MovieChat Forums > Holy Hell (2016) Discussion > Perfect example of Western self-victimiz...

Perfect example of Western self-victimizing

posted 8 years ago by AutistSpeaks
6 replies | jump to latest

These people were the luckiest bunch to have such amazing life experiences! Until they read that they have been victims, i am convinced they were happy not knowing they were victims of "sexual abuse". They were adults ffs, not children.

And i am an atheist. I don't buy into spiritual mumbo jumo (the word spiritual alone makes me cringe). These people were lucky to have these friendships, these amazing positive experiences. Some sad dyke destroyed the whole group. Don't let psycho the-rapists tell you you are a victim.

[–] debunkerboy 8 years ago

So true, look how happy the Manson family was. Fantastic life experiences! Positively delirious. Look at those smiles, the light in their eyes, it's undeniable - lucky dogs. Charlie didn't kill those people, and that's a fact, a few of his misguided followers did. And Jonestown! Such racial harmony, unprecedented, so progressive. If Jones hadn't snapped after the gubermint came after him and made them kill themselves they would still be happy campers today, the pride of Guyana, fully satisfied the world was screwed and they were saviors. In fact it's hard to come up with a single example of a megalomaniac having any responsibility at all for his followers misery. It's a one way street, only the followers can be blamed for following, or blamed for doubting because of the dykes? I guess I'm a little confused where you stand on that one.

As a fellow atheist it is important to make sure that everyone understand that all religions are cults and all are equally dangerous to their members and to society, it's not like Manson, Jones and Koresh had a special level of pathology or something. That's what the Episcopalians down the street from me at the corner church would have you believe.

[–] AutistSpeaks 8 years ago

Nice strawman, comparing a harmless cult to psychos like Charlie Manson and Jonestown.

[–] debunkerboy 8 years ago

harmless cult

And here is your error - no cults are harmless - there are many other, subtler, forms of cult pathology that fall short of murder/suicide. At their core is always an extremely deluded narcissistic leader who demands loyalty, demands that you accept their uniqueness/divinity, who uses fear as a tactic of control, and usually that you give him sex on demand, among many, many other profoundly pathological traits. (Warren Jeffs, for one.) Read through the list here https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spycatcher/201208/dangerous-cult-leaders

I don't understand how you could be an atheist and also believe that religious cults are harmless. They all fall into the same class. The only difference between Michel and Charlie is just where on the spectrum of the disease they will fall. Putting a gun to your head and demanding sex or implying that you will disappoint the leader and probably be punished, excommunicated, or maybe have to go to some sort of hell amount to more or less the same thing in a cult. That the follower has allowed himself to fall into this childlike state of dependence does not let the abuser off the hook.

[–] AutistSpeaks 8 years ago

The world is full of narcissistic adults in a harmless codependent relation with brainwashed followers. If the followers are happy, why should you dictate that they are victims? They become victims only when you instill in their mind that they were victimized.

[–] debunkerboy 8 years ago

You are really hung up on this idea of false victimization - either they are poor victims or else they are in a harmless relationship. OMG what a false dichotomy! By insisting the relationship is harmless fun you are leaving out the entire middle ground. How could you have seen the film and think their deluded fantasy world was harmless??

Can these people make a film exposing Michel's con? Can they warn others not to make the mistake they made? If they admit that they were also culpable will you allow this? I don't think so. You have no idea how close these other cults come to Manson or Jones or Koresh do you?

Do you actually admire Michele? I've yet to hear any condemnation of his disgusting narcissism. I'm strongly suspecting this lame argument which absolves Michele is nothing but a stalking horse for exactly that.

[–] leiastarkiller 7 years ago

Saying all religions are cults really downplays the hell actual cult members go through. That's like saying everyone who drinks beer is an alcoholic, or everyone who goes on a diet has an eating disorder. It's offensive and not true at all.

If you're actually interested in cults, there's a few common characteristics that distinguish them from established religion. Number one is trying to isolate members from those outside the cult. They get them to completely abandon family and friends. They also will try to control outside information. So no tv, no internet, no preapproved books, etc. They will also try to control members' finances. This isn't just tossing spare change in a basket at church, this is convincing them that all their money belongs to the group and letting the group leader decide how it's to be spent.

Do all religions have the potential to become cults? Yes I think any group that congregates for any purpose has that potential, but that doesn't mean they all are already cults. And cults don't necessarily need to be religious at all. Things like some fraternities, pyramid schemes, etc. all tap into that same psychological control. They make people feel like they matter and like they belong, but they're really just being taken advantage of. Here's an interesting article that goes into some cults that are not religion based:
http://listverse.com/2015/04/09/10-insane-non-religious-cults/

Anyway, the point of this rant is just that a belief in god does not necessarily make one more susceptible to brainwashing, just as not believing in god doesn't make one immune to it. Cults are about controlling people's lives by manipulating their minds. Some leaders use religion as a tool to do this and others don't.