SRA's

[Div6]

A long about 1990-91 a new term entered the Scn vocabulary - SRA.
This stood for "Severe Reality Adjustment". It's application varied depending upon where you were in the Scn 'food chain'. My first exposure to it was when the Mission Holder I was working under returned from Flag after some Nots.
She screamed non-stop at another staff member for a full 30 minutes over some issue (I don't recall). All of the other staff tried to ignore it, but she was quite powerful. Afterwards, she explained that it was 'causative' and 'appropriate' and 'how LRH handeled things' on the ship.

Later, the term went into parlance in communications between SO Management entities (FOLOs) and Org terminals (The reg needs an SRA, etc).

Apparently, during the DM takeover, gang-bang SRA's including physical violence were the order of the day. At the Folo\Cl V org level, I only experienced verbal abuse.

In talking to a few C\s'es, they were always complaining about how they had to do Int Repairs after a Sea Ogre had come through...apparently they forcibly exteriorized a few people with the volume.

I'd be curious to hear other viewpoints on this.

 

[Emma]

Uugh!

When I saw the title of this thread I got a fear in my belly.

I saw many an Exec dish out an SRA to some poor bastard, and I got a few of my own. It was just another term for "scream at them until you break them". It was probably the worst thing to deal with in Scn and as the years went by, they became more and more frequent.

 

[Mick Wenlock]

A long about 1990-91 a new term entered the Scn vocabulary - SRA.
This stood for "Severe Reality Adjustment". It's application varied depending upon where you were in the Scn 'food chain'. My first exposure to it was when the Mission Holder I was working under returned from Flag after some Nots.
She screamed non-stop at another staff member for a full 30 minutes over some issue (I don't recall). All of the other staff tried to ignore it, but she was quite powerful. Afterwards, she explained that it was 'causative' and 'appropriate' and 'how LRH handeled things' on the ship.

Later, the term went into parlance in communications between SO Management entities (FOLOs) and Org terminals (The reg needs an SRA, etc).

Apparently, during the DM takeover, gang-bang SRA's including physical violence were the order of the day. At the Folo\Cl V org level, I only experienced verbal abuse.

In talking to a few C\s'es, they were always complaining about how they had to do Int Repairs after a Sea Ogre had come through...apparently they forcibly exteriorized a few people with the volume.

I'd be curious to hear other viewpoints on this.

The term was around long before 90/91 - it was in common usage in the mid 80's at the FLB.

This is one of those things that I heard about but never saw. I certainly never experienced it.

I find it kind of fascinating reading all these discussions because, while I think my Scientology and SO experience was personally unproductive and counter productive and damaging to me personally, this was not because of things inflicted on me. My experience on the RPF, as I have described, was mundane and, by and large OK. I never, once, in my entire Scientology history ever saw anyone get hit, spat on, or physically abused in any way - and it certainly never happened to me. The only experience I personally have which falls into that sort of area was the gang bang finance gestapo sec check in 1982 - and surprisingly enough I got an apology for that (later).

Yet, at the same time, I don't doubt that these things have happened - I know several people who have been at the receiving end of physical abuse and told me about it in recent times.

It is fascinating an disturbing - at the same time.

 

[Pooks]

I never personally recieved an SRA, but that's probably because everyone knew I would absolutely not put up with something like that.

I remember hearing the expression and I know that Execs on staff would yell and scream and I even wrote a few KR's up on those that did. But then I remember sometime in the late 90's the term "SRA" and "face ripping"
was no longer allowed to be used. Only the term was forbidden but certanly
the actions continued.

When asked why those terms were no longer to be used, I was told that
the terms were "off policy" and LRH never used them so they were "squirrel".

LOL!

Sometimes I look back and wonder how I put up with all that craziness.



Patty P

 

[Romuva]

So there's an actual term for this?-SRA.

I remember being on a street walking away from a building(how symbolic) when a scientologist was screaming at an employee for well over 15-20 minutes.

It was the most bizarre experience ,at the time.

sorry folks... SRA= just another example.




besides I thought SRA were those reading supplements some people studied
when they were in school

 

[KMomma]

OMG...this reminded me of a time that the Dr. was literally screaming and yelling at another employee (a Scientologist) for a good 20 minutes. All of the wogs in the office found it disturbing. The next day I told the Dr. that we all found it disturbing and he said it was just a cycle to get someone who is out of reality back into reality. And when I talked to the other employee she told me that she needed that!

Actually, a wog employee quit because of that incident too. She had only been there a week, maybe less. She just never came back after she left for the day.

 

[everfree]

I may be wrong, but I think SRA was in the abbreviation section in the back of the green management dictionary, though it didn't really explain what it is.

I saw and received - and even gave a couple of mini SRAs. The only one that I know of that included physical contact was when the Chief Officer of FSO (a tall, muscular man) pushed one of my friends into a wall because he had got up to get a dictionary instead of drilling. But plenty of screaming.

 

[freet43]

I left in the late 70s, but saw that at FSO myself. I was never on the receiving end of it there, and I don't recall that going on at the mission.

I took that as one of the major differences between the SO and mission staff.

The fact that someone who is supposedly OT whatever, or Class whatever, would behave in such a manner was a serious outpoint - and seeing that behavior was the beginning of the end for me in that organization.

 

[Lulu Belle]

But then I remember sometime in the late 90's the term "SRA" and "face ripping" was no longer allowed to be used.

I heard that too (about "SRA"). That it was a "squirrel term" and was not to be used.

 

[Alan]

First time I heard of SRA was in 1981, I believe it originated at Hemet.....a couple of the CMO Execs used it.

 

[lionheart]

Yes, I first came across the term in 1981 when an org's ED gleefully told me about SRA's being used by CMO. When he explained what it stood for with a relish in his voice, I replied that it sounded like deliberately ARCXing someone.

Of course, like so much SO nonsense it was a complete violation of the published theory and practice of the spiritual technology. The SO and those closest to "source" were always the worst squirrels!

 

[Bea Kiddo]

They are so ingrained in me, that I am still strugling with stopping myself. After being out over 3 years, I am getting better. But I am concious of what effect it creates and regret it always. I just wish I weren't raised like that cause it's hard to change long time habits like that. Even my mom has given me SRA's.

 

[ExScnDude]

While on an internship at Flag I ended up in cramming over some auditor sin - don't remember what it was - the cramming officer started yelling at me in a threatening way during the cramming interview. You know, red-faced antagonism, the type of behavior you might see in a child.

Maybe these type of staff listen to "The Missed Withhold" tape - the one where LRH practically has a psychotic break - and then think that's how they should behave towards other people.

Anyway, my purpose at the time was to just graduate and get the hell back to my org, so I didn't get into with him.

I realized after his little tirade that he was basically just an asshole and that if one wanted to complete the internship as soon as possible the idea was to stay out of cramming.

 

[everfree]

>Maybe these type of staff listen to "The Missed Withhold" tape - the one where LRH practically has a psychotic break - and then think that's how they should behave towards other people.

I'm pretty sure the one you mean is "The Missed Missed Withhold", from the BC but on Level II as well.

Another is a Class VIII tape called "Standard Tech Defined".

Another is a PL called "Leadership" where Hubbard says that instead of trying to be wise, leaders need to be able to get mad (in stark contrast to his earlier writing such as "An Essay on Management" where maintaining "group ARC" is stressed.

Another is one of the basic HAS policies -- "HAS Basic Actions" maybe? -- where he gives EOs permission to "take it out on someone" if they feel stopped. Who ever heard of a tame EO?

Amerliorating that somewhat is the "Ethics Presence" PL where he says to temper the lightning with some sunshine, but even that it's pretty clear he endorses the use of anger for the most part.

