Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Discussion of cults generally - not specifically related to the SES or its related organisations.
JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby JAMR » Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:56 am

Bluemoon, you said,

That's what they all say! Sorry to tease you but you remind me of a young man in SES who told me he thought men are closer to God than women and when I said that must be because the SES told him so, he was quite offended and claimed that it was understanding he worked out himself! In the light of this discussion where you have been at pains to explain how we are all products of brainwashing from some source or other, I am a bit surprised that you may be underestimating the effect of 15 years in SES. I don't wish to be unkind or rude but you have been quite determined with me, and I think a little gentle push to get you to reconsider may be in order!


I probably need to give you more background as to why I made this point and disavow you of your assumptions.
As a subteen schoolboy I recall making observations where my friends would say, ‘how do you even think of this stuff”, as I would describe phenomena, mostly through logic and social things that other people would simply accept as the way things were. My insights worked really well with my role as class clown and teachers had difficulty dealing with insights that some adults were not yet aware of.

I also was able to accept other cultural practices as having no moral content, as a yong boy I would see people vilify different practices of other cultures, while I seemed to avoid following the cultural norm. As I had a British colonial upbringing, the most amusing one was being exposed to foreign cultures where the women did not shave armpits and legs, something I had no issue with. My school friends and parents were scandalised by these social violations and my acceptance of them.

My mother also noted that I had unusual awareness as a teenager wrt to social situations, however as a student I had a friend whose social insights dwarfed my own and I used to get highly frustrated when my statements or opinions were deconstructed, and my right to hold them was questioned. This forced me to examine myself in greater depth, something that was quite painful, however when I had done so, I was able to deconstruct my friends ideas and opinions, such that I was able to get him to re-evaluate his lifes direction. My parents dismissed my philosophic questions as just a phase that all idealistic students experience, more exposure to real life would soon cure my foolish questions. I never accepted this and I find myself 3 decades later with answers for many questions and finding more to understand. I also got immersed in the martial arts, travelled to Japan and China to study tai chi and karate, so when I joined SES it was really just more of the same, as many of the principles are aligned. I have also been exposed to religion through much of my life, from a Catholic school (and I was protestant) so I saw much of the hypocrisy from gay, drunken and violent priests (from which I was protected as a day scholar, the boarders had some interesting experiences). Even though my parents were not religious, I spent a few years as an adult understanding what role religion should play in my and my family’s life.

Having said that, my exposure to SES meditation and being a tutor myself, gave me some profound insights, and have definitely influenced my perspective on things (including why I am no longer a member of the SES). In my time at SES I found the time demands and mindless military type rules too much, so I dropped back levels several times, simply because the rest of my life needed to happen as well and I saw no good reason to give SES that much control over my life.

So as you can see your one-size-fits-all view on what makes my mind tick must lead back to SES, is simplistic but not really a surprise.

Knowing you are male will not make a difference, it was interesting for me to realise that I had drawn that conclusion because of your posts anyway, that is all. But I've been mistaken before on this forum.


I am also drawn to assign genders to posters and I would say you are female. As I have been in a few forums, I see a lot of gender polarised debates. The SES view on gender roles usually riled some of the women, and most of the rebellion was from women on this point. Males who left simply lost interest, whereas the women seemed more inclined to fight on principle. Having said that most of the women seemed to find comfort in the gender stereotyping of the SES, almost as a security blanket.

I am not quite sure I follow you here. I wrote my notes in a manner which explains what the ideas are regarding gender than run through SES and how the thought reform process works, which maybe what you mean by 'mechanisms' I don't know. This is why I appreciate without sight of them you are not in a position to really get to grips with my reasoning. But I have been stopped, perhaps for that very reason. So, sorry about that!


As an analogy, when science uses taxonomy to understand what makes a mammal, insect, vertebrate, monist, whatever, just what it is, basic criteria are defined to do this. This is at a deeper level that how we describe behaviours within any particular group. Your analysis is about how the SES sees and enacts gender behaviour, and while I am well aware of this, I can see thie same process underway in every social group. You might consider SES to be a cult and take the criteria of harm, unaccountable leaders. The fact I can see the same process in every social institution does not mean it does NOT happen in the SES, just that it is not something unique to the SES, its something about human behaviour, inside and outside the SES. The SES is just one instance of this.

I am not trying to question your desire to force change on the SES in the way they define or enact gender roles (although its a waste of time IMO), I am questioning the sense I get that SES does it differently. This is why I am taking you through other groups, like ‘normal’ schools (and business and politics) where members are indeed harmed and indoctrinated, and leaders are not held to account, to show that this is how humans operate. This does not mean you should stop any assault on the SES (aside from any fallout it might bring you), just noting that we all live in glass houses and also throw stones.

You mentioned that you have seen others try to effect reforms in SES particularly regarding the gender issue, which I find very interesting. It is a shame these people have not come forward on this forum.


They have been on this forum in years past, probably before your time here. I have no idea how they went, but my assumption is they failed. The others who did so were just ships passing in the night that I was exposed to over the years. I witnessed and heard accounts where women stood up for their different gender views, and in all cases were shot down. I saw one march out the same day, others hung in on principle until they too lost. However I saw one girl leave because the tutor tried to push her into speaking more. This was clearly not her thing, and she had really enjoyed her time to that point, but when the tutor (a female) pushed, she got really uncomfortable and left in the middle of the lecture, never to return. This illustrates that its not just about gender, its about an organisation that seeks to mould its member in its image. I see plenty of this at the local schools as they try to mould the kids. I am a volunteer sports coach and I work hard to get the kids to adhere to the principles of the training. I am a volunteer lifeguard and I try and get the members of the public to adhere to water and beach safety rules –our rules (ie. we know best). If they don’t want to attend under my rules they can go elsewhere. Trying to run a session with some kids or adults who are bent on playing the fool and disrupting others or being unsafe means I don’t achieve my objectives and I am the accountable leader in this case. Its my way or its the highway.

I agree with you that my approach is futile. However there is something about having to try in order to maintain ones own integrity.


This is interesting. I have often wondered how far I should push principles, then I realise that the principles under scrutiny are not mine and by crossing the road when I have the green traffic light might be my right, but my principle of self preservation will hopeful win these idealistic struggles. This is evidence of the powers struggle between individuals and groups that I noted in my earlier post. My approach as I have aged has been the realisation that its better for me to run away and fight another day. Others seem to think its better to be slain on the battlefield.

So, I always knew I may get nowhere but I did used to believe that the leaders' search for truth was genuine, which later experience led me to conclude that is not quite true. The ideas and practices are claimed to be 'Truth' and/or 'natural law' and some of the leaders and long standing members have lived out Maclarens 'dream' so they cannot admit there is anything wrong with any of it. Again I would have to refer to my notes to explain this in more detail.


Just look at every institution, either implicitly or explicitly they profess the truth. Exposing the objective truth to others does not make evolutionary sense, just as it does make sense to seek the truth for ourselves. This means that any group has to work hard on its version of the truth to get members to buy in, the SES is no different in principle to what parents do to their children, politicians to their voters, law courts, business, religions.

This is your main point on this thread, I think I'm right about that?? I think its because they claim to have the 'Truth'. So, my reasoning is it jolly well ought to be true then! Most of those others you mention are not claiming to have 'THE Truth', they don't care how they control, as long as they do. But I thought that if it was not true I should point it out to them!


See my point above. No organisation prefixes their position with “what we are telling you is a lie”, every position is presented as the truth, even when it is not in the headline. Politicians who seem to lie most of the time are often at pains to present themselves as transparent, despite an obvious trail of lies. The legal system is the formal authority on the truth. Until they rule, any criminal act is simply alleged, when they decide, then it becomes the truth. Any experience with the legal system shows this is just lip service. There is no evidence to suggest that people are motivated to be transparent to others and plenty to suggest that we should never state this when it relates to us or our organisation. Parents feed their children all sorts of untruths from Santa Claus to true romantic love.

