"The History of Credibility Attacks Against Former Cult Members" - Professor Stephen A. Kent

Discussion in 'News and Current Events' started by Anonymous, Aug 1, 2011.

  1. Anonymous Member

    If this were the mid-'90s, you'd be 3 for 3. Smurf has paid back what he owed.
    Not so M&M.

    Again, I believe Smurf has long since changed his ways. I first ran into him on ARS in the bad old days. It's not the same Smurf.

    Not so M&M, though it's better, agreed, to have them on this side of the razor wire.

    I'd take a confession of any kind from M&M.
    So far, bupkis.
    • Like Like x 1

  2. I agree. But I still wouldn't cite him academically unless there was corroboration for what he said, even though I'd be inclined to believe him.

    M&M I don't tend to trust anything they say unless it is corroborated.
    • Like Like x 4
  3. Anonymous Member

    < samefag

    Trust, but verify: DOX always.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Anonymous Member

    Back when Smurf appeared here, better believe that I was one of people pointing out his previous history. That kind of back-and-forth-and-back history was important for Anons to know, so I posted it. And that due diligence done, then I shut up.

    Since then I've been impressed. He's been open about what he did, and his information and advice has seemed good. Would I trust him with personal information and such? Fuck no! But then, I don't give that out to anyone anyway.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Smurf Member

    Sorry to break it to you. Your momma already knows you're gay. The Ken doll was a dead give-away. :)
  6. Anonymous Member

    Katy Perry supports Smurf
    • Like Like x 3
  7. Anonymous Member

    Has this article been published somewhere?
  8. dingodog Member

    i have no idea because my brain just fell onto the floor

    • clams love the never trust an ex concept
    • exes have written books and set up websites with "inside info"
    • if you can't trust an ex, you cannot trust any of this data or testimony**
    • that works for the clams
    • that discredits the exes who are telling the truth
    • they don't want the spotlight because they are spies
    • they want the spotlight to look like they are not spies
    **copyrighted material/court docs are the exception?
  9. Anonymous Member

    Lewis' reputation is shot as it is. First off he's a cultie himself (leading a breakaway group from the 3HO, a Sikh yoga sort of mindfuck), secondly he went to Japan to defend the bloody Aum Shinrykio AFTER the sarin attack in Tokyo. He was apparently convinced at the "sincerity" and "honesty" of the (get this!) top level representatives he had talked to. Newer occurred to you that cult leaders could LIE, did it Lewis? He was famously quoted as saying Aum was "Japans Waco", indicating the whole thing was a government plot to get rid of a "non-conformist new religious movement". A good read on his role here:
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 1
  11. Anonymous Member

  12. Anonymous Member

    It should be shot, but there's an academic circle jerk of people with reputations as problematic as his own, who cover each others back and protect their status as small fish in a tiny pond.
  13. Anonymous Member

    U mad, bra?
  14. cfanon Member

    Member Since: Jan 1, 2000
    Messages: 202,806
    Likes Received: 35,741
    Trophy Points: 0
  15. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  16. Anonymous Member

  17. Perry Bulwer Member

    I'm one of those ex-cult members Kent is talking about in this paper, though he does not mention me specifically. I was conned into joining the Children of God when I was 16. I eventually escaped in 1991 and went on to earn a law degree. I wrote an article that was published in Cultic Studies Review to fill in some of the gaps and provide a perspective, that of a former member, not found in James D. Chancellor's book Life in The Family: an oral history of the Children of God. I've put my article in response to that book on my website at:

    At the end of the article on my site, after the endnotes, you can read Chancellor's response to it, A Response to Perry Bulwer’s Evaluation of Life in the Family, and my reply to Chancellor's response, A Rejoinder to James Chancellor’s Response to My Article, both of which were also published in that same issue. Chancellor's response to my article was basically to question and cast doubt on my credibility, which I challenged him on in my rejoinder.

    Here's an excerpt from my article on the subject of the credibility of former members:

    The numbers within that excerpt refer to endnotes. Here is endnote 33 from that excerpt:

    I have two other blogs. Chain The Dogma, where I write my own opinions, and Religion and Child Abuse News, where I archived news reports for four years on religion related child abuse, including many on Scientology.
    • Like Like x 9
  18. Random guy Member

    Thank you for what you are doing, Perry!
    • Like Like x 1
  19. dingodog Member

  20. Anonymous Member

    Bookmarked for later reading, thanks
  21. AnonLover Member

    Nice to see you in these here parts Perry! I had used & quoted your CSR article on Children of God a few years after it was published as apart of term paper project i did on modern day cults in college. I also subscribe to your child abuse blog & read it regularly, but i hadnt connected the two & didnt realize that was why your name seemed familiar when I first found it.

    Your persistence over the years is inspiring, thanks for doing what you do.

  22. 3rdMan Member

    In the field of psychology, addressing ex-cult members and relying upon their dialogue for information and experiences for research purposes requires taking these things under consideration. I am glad he objectively addressed both issues: First is to ere on the side of caution, but also to be critical on rhetoric aimed to discredit ex-cult members.
    • Like Like x 2
  23. Anonymous Member

    Like the man said, triangulation. Verification of facts from multiple sources.

    Known round here as "dox".
  24. Ann O'Nymous Member

    Member Since: Jan 14, 2011
    Messages: 1,384
    Likes Received:948
    Trophy Points: 0
    • Like Like x 1
  25. cfanon Member

    Like you quoted... I inb4'd ;)

    • Like Like x 1
  26. Perry Bulwer Member

    Thanks, AnonLover. Sometime after that CSR article was published I came across a blog comment somewhere quoting an excerpt from it on the issue of former member reliability. Maybe that was you. I'm afraid my persistence has waned a bit, as I have now stopped adding new articles on religion related child abuse to the archive. I explain some of the reasons for that in the last entry there, which is also the home page. However, I still get traffic there and still publish relevant comments that add new information or insights to the story. I also add links to and excerpts from recent articles that are directly related to articles in the archive. I add those to the comment section of the most recent article on the subject. For example, this morning I came across an article on a growing movement among Jewish people of all persuasions to reject the ritual abuse of circumcision. I have many articles in the archive on that subject, so I posted the url and an excerpt from that new article in the comments section of the latest article on circumcision. Here's a link to that post to illustrate what I mean:

    Since I now only update that archive through the comments section, subscribing to the comments feed is the best way to keep track of anything new posted there.

    Also, I'm sure most on this site are already aware of the 1995 study commissioned by Scientology on the reliability of former cult members: This is one of the studies Kent refers to in his presentation on this issue when writes:

    • Like Like x 3
  27. DeathHamster Member

    Of course no one is going to offer kool-aid. That would be out-exchange.
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins