BONEWITS CULT DANGER EVALUATION FRAME, as written by Issac Bonewits

The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame (Version 2.6) Copyright © 1979, 2001, 2004 c.e., Isaac Bonewits Introduction Events in the last several decades have clearly indicated just how dangerous some religious and secular groups (usually called “cults” by those opposed to them) can be to their own members as well as to anyone else whom they can influence. “Brainwashing,” beatings, child abuse, rapes, murders, mass suicides, military drilling and gunrunning, meddling in civil governments, international terrorism, and other crimes have been charged against leaders and members of many groups, and in far too many cases those accusations have been correct. None of this has been very surprising to historians of religion or to other scholars of what are usually labled “new” religions (no matter how old they may be in their cultures of origin). Minority groups, especially religious ones, are often accused of crimes by members of the current majority. In many ways, for example, the “Mormons” were the “Moonies” of the 19th century — at least in terms of being an unusual minority belief system that many found “shocking” at the time — and the members of the Unification Church could be just as “respectable” a hundred years from now as the Latter Day Saints are today. Nonetheless, despite all the historical and philosophical warnings that could be issued, ordinary people faced with friends or loved ones joining an “unusual” group, or perhaps contemplating joining one themselves, need a relatively simple way to evaluate just how dangerous or harmless a given group is liable to be, without either subjecting themselves to its power or judging it solely on theological or ideological grounds (the usual method used by anti-cult groups). In 1979 I constructed an evaluation tool which I now call the “Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame” or the “ABCDEF” (because evaluating these groups should be elementary). A copy was included in that year’s revised edition of my book, Real Magic. I realize its shortcomings, but feel that it can be effectively used to separate harmless groups from the merely unusual-to-the-observer ones. Feedback from those attempting to use the system has always been appreciated. Indirect feedback, in terms of the number of places on and off the Net this ABCDEF has shown up, has been mostly favorable. For example, it was chosen by and is now displayed on the website of the Institute for Social Inventions, who paraphrased it for their “Best Ideas — A compendium of social innovations” listing. The purpose of this evaluation tool is to help both amateur and professional observers, including current or would-be members, of various organizations (including religious, occult, psychological or political groups) to determine just how dangerous a given group is liable to be, in comparison with other groups, to the physical and mental health of its members and of other people subject to its influence. It cannot speak to the “spiritual dangers,” if any, that might be involved, for the simple reason that one person’s path to enlightenment or “salvation” is often viewed by another as a path to ignorance or “damnation.” As a general rule, the higher the numerical total scored by a given group (the further to the right of the scale), the more dangerous it is likely to be. Though it is obvious that many of the scales in the frame are subjective, it is still possible to make practical judgments using it, at least of the “is this group more dangerous than that one?” sort. This is if all numerical assignments are based on accurate and unbiased observation of actual behavior by the groups and their top levels of leadership (as distinct from official pronouncements). This means that you need to pay attention to what the secondary and tertiary leaders are saying and doing, as much (or more so) than the central leadership — after all, “plausible deniability” is not a recent historical invention. This tool can be used by parents, reporters, law enforcement agents, social scientists and others interested in evaluating the actual dangers presented by a given group or movement. Obviously, different observers will achieve differing degrees of precision, depending upon the sophistication of their numerical assignments on each scale. However, if the same observers use the same methods of scoring and weighting each scale, their comparisons of relative danger or harmlessness between groups will be reasonably valid, at least for their own purposes. People who cannot, on the other hand, view competing belief systems as ever having possible spiritual value to anyone, will find the ABCDEF annoyingly useless for promoting their theological agendas. Worse, these members of the Religious Reich and their fellow theocrats will find that their own organizations (and quite a few large mainstream churches) are far more “cult-like” than many of the minority belief systems they so bitterly oppose. It should be pointed out that the ABCDEF is founded upon both modern psychological theories about mental health and personal growth, and my many years of participant observation and historical research into minority belief systems. Those who believe that relativism and anarchy are as dangerous to mental health as absolutism and authoritarianism, could (I suppose) count groups with total scores nearing either extreme (high or low) as being equally hazardous. As far as dangers to physical well-being are concerned, however, both historical records and current events clearly indicate the direction in which the greatest threats lie. This is especially so since the low-scoring groups usually seem to have survival and growth rates so small that they seldom develop the abilities to commit large scale atrocities even had they the philosophical or political inclinations to do so. The Advanced Bonewits’ Cult Danger Evaluation Frame (version 2.6) Factors: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Low High 1 Internal Control: Amount of internal political and social power exercised by leader(s) over members; lack of clearly defined organizational rights for members. 