Behind Every Crime a Personal Tragedy Lies Hidden

With all the talking heads exploiting the crimes of famous people with their fake indignation and false moralization that reinforces peoples repression and the fears of resolving it to just benefit themselves makes my blood boil. Because as long one's repression goes unresolved these crimes will be repeated sooner or later in one form or another.

I could not agree more with Alice Miller words below:
"I have no doubt that behind every crime a personal tragedy lies hidden. If we were to investigate such events and their backgrounds more closely, we might be able to do more to prevent crimes than we do now with our indignation and moralizing. Perhaps someone will say: But not everyone who was a battered child becomes a murderer; otherwise, many more people would be murderers. That is true. However, humankind is in dire enough straits these days that this should not remain an academic question. Moreover, we never know how a child will and must react to the injustice he or she has suffered-there are innumerable "techniques" for dealing with it. We don't yet know, above all, what the world might be like if children were to grow up without being subjected to humiliation, if parents would respect them and take them seriously as persons. In any case, I don't know of a single person who enjoyed this respect* as a child and then as an adult had the need to put other human beings to death. * By respect for a child, I don't mean a "permissive" upbringing,which is often a form of indoctrination itself and thus shows a disregard for the child's own world.

We are still barely conscious of how harmful it is to treat children in a degrading manner. Treating them with respect and recognizing the consequences of their being humiliated are by no means intellectual matters; otherwise, their importance would long since have been generally recognized. To empathize with what a child is feeling when he or she is defenseless, hurt, or humiliated is like suddenly seeing in a mirror the suffering of one's own childhood, something many people must ward off out of fear while others can accept it with mourning. People who have mourned in this way understand more about the dynamics of the psyche than they could ever have learned from books.

The persecution of people of Jewish background, the necessity of proving "racial purity" as far back as one's grandparents, the tailoring of prohibitions to the degree of an individual's demonstrable "racial purity"--all this is grotesque only at first glance. For its significance becomes plain once we realize that in terms of Hitler's unconscious fantasies it is an intensified expression of two very powerful tendencies. On the one hand, his father was the hated Jew whom he could despise and persecute, frighten and threaten with regulations, because his father would also have been affected by the racial laws if he had still been alive. At the same time--and this is the other tendency--the racial laws were meant to mark Adolf's final break with his father and his background. In addition to revenge, the tormenting uncertainty about the Hitler family was an important motive for the racial laws: the whole nation had to trace its "purity" back to the third generation because Adolf Hitler would have liked to know with certainty who his grandfather was. Above all, the Jew became the bearer of all the evil and despicable traits the child had ever observed in his father. In Hitler's view, the Jews were characterized by a specific mixture of Lucifer-like grandeur and superiority (world Jewry and its readiness to destroy the entire world) on the one hand and ugliness and ludicrous weakness and infirmity on the other. This view reflects the omnipotence even the weakest father exercises over his child, seen in Hitler's case in the wild rages of the insecure customs official who succeeded in destroying his son's world.

It is common in analysis for the first breakthrough in criticizing the father to be signaled by the surfacing of some insignificant and ludicrous trait of his that the patient's memory has repressed. For example, the father--big out of all proportion in the child's eyes--may have looked very funny in his short nightshirt. The child had never been close to his father, had been in constant fear of him, but with this memory of the skimpy nightshirt, the child's imagination provides a weapon, now that ambivalence has broken through in the analysis, which enables him to take revenge on a small scale against the godlike, monumental paternal figure. In similar fashion, Hitler disseminates his hatred and disgust for the "stinking" Jew in the pages of the Nazi periodical Der Stürmer in order to incite people to burn books by Freud, Einstein, and innumerable other Jewish intellectuals of great stature. The breakthrough of this idea, which made it possible for him to transfer his pent-up hatred of his father to the Jews as a people, is very instructive." For Your Own Good, page 196 and 197

Very Poignant Facebook Comment

I couldn't agree more with the words Steve Thomas wrote below in response to my post about Talking Heads and Psychopaths are so Annoying