Ha ha - yes I appreciate this was naive and now of course I appreciate also futile. But this claim to 'Truth' also has implications of omnipotence which concerned me a great deal. For I think we are moving into a time when the feminine (not 'feminist' by the way) perspective is going to be very important generally and I didn't think it was very helpful for an organisation claiming to have 'The Truth' to be going in the opposite direction.

I am a bit wary of labels unless the meaning gets clearly spelled out given the tendency of labels to get lives of their own, then people conveniently forget about the meaning.

I think what they are really protecting is 'patriarchy'. Now you might think I would be a 'matriarch' and that I don't know, on some soul level perhaps that is where I come from so to speak. But all I hoped to achieve was genuine balance between the sexes. So what if its similar everywhere? I don't think it is actually, I certainly never experienced sexism like this anywhere else and I'm a woman. Certainly not sexism that claims to be 'The Truth' and 'Natural Law'.


I cannot think of a single person , in public or private life, who is not sexist in some respect. Thats based upon a dictionary definition, and since most people have their own view on what sexism is, maybe its possible not to be sexist. I see rampant sexism most easily in schools. I have 4 teenage kids and because kids have not yet learned to cover their true motivations as well as most adults have, its everywhere. Its not just sexism, its every ism you can define, age-ism, rac-ism, merit-ism. Ism will arise whenever groups form and as long as individuals are not 100% aligned with their group, and despite our high level of blind conformity, there is still pushback from individuals when they feel their self interest is not being met. The SES is not politically correct in that they state their sexist view, at least after some period of membership, other organisations are usually more subtle, but if you scratch deep enough you will find it.

Its simple really, if the men want 'support' from the women why don't they just ask nicely? What makes them think its OK to operate a thought reform programme and use other coercive obvious and subliminal methods to obtain acquiescence to their beliefs? So there you are, that is part of my reasoning.

Because that is how humans operate. It happens through advertising, fashion, schooling, sports institutes, politics. Your ideal world has no basis outside of SES, why should it be any different inside? If I gave my kids the chance, they would have things quite different to what we prescribe. My wife and I do this in the belief that we know better than they do and to achieve this we over rule them to achieve this. This same mechanism was in play when colonialism imposed western ideals and religions in their colonies. Many women thrive under the regime of the SES and buy into its doctrine as much as you don’t.

At a public level, I found the recent debate about winners purse at Wimbledon needing to be the same for men and women as it was sexism to treat them differently. This was done, but no one argued that there should just be single event for singles and man or woman, the best players would come through, another implementation of sexism based upon the same premises. This would have had too great a cost on the elite women tennis players, and potentially across all womens sport and athletics where they are protected from competing with males. This is an example where sticking to the principles would have been too costly so it wont get pursued.

I found your last para interesting and sounds about right to me, except for I don't think the SES is the same as other organisations (as said above). Again can't tell you in any more detail why because I've been prevented. But I am sure you are right nothing much would surprise you.


Actually perhaps the most enlightening has been working with kids and having my own kids at school where you see the indoctrination process and what human nature is all about. My teenage daughters face massive amounts of sexism, and its mostly from the other girls. The intensity and nastiness between the girls and the categorisation of each other in sexist terms is something to behold. They are more subtle than the young boys and not as easy to catch in the act, but seem to have far more complex issues than the boys.

Good luck in your crusade against the SES, and its sexism.

bluemoon
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:52 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby bluemoon » Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:34 am

deleted
Last edited by bluemoon on Thu May 24, 2012 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SES London, 1990-2009, Female

actuallythere
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:05 pm

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby actuallythere » Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:48 pm

Two sides to every story.

There are plenty of narcissistic, manipulative, two-faced and negligent women in SES, and without them the abuses and breakdowns would have been impossible. In my personal experience of social groups, from the workplace to spiritual organizations, women treat each other worse than men treat women. For every condescending sexist old git, there is a woman stabbing a competitor in the back. How many women were there in Margaret Thatcher's government?

John Lennon was, allegedly, a wife-beater.

bluemoon
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:52 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby bluemoon » Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:38 pm

Hello Actuallythere,

I posted the lyrics of John Lennon's song because I happened to have just discovered this song and it seemed to illustrate JAMR's sexism points.

The musical version of the song is even more powerful, see this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS78MX8Zmdk&feature=related

I think he did hit his first wife and that is why he started the peace movement.

Bluemoon
SES London, 1990-2009, Female

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby woodgreen » Sun Jul 17, 2011 12:15 am

JAMAR - ( sorry if not a correct spelling) - could not quite follow your posts with Bluemoon but blimey seemed a bit much, given what we have said and how she has has attempted to do something, i.e. not getting why you are not saying yes we would support you if push came to shove. Post against Lambie et al if you can. Take him to court if you can.I have expressed my dissappointment but, hey , JAMRs have you grown any gonads against the SES? Would you take legal action?Not so, so far as I can pick up. Or do you expect women to do it for you? Ever examined why the male cult SES survives ,JAMR? Answer - by a) using men and b) using women , and d) by accusing disabled people , gay people and anyone who does not meet the test of being some perfect human, to have been born in this life through karma. And e) by using money. The The cult test is simple, and the SES are 100% cult. Are you willing to sign up against Lambie and the SES and even put some money in? Because that was his threat against Bluemoon, and the Forum by his default. woodgreen.
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby JAMR » Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:42 am

Bluemoon , you said
Much of what you say is further elaboration on the points you have already made and which I don't entirely agree with, but do not intend to analyse any further.

I think with regard to sexism I would say John Lennon understood it in his song 'Woman is the nigger of the world' and the SES has found a particularly vicious manifestation of sexism through a very controversial Hindu text (even within the tradition itself) which has had a great influence on them called 'The Laws of Manu' and as you have described so vividly they get rid of anyone who challenges the ideas about women. As you point out about leaving the SES, the men tend to get bored, whereas the women, because they are told there is something innately wrong with them and that they ought to be like this that and the other to suit the men, tend to either leave or fight and leave or just surrender to it as they are told to. Whether these women are really flourishing or just striking a pose or making the best of it is unclear, they would have to speak for themselves about that.

It has been an interesting discussion but as you said before cannot go any further.


The point about John Lennon misses that the same songs that could be written about scenarios where men are in compromised positions, and any scenario with gender at its core misses the point that society works continuously to suppress individuals of both genders. This often means that an issue raised by women as sexism is just socialism, or just as often due to oppression by other women.

A recent article in my local paper lists a number of issues that men face and the organisation championing this has the rather charming name, Mens Advisory Network (MAN) in place to redress these injustices. These range from the higher suicide rate of men (4x in Australia), shorter life (5-10%), males make 90% of the prison population, 80% of the homeless, and higher depression rates, etc, all of which no is really interested in. The point about this is that there is no space in society for men to be victims, and neither men themselves nor women, have any capacity to address males in this role. This mans initiative, is unlikely to get anywhere because of this, and no popular songs will ever be written to this theme. Some of the above would make for some great lyrics, but I am guessing there would be no buyers.

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby JAMR » Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:55 am

woodgreen wrote:JAMAR - ( sorry if not a correct spelling) - could not quite follow your posts with Bluemoon but blimey seemed a bit much, given what we have said and how she has has attempted to do something, i.e. not getting why you are not saying yes we would support you if push came to shove. Post against Lambie et al if you can. Take him to court if you can.I have expressed my dissappointment but, hey , JAMRs have you grown any gonads against the SES? Would you take legal action?Not so, so far as I can pick up. Or do you expect women to do it for you? Ever examined why the male cult SES survives ,JAMR? Answer - by a) using men and b) using women , and d) by accusing disabled people , gay people and anyone who does not meet the test of being some perfect human, to have been born in this life through karma. And e) by using money. The The cult test is simple, and the SES are 100% cult. Are you willing to sign up against Lambie and the SES and even put some money in? Because that was his threat against Bluemoon, and the Forum by his default. woodgreen.