1 _________________________ 2 External Control: Amount of external political and social influence desired or obtained; emphasis on directing members’ external political and social behavior. 2 _________________________ 3 Wisdom/Knowledge Claimed by leader(s); amount of infallibility declared or implied about decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations; number and degree of unverified and/or unverifiable credentials claimed. 3 _________________________ 4 Wisdom/Knowledge Credited to leader(s) by members; amount of trust in decisions or doctrinal/scriptural interpretations made by leader(s); amount of hostility by members towards internal or external critics and/or towards verification efforts. 4 _________________________ 5 Dogma: Rigidity of reality concepts taught; amount of doctrinal inflexibility or “fundamentalism;” hostility towards relativism and situationalism. 5 _________________________ 6 Recruiting: Emphasis put on attracting new members; amount of proselytizing; requirement for all members to bring in new ones. 6 _________________________ 7 Front Groups: Number of subsidiary groups using different names from that of main group, especially when connections are hidden. 7 _________________________ 8 Wealth: Amount of money and/or property desired or obtained by group; emphasis on members’ donations; economic lifestyle of leader(s) compared to ordinary members. 8 _________________________ 9 Sexual Manipulation of members by leader(s) of non-tantric groups; amount of control exercised over sexuality of members in terms of sexual orientation, behavior, and/or choice of partners. 9 _________________________ 10 Sexual Favoritism: Advancement or preferential treatment dependent upon sexual activity with the leader(s) of non-tantric groups. 10 _________________________ 11 Censorship: Amount of control over members’ access to outside opinions on group, its doctrines or leader(s). 11 _________________________ 12 Isolation: Amount of effort to keep members from communicating with non-members, including family, friends and lovers. 12 _________________________ 13 Dropout Control: Intensity of efforts directed at preventing or returning dropouts. 13 _________________________ 14 Violence: Amount of approval when used by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s). 14 _________________________ 15 Paranoia: Amount of fear concerning real or imagined enemies; exaggeration of perceived power of opponents; prevalence of conspiracy theories. 15 _________________________ 16 Grimness: Amount of disapproval concerning jokes about the group, its doctrines or its leader(s). 16 _________________________ 17 Surrender of Will: Amount of emphasis on members not having to be responsible for personal decisions; degree of individual disempowerment created by the group, its doctrines or its leader(s). 17 _________________________ 18 Hypocrisy: amount of approval for actions which the group officially considers immoral or unethical, when done by or for the group, its doctrines or leader(s); willingness to violate the group’s declared principles for political, psychological, social, economic, military, or other gain. 18 _________________________ A German translation of the 2.0 version of this is available at: Isaac Bonewits’ Sektengefahr Checkliste. A French translation of the 2.6 version is available at: Grille avancée de Bonewits pour l'évaluation du danger potentiel d'une secte. An Italian translation of the 2.6 version is available at: Documento Avanzato di Isaac Bonewits per la Valutazione del Pericolo del Culto. A Polish translation of the 2.6 version is available at: Zaawansowany Kwestionariusz Bonewitsa Oceniajacy Niebezpieczenstwo Sekty A Portuguese translation of the 2.6 version is available at: A Ferramenta Avançada de Bonewits para Avaliação de Seitas. Other translations will be posted as they are done. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Low High Copyright © 1979, 2001 c.e., Isaac Bonewits. This text file may be freely distributed on the Net, provided that no editing is done, the version number is retained, and everything in this notice box is included. If you would like to be on one or more of Isaac Bonewits’ emailing lists, click here to get subscription information. Note: this is one of his most popular essays, so if you want to mirror it, that’s fine with him, but please check back regularly for updates. If anyone wants to translate this or others of his essays into other languages, he will be happy to post them on his website. Is having access to this material worth a few dollars, punts, pounds, or euros to you? Click either graphic to make a fast and secure donation to Isaac Bonewits, so he can afford to keep his website going and growing! Or you can suggest to your local Occult/New Age bookstore that they bring him out for one of his colorful presentations, or you could just send money to him at PO Box 1010, Nyack, NY, USA 10960-1010. Back to the Contents Page of Isaac Bonewits’ Homepage Isaac & Phae say: We use PayPal and we recommend it! Back to the T.O.C. of Isaac Bonewits’ Homepage Pagan T-shirts ~ Mousepads ~ Coffee Mugs ~ Wall Clocks Take a look at the graphic designs Isaac has available at his CafePress store! (P. E.) Isaac Bonewits, Adr.Em./ADF Email: ibonewits@neopagan.net Snailmail: PO Box 1010, Nyack, NY, USA 10960-8010 This webpage is copyright © 1979, 2001 c.e., Isaac Bonewits Most recently updated: August 5, 2006 c.e. (advertising) This page’s URL is http://www.neopagan.net/ABCDEF.html My Homepage URL is http://www.neopagan.net . . . . !

