Every situation is unique. This is so important to remember, and something that causes pause for me now as I look at the actions taken by those at FDR. How is it that for each unique situation, so many at FDR opt for the same solution?

My case is unique as well, and so it is interesting that you should generalize, appearing confident that you doubt "anyone at FDR would actually oppose" my decision to refoo. I am quite sure that there are people there who would oppose my decision, and feel very strongly about it. There is one person who was the strongest influence during my decision to defoo, who I am positive feels that my decision to refoo is corrupt and horrific.

Every case is different, I am sure. It would be nice if every case would be treated differently.

Danny, I'm not saying it's stupid. I'm saying:

1. What Mrs. Weed did and what is done is this thread hardly constitutes facing people who've actually been "scammed". It's closer to slander (especially in Weed case) or talking behind one's back about how manipulated he was. You can't know individual's story entirely before facing him.

2. Unlike FDR, scientology does involve quite a bit of actual coercion, so the comparison there is fairly invalid.

See what Nelle said.

Nelle, I am not so confident that the number of people opting for the same solution is actually all that disproportionate to those who choose differently. I myself am one example of someone who chose differently and I've seen others. The fact that deFOOing is a popular topic doesn't make deFOOing just as common of a practice. It's simply something everyone who reads Real Time Relationships (one of the most relevant of Stef's books) naturally considers and discusses, hence creating so much bandwidth on that topic alone).

Even if this solution WAS chosen so many times it is still quite possible that this is because of a genuine necessity for it, but that would delve to a large discussion on what exactly constitutes abuse. I am convinced that lying to a child, exercising double standards, terrifying screaming and of course ANY bit of physical violence all constitute abuse whereas most in the world today would find double standards, for instance, completely acceptable because, you know, parent is an authority and children ought to respect their parents, as if no further justification was necessary.

EDIT: Some even go so far to justify hitting a child every now and then. I never justify that. If you can't raise a child without violence, terror inspiring screaming, lies and double standards, don't have it. This is something I expressed in my FDR topic: "Babies aren't miracles". Children should be a rarity reserved for those who already grew into virtuous persons themselves and have absolute confidence in their ability to raise another human being.

And by your own admission of each being a unique case even if it was an often chosen solution you can't exactly claim it wasn't the right one for any of these cases.

About anyone at FDR not opposing your decision, I stand corrected. It's of course possible, but my impression is that deFOOing isn't some sort of an FDR "rite of passage" that those who don't do or those who do it but revert must pass before being "accepted" by the FDR community. Such implication is typical cult accusation rhetoric and has nothing to do with reality.

I wonder what the results would be if a comparative study was done. Say two test groups with people of comparable backgrounds, at comparable ages, etc were gathered for comparative purposes (one group from FDR, and one seeking traditional psychological treatment). It would be interesting to see how these two groups would compare, particularly in regards to how they maintain or cut ties with family and friends. Do you think there might be a significant difference between the two groups? Of course, this is all hypothetical....but it would be interesting to see.

There certainly may be significant differences, but for the test to be truly complete one would have to examine the traditional psychologists themselves for signs of justification for any of the mentioned abusive practices.

The reason is that the whole problem may be exactly in what constitutes "traditional" treatment if it stems from "traditional" way of thinking.

Regardless though, Stef does recommend traditional therapy as well so it's quite possible that it is often the combination of traditional with Stef's non-traditional methodology which ultimately provides people with the data necessary for their decisions. It's possible that the combination of Stef's non-traditional and thus non-conforming ideas with traditional therapy is for some people the perfect and safest way to gain necessary information to build their decisions on.

Isn't it true that Stef and Christina provide instructions on finding a good therapist?

When I was a member, I followed those hints, and my first therapist, even after following those suggestions, was eventually telling me that my friend from FDR, and FDR was abusive, and that I should move on. I left my therapist because I was afraid anyone who would tell me that must be a bad therapist. I wonder how many at FDR have done that. Hard to tell.

Then when my second therapist told me the same thing....well, I listened.

http://freedomainradio.com/board/forums/t/18600.aspx?PageIndex=1

This thread for instance. There are all sorts of subtleties going on upon close examination.

