loved so much as to be understood."
"Nineteen Eighty-Four", George Orwell


Edited to add: That's from the infamous chapter three, where Winston gets tortured by O'Brien. I just wanted to add this to point out my eldritch and not quite innocent irony. :biggrin:

A needle slid into Winston’s arm. Almost in the same instant a blissful, healing warmth spread all through his body. The pain was already half-forgotten. He opened his eyes and looked up gratefully at O’Brien. At sight of the heavy, lined face, so ugly and so intelligent, his heart seemed to turn over. If he could have moved he would have stretched out a hand and laid it on O’Brien arm. He had never loved him so deeply as at this moment, and not merely because he had stopped the pain. The old feeling, that it bottom it did not matter whether O’Brien was a friend or an enemy, had come back. O’Brien was a person who could be talked to. Perhaps one did not want to be loved so much as to be understood. O’Brien had tortured him to the edge of lunacy, and in a little while, it was certain, he would send him to his death. It made no difference. In some sense that went deeper than friendship, they were intimates: somewhere or other, although the actual words might never be spoken, there was a place where they could meet and talk. O’Brien was looking down at him with an expression which suggested that the same thought might be in his own mind. When he spoke it was in an easy, conversational tone.
’Do you know where you are, Winston?’ he said.
’I don’t know. I can guess. In the Ministry of Love.’
’Do you know how long you have been here?’
’I don’t know. Days, weeks, months — I think it is months.’
’And why do you imagine that we bring people to this place?’
’To make them confess.’
’No, that is not the reason. Try again.’
’To punish them.’
’No!’ exclaimed O’Brien. His voice had changed extraordinarily, and his face had suddenly become both stern and animated. ’No! Not merely to extract your confession, not to punish you. Shall I tell you why we have brought you here? To cure you! To make you sane! Will you understand, Winston, that no one whom we bring to this place ever leaves our hands uncured? We are not interested in those stupid crimes that you have committed. The Party is not interested in the overt act: the thought is all we care about. We do not merely destroy our enemies, we change them. Do you understand what I mean by that?’
:coolwink: :giggle: :omg: :p :brow: :clapping: :drama2:

The book is available as free download, for example here:
http://msxnet.org/orwell/print/1984.pdf
https://archive.org/details/ost-english-1984-george-orwell-1937-dystopia
http://www.pdfbooksforfree.com/1984-george-orwell/
 
Last edited:

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
Maybe, but at the risk of going off-topic here I think the other extreme is far worse - there are plenty of OK-looking people who have been convinced by the media etc. that they look terrible.


I don't like to see either extreme ... but yes, low self esteem whether it's from "normal" teenage angst or [STRIKE]created[/STRIKE] assisted by the media is hard to watch. Drug pushers, alcohol vendors and cults seem to be the only real beneficiaries.

Back to Free Speech eh?

:)
 

Lord Xenu

Patron Meritorious
Why is it that people will say "I had wins on this OT level or that OT level", "I had wins with this auditing or that routine", rather than give a description of the experience they had?



Maybe it's because they are presented with a form to write up their wins at the end of the 'course' and if they don't describe those 'wins' they haven't finished the course. And who knows how much stuff they'll have to go back over to get to that same point again?
 

Enthetan

Master of Disaster

I believe that self esteem is a huge issue and some people do respond to any positive reinforcement even if it's actually doing them more harm than good. Others can often see what is happening ... but can't really see a way to say so without causing offence and looking like the bad guy.
:)

Self-confidence has to do with your conception of what you're able to do. Not enough self-confidence can result in your not reaching your full potential. Too much self-confidence can have you trying things that will result in disaster. Your self-confidence needs to be rooted in reality (and being a LITTLE overboard on your self-confidence is fine. If you're not trying things and falling down some of the time, then you're not expanding your abilities. Just don't assume you can jump the Grand Canyon on your motorcycle).

Similarly, self-esteem has to do with your conception of what you are. Not enough is bad, but too much self-esteem can blind you to the need to improve yourself. It's fine to tell the chubby girl that she's pretty, but also tell her "and if you exercise and watch what you eat, you can be EVEN MORE SO".
 

He-man

Hero extraordinary
I'm a born proselytizer. Its a part of helping the world to be a better place. Which critics also do. Despite agreeing with mostly all critical
commentary, fundamentally I've seen and experienced much benefit from
Scn. I've also seen much stupid bullshit in the name of Scn. For example Communicater I/C posted Lana M's comments re stupid A-J checks. Dunno what the fuck they are doing with them now. I used to do them in about 5 minutes, and then tell the recipient "go see the course sup" or whatever.

If one does Scn with the purpose of helping another expand in
whatever way they want you can get great results. Client centered.
Most of the FZ is like that. I promote to those who have an interest.
They can then find out for themselves. No declares disconnections
and mostly no rip offs.

For example I had great wins on OT 2&3. I'd love others to have the same. Had these wins despite no belief in Xenu. Go figure?

I understand that. What I don't understand is pushing it to a community who is in most parts never going to be interested ever again. Unless they are newly out, of course, and that I kinda see as stalking.

I'm telling ya man, you'd be a great witch doctor in Javanesia.
 

strativarius

Inveterate gnashnab & snoutband
You're wrong, consider yourself corrected!
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I mean that), but isn't that the attitude of the moderators here on ESMB?
Meanwhile, I've seen postings from people here about negative experiences on "Freezone" boards when posting negative views about LRH and the "tech". [highlight]Over there, the doctrine is that the tech is good, and it's just DM who screwed things up.[/highlight]

Thanks M3, now that I've seen it in print, I do!

EDIT:

<snip>

If you have the left the official church of Scientology, have had a chance to read all the information about Hubbard, the formation of the tech, the abuses, the history, the lies and betrayals Scientology delivers AND you have flittered around the FZ, had a chance to experience Scientology tech "outside" the official church and interacted with the key people in the Freezone and seen how these people behave and how the insanity perpetuates, and you still consider yourself a Scientologist

THEN YOU ARE FUCKING STUPID.

There is no other explanation. You are just fucking stupid.

And now that I have seen the above post, I really do! :biggrin:
 
Last edited:

Purple Rain

Crusader
Self-confidence has to do with your conception of what you're able to do. Not enough self-confidence can result in your not reaching your full potential. Too much self-confidence can have you trying things that will result in disaster. Your self-confidence needs to be rooted in reality (and being a LITTLE overboard on your self-confidence is fine. If you're not trying things and falling down some of the time, then you're not expanding your abilities. Just don't assume you can jump the Grand Canyon on your motorcycle).

Similarly, self-esteem has to do with your conception of what you are. Not enough is bad, but too much self-esteem can blind you to the need to improve yourself. It's fine to tell the chubby girl that she's pretty, but also tell her "and if you exercise and watch what you eat, you can be EVEN MORE SO".

I haven't been following this thread, but I just noticed the word "self-esteem" in my feed and I just posted something on Facebook I was reading today, so I will repost it here in case it is interesting to anyone else or resonates with somebody.

"The capacity for self-esteem, for a sense of one’s own worth, is remarkable; non-human animals don’t have this capacity. Animals cannot be humiliated. And it is precious, as becomes especially clear when we come across a human being whose capacity for self-esteem has been so shattered that she thinks there is nothing about her that makes her estimable. She believes she is worthless. But she is not worthless.

"There are many ways in which we humiliate or try to humiliate others, ways in which we try to put them down. We humiliate them by calling them derogatory names: ... 'cockroaches,' 'scum'—the list goes on and on. Hitler humiliated, or tried to humiliate, Jesse Owens by refusing to give him the gold medal for winning the hundred-meter dash in the 1936 Olympics because he was black. We humiliate our fellow human persons by insulting them. Sometimes we humiliate a person by ignoring her, acting as if she’s not there. Worst of all, we humiliate a person by enslaving him and then putting him up on the block for sale. What’s wrong about humiliation in all its forms is not simply that it fails to pay due respect to the humiliated person as someone who has the dignity that supervenes on the various aspects of human personhood. What is also wrong about it is that it sends a false message of worth and aims to lower or destroy the person’s self-esteem. It aims to make him think that he is scum."

Nicholas Wolterstorff, Understanding Liberal Democracy: Essays in Political Philosophy (Oxford University Press, 2012) 221.

423144b1f5d4999060084b7b2f2f15b7.jpg


And these relate to the complete destruction of self-esteem in a person also. I have experienced this and it was all accomplished with words.

"Henrik Ibsen (the Scandinavian playwright) coined the term SOUL MURDER in C19th. He defined it as 'the destruction of the love of life in another human being' ... 'killing the capacity for joy in another human being'"

"In 1887 Strindberg gave the title 'Soul Murder' to an article on Ibsen’s Rosmersholm. He said that instances of actual murder were decreasing in the Western world, but that soul (or psychic) murder, which he defined as taking away a person’s reason for living, was on the increase. The concept obsessed Strindberg who was at that time illustrating it in his great play The Father…. Soul murder was a repetitive theme of Ibsen, who uses the term directly in his play John Gabriel Borkman (1896)…. In the play Ibsen speaks of soul murder as … 'killing the instinct for love,' ... 'killing the love-live in a human soul,' ... and murdering 'love in a human being.'" ~ Leonard Shengold, Soul Murder: The Effects of Childhood Abuse and Deprivation (Fawcett Columbine, 1989) 19.

"According to Feuerbach’s concept, soul murder is not itself a physical crime, rather it is a crime against a person’s intimate self concept. What Feuerbach is trying to describe closely relates to what occurs when an individual’s personal self-concept is destroyed. Imagine an individual so violently attacked that physical recognition as a human is virtually impossible. Soul murder is the emotional, mental equivalent of this kind of physical assault. To destroy this part of a person limits their development and capacity for human character and human interaction." ~ Stacey Rae Benner, ‘Soul Murder, Social Death, and Humiliation: Consequences of State-sponsored Rape’ (2010) 4 The New York Sociologist 1, 7

[Emphasis mine]
 

Terril park

Sponsor
I understand that. What I don't understand is pushing it to a community who is in most parts never going to be interested ever again. Unless they are newly out, of course, and that I kinda see as stalking.

I'm telling ya man, you'd be a great witch doctor in Javanesia.

I'm not pushing it. Just letting people know its there if they want it.
Unfortunately its almost impossible to do this anywhere except
where most are critics and no longer interested.

I aspire to be a witch doctor in Javanesia. Here is the
Serimpi dance formerly only danced by royal princesses
in order to reach enlightenment. I once knew two american
girls who performed this. I swear one of them went exterior
while dancing. Note how this dance is not a million miles
away from CCH's.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=207rOHEH2K0
 

HelluvaHoax!

Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
...

Some years ago I met someone (we dated for a while) that was a very independent and free thinking individual, except for one thing--she had grown up in the LDS. And, the LDS still had her psychologically and emotionally tethered and would not let go of her.

I began to study (books and online) all the beliefs of the Mormons, particularly the absurdities of their founder who was a convicted con man before he discovered the "religion angle". We read and discussed many of those blasphemous revelations together and she began to quickly see that she was being "played" (her term).

The more she broke away, the more the local Mormon church devotees staged meetings and interventions and all manner of button pushing, subtle coercion and guilt ensued.

What struck me like a thunderbolt was the virtually perfect parallels between the cults of LDS and Scn.

The deception of the LDS is another thread entirely, but relevant to this thread are certain profoundly well hidden, yet simple, revelations I will never forget. I have never reduced it to writing before, but I'll try to make a very brief run at it and see if that works. In trying to identify the basic mechanisms that LDS used to grow itself, I learned much about Hubbard's hoax, such as:

1) Ludicrous Lies: This describes the beginnings of Joseph Smith's "revelations" which came to him by putting his head inside a hat and using a magic stone, while others took dictation of sacred messages from God. Just before Smith figured out this scam, he was perpetrating the identical con game by bilking local famers/ranchers for which he was arrested.

2) Layering: The church gained traction, naturally, by elaborately hiding its true origins, thus burying the truth inside of densely packed misdirection and dead ends.

3) Leverage: What cult would be complete without the ability to control the minds and hearts of its devotees. A good start is always terrorizing individuals with burning in hell forever or "losing their eternity".

4) Legitimacy: This (religious/church status) is one of the best cult tactics that receives little attention because--one learns in society never to "attack" or "abridge" the sacred concept of "Religious Freedom".​

That last one ("legitimacy") is particularly fascinating because it prevents non-believers or former members ("apostates") from speaking directly about how ridiculous many of these religious hoaxes are. By way of example, let's assume today (2014) that one of ESMB's members began a thread about how they (and they alone) had discovered the secrets of God and the universe--by putting their head in a hat and using magically powered "seer stones". After this individual began making thundering announcements of who on this board was going to be "saved" and who was being sent to hell (for disobeying his messianic dogma), the members here would very quickly tear that thread (and its guru) apart in a maelstrom of rejection & ridicule.

Isn't that why L. Ron Hubbard put his own head in his hat (Pack) and channeled the word of God in declaring the "High Crime" of "joking & degrading"?

The point I think I want to make, above all others, is the extraordinary lengths that any cult will go in order to hide its astonishingly stupid origins. The continuous layering behind legitimate sounding/appearing facades prevent the world from dismissing the entire religious racket without giving it a second thought. Consider, if you will, that a door-to-door salesman was in your neighborhood and you got a knock one day. He offered to find precious oil on your property for a modest fee. . .

Then (after being paid) he used "seer stones" to divine where your earthly rewards could be found underground. Naturally, no oil was located but that didn't stop the intrepid swindler from hustling away yours (and your many neighbors) hard earned trust and money. Eventually, you read in the newspaper that he was arrested and sent to prison.

Now, what if a few weeks after that someone else knocked on your door with the same ludicrous proposition? You would mercilessly boot them off your property, right?

That's LDS and Scientology without the layering and legitimacy ruses.

It's a joke. A cruel hoax.

I don't think these kind of cloaked criminal enterprises merit any special care of respect as "religions".

I say all these things in the face of the LDS and Scientology God, may they strike me dead if I am wrong. And I do so without the spiritual protections afforded to me by wearing magical underwear.

220px-Garment.jpg


Yeah, okay, I am going to hell
for making fun of holy temple garments.
So I'm going to hell, so what?​
 
Top