Woodgreen, your post is not clear to me. Either you have not read my previous posts, or have not understood, or disagree with them, or some combination of the above. Either way you will need to make your post more coherent and structured if you want me to answer it and do it justice, as it appears somewhat rushed and heated. Responding to its current form risks me misconstruing and making strawmen where none exist, so if you can reformat it, I will respond.

bluemoon
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:52 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby bluemoon » Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:07 am

deleted
Last edited by bluemoon on Thu May 24, 2012 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SES London, 1990-2009, Female

bluemoon
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:52 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby bluemoon » Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:50 am

I just wanted to add that a book that I found very helpful in understanding the importance of the feminine is 'The return of the feminine and the world soul' by Llewellyn Vaughan-Lee. A description of the book can been viewed at this link: http://www.workingwithoneness.org/the-feminine/book-description?q=the-feminine/book-description

There is a quote at this link which ends like this:

"...In denying the feminine her sacred power and purpose, we have impoverished life on personal and global levels in ways we do not understand…. Yes, we see now the outer effects on the earth, but it is so much more difficult to recognize the inner effects, which have been devastating.” Llewellyn Vaughan-Lee

What I have been so concerned about in SES is what he says here, and that is why I have spent so much time and energy trying to address the issue.

Bluemoon
Last edited by bluemoon on Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
SES London, 1990-2009, Female

ConcernedMum
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:58 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby ConcernedMum » Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:57 am

Bluemoon - you have a very well developed muscle for responding pleasantly and playfully to someone taking a an super-humourless and very-superior attitude towards you! Your time in the SES was not wasted clearly ;) You are very patient.

bluemoon
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:52 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby bluemoon » Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:59 am

Thanks Concernedmum! And you are a real sweetie! And I mean that sincerely. Bluemoon
SES London, 1990-2009, Female

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby JAMR » Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:02 am

ConcernedMum wrote:Bluemoon - you have a very well developed muscle for responding pleasantly and playfully to someone taking a an super-humourless and very-superior attitude towards you! Your time in the SES was not wasted clearly ;) You are very patient.


I find indirect posting a curious means of communicating information, and something I never seem to able to do. You are saying you did not find anything I said funny? Did you not crack a smile at this?

It reminds me of this political joke.
“The new front bencher was attending his first parliament session and turned to the seasoned campaigner and said, “its great to be here and sit across from the enemy”, (pointing at members of the party on the other side of the house). The oldster laughed and said, ‘those aren’t the enemy, they are the opposition, the enemy are the ones sitting around you.”

ConcernedMum
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:58 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby ConcernedMum » Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:01 pm

JAMR wrote:I find indirect posting a curious means of communicating information, and something I never seem to able to do. You are saying you did not find anything I said funny? Did you not crack a smile at this?


I've started a few replies to you but overall I find I do not wish to engage with you JAMR. The world you live in sounds vaguely psychopathic to me. I think the SES does attract men with a superiority complex, (and women who wish to occupy the other end of the sado-masochistic spectrum (and who can turn the tables on others weaker than themselves in turn)). It doesn't describe everyone I've met who are or who have been involved with the SES, but it's definitely a type who are attracted to it.

Not my scene, thankfully.

woodgreen
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby woodgreen » Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:34 am

ConcernedMum wrote:
JAMR wrote:I find indirect posting a curious means of communicating information, and something I never seem to able to do. You are saying you did not find anything I said funny? Did you not crack a smile at this?


I've started a few replies to you but overall I find I do not wish to engage with you JAMR. The world you live in sounds vaguely psychopathic to me. I think the SES does attract men with a superiority complex, (and women who wish to occupy the other end of the sado-masochistic spectrum (and who can turn the tables on others weaker than themselves in turn)). It doesn't describe everyone I've met who are or who have been involved with the SES, but it's definitely a type who are attracted to it.