Also ameliorating it was an Apollo OOD that was made into a PL a few years back where he says the staff are his friends so should be treated well.

And of course many many writings on proper communication and ARC.

But for the most part, the CofS culture is for managers to pay more attention on the "get angry" type PLs.

Edit: I just remembered another one, there was a black on white - FO probably though I don't remember for sure - about Emergencies. It was something to the effect that in emergencies one sometimes has to take drastic actions, and it's silly for people who have been rescued from a possible sinking boat to look hurt that they were screamed at (and of course in CofS and especially SO it's pretty much ALWAYS an emergency). If someone knows what I'm refering to, an exact quote would be nice - it's been more than 10 years since I read it.

 

[ExScnDude]

I once saw the ED of my org slap one of his juniors and scream at him for 15 minutes.

Again, this type of behavior is just inexcusable and more like something Tony Soprano might do to one of his underlings.

On tech lines, I eventually found out about the majority of these ranting and raving incidents. I can not recall that even one resulted in any beneficial outcome. Usually, the victim was much less willing to remain loyal to the perpetrator.

 

[ExScnDude]

Wow! everfree - you have quite a good memory. I haven't been in Scientology for so long now - I don't have many of the tape titles in my head anymore!

 

[lionheart]

When they shout and rant and forcefully "adjust" your reality they are simply dramatising Hubbard. He has overwhlemed the poor fools with his valence. His evil purposes live on, I'm sorry to say.

 

[everfree]

Lemme add a few reflections on SRAs in CofS

I outlined a few of my experiences with them in the FSO OOT thread, here:
http://forum.exscn.net/showpost.php?p=5338&postcount=20

As a result of seeing how the top RTC/CMO and even FSO execs operated through the use of force, threat and anger, it didn't seem right to me, at all.

I joined CofS staff because I wanted to help people. When I first became a supervisor, I had to be constantly corrected on being "tough". The "What is a course?" PL for Supervisors said that the successful Supervisor is "tough", not a "kindly old fumbler".

Well, I wanted to be kind and didn't take to being tough. I eventually got used to it, and developed a "supervisor presence" I think, but

So all the screaming didn't sit well with me. As a good little CofS staff member, it got me thinking about "what Ron would do?" so I looked up every single reference I could find about screaming, getting mad, properly handling of juniors etc. That's why I could rattle off so many of the references off the top of my head - I really researched this.

What I concluded was that Ron did use screaming and anger "to impinge", and most definitely endorsed it's use to "get things done". I still thought that most of what I witnessed was crazy and not done well.

But some of those execs seemed to be able to get things done, and our org was not even close to getting enough done to be able to support itself, so maybe, just maybe, those crazy vicious execs were partially right - maybe we needed more of that in our org.

So although those execs had been crazy and excessive about it, I could use my anger in some cases to "blow through" "counter-intention" and "other-intention" to get things done. As well as perhaps to handle confusion of emergencies to organize things quickly.

So at my org, I tried a couple judicious, very mild compared to what I had seen, SRAs. And you know what? My stats went up! Way up! I got lots done! Blew through "CI" like nobody's business.

So I thought I would be recognized as an upstat for finding and correctly applying LRH policy to handle a situation and increase production. I was not. I was complained about and got removed from post.

"But, but, I was applying policy and got results!"

"But people are complaining." So I was treated rather roughly, because obviously if I was getting mad at people it must mean that my ethics were out...

So I didn't do it any more. I hadn't really wanted to be like that anyways.

One of the people was actually a dear dear friend of mine. I went and found her and we looked at each other for a moment then gave each other a big hug and I told her I was sorry.

The other person was also someone I was pretty close to as well. I ended up apologizing to them as well.

Thus ended my great SRA experiment.

I was put on a post where all I had to do was help people and didn't any longer have to worry about being tough or even "getting things done" really. Just helping the person in front of me, which is all I'd wanted in the first place.