Steve Thomas: Sylvie, I think what might be good about this is that unless I'm badly misreading things, public discussion has really been ignited, and maybe finally gone beyond the tipping point in favor of children's rights. I'm talking not necessarily even about the content of all these articles but just the number of comments and conversations (arguments) the commenters are having between themselves. If it's true that something like 70% of American adults think that "spanking" is at least sometimes necessary, then judging from the comment sections, I'd say the minority 30% are doing a fantastic job of sowing doubt. And I think that might be exactly what it takes: a long-term, general and preferably non-organized, discussion. One led by no one and nothing. 

My impression is that Sweden's public argument (reactions to news articles, etc.) began pretty much in about the 1920s. 20 years earlier Ellen Key had her "The Century of the Child" published in Swedish but I think that mostly might have helped just prime people, loosen the soil a little. I don't know. But something else happened around 1920 - and I'm sorry I can't think of it - something to do with WW I and the League of Nations, seems like from memory. It's said that in the US, child mistreatment wasn't publicly discussed or written about much (or for all intents acknowledged to even exist) until the 1960s. So that's a 40-60 year head start that Sweden had. This place was as brutal as anywhere, earlier. Nothing magic in Swedish genes. I've seen executioner's axes, torture machines and shaming equipment, typically set up in churchyards. To go further back (and despite an effort people now seem to be making depicting Viking-era Norsemen as more agrarian and humane), even slavery was common during that time and the Norse plundering warriors were in fact brutal. One guy's friends nicknamed him "the children's man" because he refused to run captive children through with his lance the way all his buddies did.

You're also right to say that there's more to the problems of the world than talking heads can cure by selling books telling people it's wrong to hit kids. I expect that even if the practice were to completely stop tomorrow, the world wouldn't see miraculous overnight changes. Sweden is by no means out of the woods, far as societal ills, despite the 35-year-old across-the-board child battery ban. (Drama of the Gifted Child, incidentally, was published that same year - 1979 - so Miller hadn't been a factor.) Lot of times things are the same as squeezing a water balloon: squeezing it here just mean it squeezes out somewhere else. So you're right that repression (and I suppose, suppression) are pointless - and I know you don't need anybody to tell you any of that. But I just wanted to say holy cow let these people talk! I think tons of parents will think twice after all this discussion. And that more will follow. I think it's reasonable to suppose that this outcry is giving more and more of the timid who are in what's still the minority enough courage to speak up too. And that's good.

The articles might or might not help those who are trying to deal with the after-effects of their own mistreatment (I suspect they might) - but isn't that really a different consideration? Seems to me this is a clear win for children who haven't yet been damaged and broken, including all those not yet born - and that is now projected (very frighteningly, imo) to be basically the entire present population of the world - and I mean just in the remainder of this century. I know full-well there are ways to poison people that don't involve laying a finger on them. Bad ways. And that, if forced into it either by law, social "consensus" or by both, many people will quickly resort to techniques like that. And I know that that crap can be as damaging or even worse than physical battery. My take on Miller is that she recognized completely that the practice of beating kids was just the visible tip of a iceberg. One thing I'm clueless about is the extent to which she was aware that this thing she'd discovered had, huge and dangerous as it still was (and is), been for some reason spontaneously melting for centuries already (I'm talking about stuff Lloyd deMause, Steven Pinker and those kind of guys have looked at).

I think it's a little twisted and very sad that it took an offender with celebrity to get this particular ball rolling, especially given how much screaming and yelling so many have done for so many years on behalf of the kids of everyday people - just to be largely yawned at and pushed aside. But then again: I don't care. All publicity is good.

Here's a link to some statistics, mostly just for the heck of it. Far as I can see there are no comments 

You keep on doing what you do! It's all great.

Sylvie Imelda Shene: Steve Thomas, I agree with everything you wrote. All the talking going on exposing that hitting children is very bad for children is good and a step in the right direction. But I also like to hear voices exposing the lies and disconnected half-truths that the talking heads are using to manipulate and exploit the public to just benefit themselves, like the author Mel Robbins in the article above. I didn’t know who she was, but someone wrote me an e-mail asking: “Sylvie, is Mel Robbins another kind of Oprah? I don't know much about these public figures in the US and wonder if she is real.” So I went and check her out and read the preview of her book "Stop Saying you’re Fine" and of course what I find there is the same recycled BS to manipulate the public with their elaborated engineered schemes to get rich and keep their own childhood repressions intact, but really they could care less about children and the suffering of others.  
Read original Facebook post here

I could not agree more with Alice Miller words below:
"I have no doubt that behind every crime a personal tragedy lies hidden. If we were to investigate such events and their backgrounds more closely, we might be able to do more to prevent crimes than we do now with our indignation and moralizing. Perhaps someone will say: But not everyone who was a battered child becomes a murderer; otherwise, many more people would be murderers. That is true. However, humankind is in dire enough straits these days that this should not remain an academic question. Moreover, we never know how a child will and must react to the injustice he or she has suffered-there are innumerable "techniques" for dealing with it. We don't yet know, above all, what the world might be like if children were to grow up without being subjected to humiliation, if parents would respect them and take them seriously as persons. In any case, I don't know of a single person who enjoyed this respect* as a child and then as an adult had the need to put other human beings to death. * By respect for a child, I don't mean a "permissive" upbringing,which is often a form of indoctrination itself and thus shows a disregard for the child's own world.

We are still barely conscious of how harmful it is to treat children in a degrading manner. Treating them with respect and recognizing the consequences of their being humiliated are by no means intellectual matters; otherwise, their importance would long since have been generally recognized. To empathize with what a child is feeling when he or she is defenseless, hurt, or humiliated is like suddenly seeing in a mirror the suffering of one's own childhood, something many people must ward off out of fear while others can accept it with mourning. People who have mourned in this way understand more about the dynamics of the psyche than they could ever have learned from books.

The persecution of people of Jewish background, the necessity of proving "racial purity" as far back as one's grandparents, the tailoring of prohibitions to the degree of an individual's demonstrable "racial purity"--all this is grotesque only at first glance. For its significance becomes plain once we realize that in terms of Hitler's unconscious fantasies it is an intensified expression of two very powerful tendencies. On the one hand, his father was the hated Jew whom he could despise and persecute, frighten and threaten with regulations, because his father would also have been affected by the racial laws if he had still been alive. At the same time--and this is the other tendency--the racial laws were meant to mark Adolf's final break with his father and his background. In addition to revenge, the tormenting uncertainty about the Hitler family was an important motive for the racial laws: the whole nation had to trace its "purity" back to the third generation because Adolf Hitler would have liked to know with certainty who his grandfather was. Above all, the Jew became the bearer of all the evil and despicable traits the child had ever observed in his father. In Hitler's view, the Jews were characterized by a specific mixture of Lucifer-like grandeur and superiority (world Jewry and its readiness to destroy the entire world) on the one hand and ugliness and ludicrous weakness and infirmity on the other. This view reflects the omnipotence even the weakest father exercises over his child, seen in Hitler's case in the wild rages of the insecure customs official who succeeded in destroying his son's world.

It is common in analysis for the first breakthrough in criticizing the father to be signaled by the surfacing of some insignificant and ludicrous trait of his that the patient's memory has repressed. For example, the father--big out of all proportion in the child's eyes--may have looked very funny in his short nightshirt. The child had never been close to his father, had been in constant fear of him, but with this memory of the skimpy nightshirt, the child's imagination provides a weapon, now that ambivalence has broken through in the analysis, which enables him to take revenge on a small scale against the godlike, monumental paternal figure. In similar fashion, Hitler disseminates his hatred and disgust for the "stinking" Jew in the pages of the Nazi periodical Der Stürmer in order to incite people to burn books by Freud, Einstein, and innumerable other Jewish intellectuals of great stature. The breakthrough of this idea, which made it possible for him to transfer his pent-up hatred of his father to the Jews as a people, is very instructive." For Your Own Good, page 196 and 197

Talking Heads and Psychopaths are so Annoying

Hi E,

I am feeling so annoyed lately with all the scandals and with all the talking heads and psychopaths exploiting these scandals. Like the scandal of the football player that hit then girlfriend and now wife and the player that hit his child, so they can sell their books giving advice like the author Mel Robbins in the article in the link below that represses people  all over again instead of helping them face and resolve their repression, but how can they do that if they have not resolved their own repression, but use their sharp intellect to engineer elaborated schemes to deepen their own and others repression. And like addicts that the only thing they change is one addiction for another. The author of the article in the link below might be able to temporally stop some people from beating their children a step in the right direction, but they only change one form of abuse for another and one lie for another, because as long the repressed emotions of the child they once were go unresolved will be transferred into the next generation in one form or another and these traumas will be repeated and reenacted sooner or later. How can I make it clear that as long people keep repressing their emotions with the aid of all kind of seductive pretty lies and half-truths that they will keep being driven by them into the state of repetition compulsion soon or later?

By the way when I told you yesterday about the resident that sent me my book back, I left a little detail out. Inside the book were a few sheets of toilet paper. In a symbolic way, she was saying that my book is good to wipe my ass with and to put it up my ass, but she really was showing me how she was treated as a child and how she treated her children that she made them her poisonous container when they told her the truth. One daughter has all kind of health issues from this poison she took in from her mother. She thought she had me fooled with all her gifts and dinners. But I knew all along she was buying my love and attention to have control over me.  And now she is pissed because she knows I see her clear and didn’t fool me and the control she thought had over me was an illusion of her. By the way, I sent her a thank you card saying: Dear Joy, I got the book back! You are so thoughtful! Thanks, Sylvie" I really wanted to write because her first name is Joy. “I got the book back! You are a joy! Thanks, Sylvie", but I thought would be too sarcastic. She is a psychopath and psychopaths going to hate me because I expose them and remove the masks they wear.  This is just a tip of the iceberg of all the hate that is going to be directed at me.  And you helped me write this book and had the courage to have your name on the cover, so be ready to deal with this hate a little bit too, because people is going to hate you a little bit also for helping me put this book together.  This woman used to tell me that her husband was a good writer and use to be a college professor and could have helped me write my book if he was still alive, he died of cancer a few years ago, I use to think to myself: your husband enabled your repression and the only reason was married to you and took your poison was for the money, so he would not have been a good candidate to help me write my book.
To continue,
Sylvie

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/15/opinion/robbins-spanking-adrian-peterson-case/index.html?sr=sharebar_twitter

Yes E, at least I got a reaction and because of it I sold another book, because I told the story to someone that lives in Seattle that has a house here, but only comes down here once in a while and after hearing the story of what Joy did, they said: NOW I want to read this book where can I buy it? I hope more people like her can’t hold it in and starts reacting to it, because this type of publicity is the best publicity I can get, but it stings a little bit, because I am a feeling person and it doesn’t feel good when people direct their poison at me even if I don’t take it in and give it back to them. 

Talk more soon,

Sylvie

Steve Thomas: Sylvie, I think what might be good about this is that unless I'm badly misreading things, public discussion has really been ignited, and maybe finally gone beyond the tipping point in favor of children's rights. I'm talking not necessarily even about the content of all these articles but just the number of comments and conversations (arguments) the commenters are having between themselves. If it's true that something like 70% of American adults thinks that "spanking" is at least sometimes necessary, then judging from the comment sections, I'd say the minority 30% are doing a fantastic job of sowing doubt. And I think that might be exactly what it takes: a long-term, general and preferably non-organized, discussion. One led by no one and nothing.

My impression is that Sweden's public argument (reactions to news articles, etc.) began pretty much in about the 1920s. 20 years earlier Ellen Key had her "The Century of the Child" published in Swedish but I think that most might have helped just prime people loosen the soil a little. I don't know. But something else happened around 1920 - and I'm sorry I can't think of it - something to do with WW I and the League of Nations seems like from memory. It's said that in the US, child mistreatment wasn't publicly discussed or written about much (or for all intents acknowledged to even exist) until the 1960s. So that's a 40-60 year head start that Sweden had. This place was as brutal as anywhere, earlier. Nothing magic in Swedish genes. I've seen executioner's axes, torture machines and shaming equipment typically set up in churchyards. To go further back (and despite an effort people now seem to be making depicting Viking-era Norsemen as more agrarian and humane), even slavery was common during that time and the Norse plundering warriors were in fact brutal. One guy's friends nicknamed him "the children's man" because he refused to run captive children through with his lance the way all his buddies did.

You're also right to say that there's more to the problems of the world than talking heads can cure by selling books telling people it's wrong to hit kids. I expect that even if the practice were to completely stop tomorrow, the world wouldn't see miraculous overnight changes. Sweden is by no means out of the woods, far as societal ills, despite the 35-year-old across-the-board child battery ban. (Drama of the Gifted Child, incidentally, was published that same year - 1979 - so Miller hadn't been a factor.) A lot of times things are the same as squeezing a water balloon: squeezing it here just mean it squeezes out somewhere else. So you're right that repression (and I suppose suppression) are pointless - and I know you don't need anybody to tell you any of that. But I just wanted to say holy cow let these people talk! I think tons of parents will think twice after all this discussion. And that more will follow. I think it's reasonable to suppose that this outcry is giving more and more of the timid who are in what's still the minority enough courage to speak up too. And that's good.

The articles might or might not help those who are trying to deal with the after-effects of their own mistreatment (I suspect they might) - but isn't that really a different consideration? Seems to me this is a clear win for children who haven't yet been damaged and broken, including all those not yet born - and that is now projected (very frighteningly, imo) to be basically the entire present population of the world - and I mean just in the remainder of this century. I know full well there are ways to poison people that don't involve laying a finger on them. Bad ways. And that, if forced into it either by law, social "consensus" or by both, many people will quickly resort to techniques like that. And I know that that crap can be as damaging or even worse than physical battery. My take on Miller is that she recognized completely that the practice of beating kids was just the visible tip of an iceberg. One thing I'm clueless about is the extent to which she was aware that this thing she'd discovered had, huge and dangerous as it still was (and is), been for some reason spontaneously melting for centuries already (I'm talking about stuff Lloyd deMause, Steven Pinker and those kind of guys have looked at).

I think it's a little twisted and very sad that it took an offender with celebrity to get this particular ball rolling, especially given how much screaming and yelling so many have done for so many years on behalf of the kids of everyday people - just to be largely yawned at and pushed aside. But then again: I don't care. All publicity is good.

Here's a link to some statistics, mostly just for the heck of it. Far as I can see there are no comments.http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/americans-opinions-on-spanking-vary-by-party-race-region-and-religion/
You keep on doing what you do! It's all great.

Sylvie Imelda Shene: Steve Thomas, I agree with everything you wrote. All the talking going on exposing that hitting children is very bad for children is good and a step in the right direction. But I also like to hear voices exposing the lies and disconnected half-truths that the talking heads are using to manipulate and exploit the public to benefit themselves, like the author Mel Robbins in the article above. I didn’t know who she was, but someone wrote me an e-mail asking: “Sylvie, is Mel Robbins another kind of Oprah? I don't know much about these public figures in the US and wonder if she is real.” So I went and check her out and read the preview of her book "Stop Saying you’re Fine" and of course what I find there is the same recycled BS to manipulate the public with their elaborated engineered schemes to get rich and keep their repressions intact, but really they could care less about children and the suffering of others.

https://www.facebook.com/sylne/posts/10152468031488922?comment_id=10152474023408922&offset=0&total_comments=3&notif_t=share_comment

Beauty Stealers

Good day Sylvie,

Thank you for your last email and for taking a great chunk of your time writing and sharing with me about real stuff.

Today I want to take it a little lightly since it’s Friday.

I saw your post on FB about not wasting anymore of yourself on ''obtuse'' and senseless beings. Congratulations!  Basically, I find that all this hard work is paying off in the simple fact that you know who you are and you are only looking for soul connections to share your precious time, energy and spirited being with. Point final!

Unfortunately, or fortunately, very few individuals are worth this special kind of attention and dedication that, as a loving and available and free person, you are opened to share and give. But at no cost will you settle for less and pretend that you feel fulfilled by a shallow relationship.  That's how I interpret what you are dealing with lately.

More time for yourself, your work, your correspondence and your purpose!!!

I feel the same and I have felt like this pretty much all my life.  Maybe that's what saved me from drowning in my own drama or from associating and reproducing with dangerous people.  I call them as my title says: Beauty stealers.  If your soul is poisoned, your body will also suffer.  I have become an expert at identifying these people and consequently my social life is very minimal.  I have a strong aversion for anything or anyone that makes me feel like I'm wasting my precious life away.  Don't get me wrong here; I am not keeping myself from spending time with people who challenge my comfort zone and I can totally recognize and appreciate adversity. It's pure growth. In my utopian world, we could all benefit from exchanging point of views and differences with wide opened eyes and free from judgment.  When your soul is healthy you don't need religion, gurus, gangs, politics, drugs and all the soul wrecking addictions out there to know what's right and what's wrong.  Not only for you as an individual but for all the living things on this planet.  You have respect for yourself and for your surroundings.  You seek harmony and constructiveness. Not possession, control and destruction.  I think I was born on the wrong planet.:).

As I want to keep it light, I want you to know that I'm grateful for our communication and feel that I'm expanding since I've started to write my story to you.  I'm looking forward to deepen my liberating journey and for sharing more experiences in our letters.  The emails are very convenient after all and even if you feel bad about not answering fast enough I know you are willing to.  Time is always running out. Like money. Like quality...

Have a great weekend and I'll send you my reply about your last message.

Keep following your guts Sylvie! Self-preservation and pure animalistic instinct in the jungle will keep us alive and well.

Have some fun!

X

Dear X,

Thank you for your very encouraging and thoughtful letter. I agree with everything you wrote. I felt the same as you all of my life and that is probably why I was able to eventually break free and I too like you not drown in all the drama and reproduce with unconscious men.

Once we resolve our repression and liberate ourselves, we can't go on as if, and at no cost we will settle for less and pretend that we feel fulfilled by a shallow relationship. I always say it's better to be alone and to know that I am alone than to be with someone and nevertheless to be alone. I don't feel lonely when I am alone, but I feel lonely sometimes when I am with people.

You are a breath of fresh air, because I don’t come across many people that communicates at the emotional level as clear as you. Congratulations! Most people I know are lost in their sharp intellect and totally disconnected from their true authentic feelings deceiving themselves and others, incapable of understanding their own feelings and the feelings of others.

 So true, if we take others poisons, our body will suffer. Congratulations in no longer be willing to take others poisons. You are so right when our soul is free or healthy and we are autonomous human beings, we don't need drugs, religion, gurus, gangs, politics, to teach us what is wrong or right for us, we naturally know it and we are not interested in possessions, manipulations, control and destruction. Me too I think I was born in the wrong planet.

Enjoy your new found freedom,

Sylvie

The Danger of Gurus and Cults

N. Sylvie - I read your experience with PU [People Unlimited] and I'd like to talk to you.  I have a few relatives involved and I have many questions.  I personally have not attended and do not plan to get involved.  I am worried for my granddaughter.  Would you be willing to contact me? N

Sylvie Imelda Shene: Hi N, I just saw your message. Feel free to ask me any questions you might have and if I can I will be happy to answer. I am sorry you have relatives that have fell victims of the illusion of PU.

You also might like reading the article in the link below:

http://sylvieshene.blogspot.com/2011/08/gurus-and-cults-leaders-how-they.html

N. Hi Sylvie - I really don't know what to ask - I just don't understand why anyone would continuously attend a group meeting where the focus is "you are never going to die". Maybe I am wrong, but what is the attraction for the people who are so hooked at these meetings?

Sylvie Imelda Shene: Hi N, the meetings are very electrifying and addictive just like a drug and for people to keep feeling high, they need to keep going to the meetings, just like a person addictive to drugs needs to keep taking a drug to feel good. Gurus and cult leaders are masters at regressing people to the state of the child so they can have total control over them. You might like reading my book that I just published. Below is a little excerpt where I talk about these psychological mechanisms.

Good luck,

Sylvie

“…I really want to reinforce the idea that so-called therapists and gurus only substitute one dangerous illusion for another. As Alice Miller writes, “What can happen when a doctor doesn’t stop at self-deception in his flight from pain, but deceives his patients, even founding dogmatic institutions in which further ‘helpers’ are recruited to a faith advertised as scientific truth,’ can be catastrophic.”64 The key to effective therapy is learning how to use your present triggers productively. They can help us clarify, understand and consciously feel our intense emotions within the context of our own childhoods without losing our adult consciousness. A good therapist can help us regain our adult consciousness if we lose it and encourage our autonomy, so we can deal with present issues from an adult perspective. But when a therapist regresses us to the state of the desperate child we once were and keeps us feeling old pain over and over again, that just reinforces our dependency, keeps us vulnerable to all kinds of manipulations and makes our addiction to pain harder to shake. Why do people keep punishing themselves? As Alice Miller writes, “… the awareness was borne in upon me that in a state of regression it is not possible to judge the competence and integrity of the person one has turned to for such guidance. This opens up all kinds of opportunities for abuse. The intensive phase with which primal therapy begins is an immediate obstacle to the formation of a balanced, critical, independent assessment of the therapist’s abilities by the client. The fact that the attendant uncritical and irrational expectations of healing and ‘salvation’ can lead to the establishment of totalitarian sects is borne out by the crass example of mass abuse at the hands of the exponents of ‘feeling therapy’ as described in detail by Carol Lynn Mithers in her book Therapy Gone Mad: The True Story of Hundreds of Patients and a Generation Betrayed (1994). But this study was possible only after the community she describes had disbanded, something that frequently takes decades. Today we know that such groups exist and that members of sects are done irremediable harm before they become aware of the fact.”65 In another book, she goes on to say, “The thing that concerns me most about cult groups is the unconscious manipulations that I have described in detail in my work. It is the way in which the repressed and unreflected childhood biographies of parents and therapists influence the lives of children and patients entrusted to their care without anyone involved actually realizing it. At first glance, it may seem as if what goes on in cults and cultlike therapy groups takes place on a different level from the unconscious manipulation of children by their parents. We assume that in the former instance we are in the presence of an intentional, carefully planned and organized form of manipulation aimed at exploiting the specific predicament of individuals. … First, they had learned how to reduce people to the emotional state of the helpless child. Once they had achieved that, they also learned how to use unconscious regression to exercise total control over their victims. From then on, what they did seemed to come automatically, in accordance with the childrearing patterns instilled into them in their own childhood.”66 Most people who search for answers never actually find them, because people suffering with their own repression are the ones who practice traditional therapies. Since the beginning of human history, priests, teachers, gurus, psychics, doctors, philosophers and psychologists have all duped people into thinking they could provide real assistance, when it was never possible because the healers were also victims of their own childhoods.” From the book:  A Dance to Freedom: Your Guide to Liberation from Lies and Illusions, page 129, 130 and 131

Original blog about my experience with People Unlimited

http://sylvieshene.blogspot.com/2011/02/people-unlimited-inc-my-experiences.html