Not my scene, thankfully.

Thought I had lost the plot for a short while CM - but for sure JAMR is not someone I wish to post with on the Forum either. But I do have a slight tendency to react and my decision is to not get dragged down by some of the posters who go backwards. If I overstep the moderaters mark, then I will say bye, thanks, and will move on and work elsewhere against the SES. So no prob if the JAMRS, Chittanis, and others have pushed some people too far. best regards, woodgreen.
Ex-SES Member. (Member for 3 years in late nineties).

JAMR
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 6:45 am

Re: Another Guru in Deep Trouble

Postby JAMR » Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:48 am

Concerned Mum you said this,

I've started a few replies to you but overall I find I do not wish to engage with you JAMR. The world you live in sounds vaguely psychopathic to me.


Your words and actions are not aligned. However you position it, you have engaged with me, firstly in an oblique fashion through your post to BM, knowing fully that I would read this, but in doing it via proxy makes it easier to do and carries less responsibility than a direct engagement. Note that the SES points out that women cannot be relied upon to lead a frontal assault to find the truth, men are required to do this because they will take a direct path to do so. Can you see the ironic humor in that?

I note that you are suggesting that my world is psychopathic, and added to your earlier comments about my comments lacking in humour and acting in a superior fashion, this counts as three personal insults. (versus zero from me). On most websites personal comments like this usually get warnings from moderators stating that the subject should be addressed and personal vilification avoided.

Having said that, I am not insulted by your personal comments, just surprised that you have not made any attempt whatever to address the content of my posts, but instead have chosen to attack me personally. This is a major issue for forums like this, when peoples point of view is challenged, they often get personal. This is why most forums outline some rules of engagement to try and preserve the illusion that rational beings are engaged in civilised debate.

Personally I think it humanises and enriches the debate to do some mudslinging, something I have refrained from doing this far.

As you introduced the topic of psychopathy, please note you have personally insult me three times in not many more sentences, whereas my posts have focussed on the topic in hand and avoided any personal vilification of you ro any other. I admit I see forums as being too one-dimensional to spend time in social small talk and instead concentrate on the topic itself, I save the personal stuff for my flesh and blood relationships. If you are getting emotional at the disembodied, virtual words of JAMR perhaps you should spend time in wiki getting a better understanding of just what psychopathy means to your behavior.

I think the SES does attract men with a superiority complex, (and women who wish to occupy the other end of the sado-masochistic spectrum (and who can turn the tables on others weaker than themselves in turn)). Not my scene, thankfully.


Most people have an exaggerated and distorted idea of who they are so I would say its more accurate to say that SES attracts those (men and women) with intellectual pretensions, nothing more pretentious than saying you are a practical philosopher. The superiority you saw is also something shared by any group that believes in a superior being, so any religion will work well for someone who needs to think that they have salvation secure and are superior to any barbarians who have not.

The profile of women in SES allows them to avoid responsibility or formal positions and the rights of males, but still reap the material benefits. This is not too different from most socially apolitical women outside the SES. The only difference in the SES is that they openly state that their lesser position is OK and something ordained. In general society this is a de facto position, while the stated position is the basis for political feminist concerns about equality. Turning the tables on those weaker than us is core human nature. We only impose upbringing upon our children because we have more power than they do, human society and life overall is a power based hierarchy, so nothing unique to SES here. Insulting people on forums is just another way of seeing if you can inflict power and hurt on another. If you choose the wrong target you might get more than you bargained for.

It doesn't describe everyone I've met who are or who have been involved with the SES, but it's definitely a type who are attracted to it.


I don’t know enough about your background with the SES, my experience was meeting some great people there, some not so great, and aside from a real or misguided search for something called SES truth, were not very different to other non religious groups I associate with.


Return to “Cults and religious organisations generally”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests