Well, when I did the Comm Course, and later a few different versions of the TRs Courses, I never for a moment had the viewpoint that communication was about staring at people. Is that what YOU thought it was?
If one can't sit there or stand there and comfortably observe, one will not be able to operate from any position of stability. I think Hubbard defined confront as "being able to easily face or comfortably perceive". Both are prerequisites to any decent living or working. If you can't even be there comfortably with what is there, well . . .you might as well pack it in. THAT is a prerequisite to just about anything else.
Oh yeah, "to face without flinching or avoiding". That sounds like a good thing to me. The idea of confront, to me, as I understood it, was to be able to "be there comfortably, with nothing else". That is ALL it means until one ADDS to it.
Like any "tool" it all depends HOW one uses it. Now, granted, there is much about Scientology that nudges one towards "control". But, even control is not necessarily a bad thing. I control my car. I control by steps when I am walking on the side of a 70-degree cliff on the side of a steep mountain. I control my fingers when I play the guitar. I control the razor when I am shaving. And on and on.
The "control" that most people don't like is the type that either forces one against their will, or tricks people when they are unaware of such trickery. People don't like mind control, thought control, behavioral control, etc. People don't like manipulation parading as control.
One can communicate to make friends, to make people feel good, and to make people smile. I do it all of the time. I generally look them right in the eye - but I don't "stare" at them. And reversely, one can communicate to deceive, to spread lies and to manipulate the ideas of others.
Communication is entirely neutral. I never saw it as anything else when I did the Comm Course and TRs.
I hate to sound like Baker here, but it seems to me that what you are saying above says more about YOU than it does about the subject being discussed. Why? Because I never got any of that from what I studied. :confused2:
"Confront" as a "battle mentality" is YOUR own contribution to the subject. Now, there is no doubt that there are OTHER ideas in Scientology that frame life sort of as a battle - the whole notion of life as a game (which it is in many aspects) exists in MANY other subjects and views. Now, yes, add in the KSW lunacy of "we are fighting for our eternal salvation", and THAT adds tinges of insanity to all the rest of it. But, I have long ago thrown such ideas away.
Now about auditing. I audited some, and I worked with auditors for awhile. To me, as I understood it, and as it seemed the others understood it, people have a sorry tendency to evaluate and invalidate others in their communication, so part of the TRs were to help drill auditors to NOT do that. Thus, "muzzled TRs". Another aspect was that sometimes PCs have trouble getting through the processes. Sometimes they need some encouragement. I recently described how I "turned-on" a severe urge to puke while running an engram chain. I was PISSED. I wanted to KILL the auditor. I wanted to leave the room (blow). The auditor persisted, having done TRs before, handled my origination, and got me to keep running the chain. In the end the severe feeling of sickness vanished, and I was VERY glad that he "helped me through it" with TR3 and TR4. People might giggle at the phrase, "the way out is the way through", but guess what, sometimes it is!
Comparing actions that are designed (in some cases) to help a person face and handle past areas of upset to "police interrogation" is just so horribly disingenuous.
There is so much wrong with Scientology, that as I see it, there is no need to MAKE UP and exaggerate aspects of the more innocent and innocuous stuff, much less about the stuff that actually might be helpful.
I NEVER for a moment interpreted or used ANY of the TRs as a "fight crisis". Did you?
Now yes, GO and OSA staff take the TRs and use them in specialized versions to learn how to LIE. THAT sucks. TR-L is real. They are trained to IGNORE questions that they don't want to answer, and to misdirect attention. When some idiot stands there and bellows, "what are your crimes", he IS using TRs, but in a very STOOOOPID manner.
But for the guy on the street who walks in and does an introductory Comm Course, I would suspect that most benefit by the simple drills that help just about anybody become and remain more comfortable in his or her own skin, and address simple points like speaking clearly, not getting flustered, and persisting to get a simply question answered.
Again, the Comm Course was put together so that it would be useful and helpful to most people most of the time. Why? Sadly, NOT to help them, but to lure them into the larger scam known as Scientology. See, THAT is REALLY evil. Hubbard took the time to actually figure out valuable things that could actually benefit people, but then wrapped them up in a convoluted messy organization that was designed to entrap people.
You don't like to sound like Baker, but sometimes you do.