Is there judgment of the parents religious beliefs? Do we know that the son feels upset because he feels the parents' religious choices are corrupt? Obviously. Do we also know that perhaps the parents are upset because the son is judging their religious beliefs/struggles harshly? Interesting question that we don't really know the answer to. Why does the son feel compelled to judge his parents' struggle to understand the greater questions of the universe so harshly? It is difficult for many to understand whether or not there is a god/God. The struggle is more difficult for some than others. Is it really so difficult to have compassion for those that struggle? If the question were so easy and obvious to answer, why does it persist as a major point of debate and contention among all humans? Why then is it necessary to judge one who is honestly struggling with this question? Could this be considered judgmental? Is this son being influenced toward defooing from his parents?

http://freedomainradio.com/board/forums/t/14566.aspx?PageIndex=1

What about this thread? Do you think there was anything going on here that could be considered manipulative or coercive?

Nelle, as you say it's hard to tell for a specific case and for your case I could still apply the differential between "traditional" methodologies or ways of thinking and "new" ones used at FDR in which case the question would be which is better.

If I make the assumption that the new methodology is better then I could blame your therapists for simply following an objectively invalid way of thinking.

If I make the assumption that the way of thinking employed by the therapists is indeed objectively superior then it's likely their advice was valid, of course.

It could also be said that you misinterpreted therapists advice or misrepresented your mental/emotional situation in your sessions with them etc. But clearly I can't know your case to have any certainty.

Right now I'm not necessarily making either of the assumptions regarding superiority of one or the other, just that the way of thinking employed at FDR tends to be largely correct according to my own analysis so far.

I'll read those threads.

Thank you for being willing to read.

There are so many threads that could be included as evidence of FDR influencing its members. These are only two of many examples.

http://freedomainradio.com/board/forums/t/18634.aspx?PageIndex=2

This one is particularly enlightening. Notice how Nojus is encouraged to confront his friends with their "own corruption". To Nojus' credit, he chooses to resist this manipulation. Perhaps there are others who would not have resisted so admirably.

I love how Nojus says, "Sounds like bigotry to me".

Wow Nelle, I've just read the first thread and I seriously wonder why I am even bothering with you guys... The conversation you linked had the amount of honesty that is rarely seen and there was indeed quite a bit of compassion going on across the board, by others for the original poster and by him towards his dad. As far as I can see he still didn't decide to deFOO, despite the fact that his mom not only physically abused him (to bleeding), but apparently remains quite controlling of his dad and probably him as well.

As I was reading I kept trying to detect these "subtleties" you speak of, but all I could see is what appears to be honest expression and quite a bit of effort spent to be balanced and not act too rashly.

nelle wrote:

Why does the son feel compelled to judge his parents' struggle to understand the greater questions of the universe so harshly?

You think that was "harsh"? To me it was obvious that he tried pretty hard to be as diplomatic as he could in his confrontations. If you refer more to his private judgment what do you expect him to do, to pretend that he cares less than he does? It just seems to me like you would rather have him be more shallow and pretend. You clearly missed the entire point of Real Time Relationships (if you've read it), because if you did you wouldn't be asking this.

nelle wrote:

Is it really so difficult to have compassion for those that struggle?

There obviously WAS compassion. If you think that compassion equals pretending to care less just so you don't offend then you don't understand what compassion is. Compassion is basically empathy or understanding of how someone feels and thus trying to be as diplomatic as you can in your confrontations. But it is not about pressuring yourself to feel less of what you do just because someone else doesn't feel good because of that.

nelle wrote:

Why then is it necessary to judge one who is honestly struggling with this question? Could this be considered judgmental? Is this son being influenced toward defooing from his parents?

Judging, judging, judging. You are the one judging here. What he did was express his honest feelings as diplomatically as he could. It is you who apparently judge certain kinds of feelings as "judgmental" and thus "off limits" or at least worth repressing a little.

I can't believe this.

nelle wrote:

Is this son being influenced toward defooing from his parents?

He is being influenced to act rationally and diplomatically while not dismissing the truth of his own feelings. And he is doing a damn good job of being rational, diplomatic, honest and true to himself I might add.

Nothing else is happening in that thread whatsoever.