I felt much better. But I continued pondering my SRA experiences. Why hadn't I been recognized for the great production I'd accomplished? Well, to start the rest of the staff members at my org mostly just wanted to help people to, and screaming at them no matter how judiciously, isn't helping those people. And most of them had never seen how their management operates, so tended to ignore the "get mad" policies about giving people nightmares if they contemplate squirreling and attacking.

Which is how it should be. Decent people will tend to protest harming of people.

This got me pondering even further; if even other staff members protested it, what must it look like to outsiders? Perhaps not everyone who criticizes Scn/CofS is really a criminal as Hubbard says, but maybe some are really decent people who see what appears to be harm, so protest against it?

What else might that apply to besides SRAs? How about the near utter neglect of staff - despite the millions of dollars brought in by CofS? Enforced disconnection? Or even discouraging young people to join staff instead of going to college? Lack of health care for SO members? Or taking all of grandma's retirement fund so she can "go free"?

I realized that there were many other things besides SRAs that I had originally not liked about CofS but had over time become acclimatized until they no longer bothered me so much -- unless I really thought about them. Mostly they just didn't register much any more.

I started re-evaluating what CofS was really like, if I stopped ignoring the things I didn't like and just looked at it freshly from an outside viewpoint. I decided that from an outside viewpoint, despite the attempts of many decent people within CofS to help people, overall CofS was the coldest, most vicious organization I'd ever been around in my life by a large margin.

At that point, I was pretty much out the door, though it took a while before I finally left. I just couldn't countenance the amount of hurt I'd seen brought to people over the years.

It is taught in Scn "Never fear to hurt another in a just cause." Well, to CofS a "just cause" is anything that slows down the expansion of CofS - like spending the money to provide healthcare or retirement for SO rather than on more promotion.

I like better the -- admittedly often ignored -- medical ideal of "first, do no harm". I suspect that if CofS had adopted that ideal it would have turned out a loooot healthier than it did.

OK, done rambling for now...

 

[ExScnDude]

Quality rambling, everfree!

I should have known you were a sup the way you rattled off those references.

My story is very similar. I was an auditor and C/S for many years at a CL V org, and had trained at upper orgs a dozen times During these training cycles, I observed that the more senior the org, the more you'd run into staff who were dramatizing being "unreasonable".

The most vicious behavior I ever encountered was at Flag - with ITO being a close second.

After a couple of decades of this (I guess I'm a slow learner) I finally had this epiphany: If one assumes that the most senior orgs most closely resemble Scientology's "new civilization" (after all, these senior orgs are closest to source), and if the behavior and condition of the individuals working in these senior orgs are any indication at all of what that "new civilization" would look like, then it would be immoral to contribute in any way to that goal. My original purpose in Scientology was never to propel some tin pot dictator and his gang of thugs to world dominance.

Therefore, "Exit - Stage Right".

 

[Zinjifar]

After a couple of decades of this (I guess I'm a slow learner) I finally had this epiphany: If one assumes that the most senior orgs most closely resemble Scientology's "new civilization" (after all, these senior orgs are closest to source), and if the behavior and condition of the individuals working in these senior orgs are any indication at all of what that "new civilization" would look like, then it would be immoral to contribute in any way to that goal. My original purpose in Scientology was never to propel some tin pot dictator and his gang of thugs to world dominance.

Therefore, "Exit - Stage Right".

That sounds like a 'cog' even a 'wog' could grasp

It reminds me of one of the few statements made by the notorious 'Bernie' that I considered hearfelt and honest:

'I quit Scientology once I realized that I didn't want to live in a world run like an Org'.

I think it's completely reasonable to see 'Scientology' as *best* expressed in the Sea Org, although, I don't doubt that 'never-been' SO Scns would disagree.

Certainly the *Church* of Scientology and Hubbard Himself saw it so, and, it's fair to assume that that *is* the best example of the 'Clear Planet'.

Zinj