Pasted from Issac's site and under the terms of his conditions, I have included the entire page including the box above. sapphoq reviews

FIBROMYALGIA 12/4/06

Having spent today with Fibromyalgia, I have decided to provide a review of Fibromyalgia.
While I do recognize that a few excellent books, articles, and suchlike have been written
about Fibromyalgia at a level of competency which perhaps I shall not attain here, nevertheless
I have decided to do this. I'm not a doctor, which will be abundantly clear by the end of this thing.
So naturally, nothing I say here should be construed as medical, useful, or life-saving advice.
Thus said, let us begin.

Fibromyalgia sucks. Yes, it does.
Some folks believe it is part of clinical depression. Well, at least one drug company seems to think so. Which came first? I don't know and I do not have to care. Because, I am not a doctor.

Okay then. For the uninitiated, I will describe Fibromyalgia as a sort of arthritis of the muscles. That is not technically accurate and does not really do justice but it is a beginning. And the Midrash says, "All beginnings are hard." I have never read the Midrash. I hope I am spelling it correctly. But I do know that is what it says. Cuz I saw it somewhere.

Furthermore, besides providing an assortment of muscle pain, Fibromyalgia also provides Fatigue. For those of you who are healing a tbi like me, Fatigue is the Great Enemy. This Fatigue is not regular people fatigue. It is muscle crushing dragging along sleepwalking through life sort of fatigue. It is Oh crap, I gotta keep going even though I want to drop Fatigue.

Unofficially, there exists a suspicion among some of us that Fibromyalgia is somehow related to car accidents or something.
Officially, there are many Explanations.
Everything from [it is felt to be mostly women]: Women with Fibromyalgia are Drug-Seeking.
To: Fibromyalgia is a Lifestyle.

Perhaps folks who have Fibromyalgia are Drug-Seeking, Doctor, because they genuinely Hurt.
Have Pain.

At any rate, my own Fibromyalgia comes Knocking at rather Inconvenient Times.
I am just strolling along, living my life and Fibromyalgia says, Hey You, You are having
Too Much Fun.
Zing! You just took a bath and you Have to Sleep
for Two Hours afterwards.
Zing! You went to the gym and you will not Recover for two whole Days.
Zing! Whatdoya mean you want to Have a Life?!?

I am fortunate that mine responds to exercise and that is how I keep from Screaming.
Not everyone is as fortunate as I am.

Fibromyalgia is a Lifestyle? More of: We are Our Labels. No, I Will Not Have It.
We Are Not Our Labels. We are MORE Than Our Labels. MORE than your labels.
So There.

Freaking Idiopathic Beastie Rumbling Over Muscles Yakking Always Loudly Groaning In Agony.

That's Fibromyalgia.

sapphoq reviews

CUTE AND ADORABLE PRECIOUS MINIS 11/25/06

Drifting around web
at night I found your minis--
cute precious delight!

Who: Goowy did it. I tried it. I liked it.
What: Little prepackaged widgets. Flash. News. Mail. Pop3. Weather. Blog RSSes. More.
Where: On your own yourminis page. Free. Password-protected.
When: Whenever you sign in from any computer.
Why: Cuz they are cute.

http://www.yourminis.com/

BLOGBURST 11/16/06

At first the BlogBurst site looked like a pretty good deal. Enter your url which then gets reviewed for quality and after acceptance, get a chance at having your blog seen by people and companies all over. I entered my url, was "accepted," asked to place a blogburst button on my blogsite, and then was taken to the Terms and Conditions page of Using their Service.

In exchange for their right to place advertising on my site and to advertise my site, I was to sign over worldwide royalty rights to my material forever. BlogBurst would suffer no obligation to pay me for any income generated to them for my stuff. Nope. I bailed out.

This review is a warning. BlogBurst sounds good. It isn't. Any writer who has been published regularly will tell you, "Don't sign away your worldwide royalty rights." Signing away First Serial Rights would be permissible but not the whole she-bang.

No thank-you BlogBurst. I will continue on my path of discovery and future syndication without your help.

sapphoq reviews

THEY CAGE THE ANIMALS AT NIGHT by Jennings Michael Burch 11/16/06

They Cage the Animals at Night, by Jennings Michael Burch.
New York: Signet, 1985. paperback, 293 pps.

The author, J. Michael Burch tells the story of his childhood and adolescence quite well. His mother was not a well woman; his father a drunk absent from his life. Periodically, his mother would drop him off [and later on his youngest brother] at an orphanage or at social services because of her inability to provide for her offspring. The two oldest boys were able to go to relatives to live, the middle brother had a heart condition and lived at a hospital for most of his life.

This book recounts the horrifying abuses suffered by the author and other boys entrusted to New York City's foster care system during the fifties and how the author was able to find his way out.
Definately worth a read for anyone with their own childhood memories of abuse. Not for those who dislike sentimentality.

sapphoq reviews