Talk:Debunking of the anti-cult movement myths

It was really Barker and her Making of a Moonie that blew the lid off the "lump 'em all together" anti-cult scare. When she proved with documented research that hardly anyone contacted by a Unificationist gets involved, and showed how high the attrition rate was for people who "moved in", that really let the wind out of the sails of zealots like Hassan who claimed that hapless weak-minded victims could be "snapped" or "zapped" with (unpecified!) mind-control techniques right on the street -- "just one look, that's all it took". Gimme a break!

To do:

• Find Steve Hassan quote, where he claims that anyone is "susceptible" to being sucked in willy-nilly, even in a chance encounter on the street. Does his BITE model explain how someone can control all information a potential recruit gets while still on the street? Does it show the difference between the information control exercised by a new car salesman (when he's got you in the showroom) and "cult mind control" exercised by a potential recruit who visits NRM members on their turf? Does it account for the "one-sided argument" fallacy, and/or the percent of the general populace who are aware that unscrupulous people often make one-sided arguments? (It's common knowledge, isn't it?)
• Are their any other examples (aside from NRMs) in which people are said to have been "controlled" via the BITE model, etc., other than those incarcerated by force?
• Find sociologists who say it's really about saving face.
• Find quotes about 'mind control' used purely to justify deprogramming. That is, is their any one who espouses the mind control theory who does NOT advocate unethical methods of dealing with it, such as (a) kidnapping (illegal); (b) surreptious conservatorship (deception); surprise "intervention" (deception) as recommended for exit counseling?
• Clarify claim by mind control advocates that APA never "said it was unsceintific" vs. actual statement that "It is not part of science". What's the distinction? Proven, unproven, disproven: APA said it's "not proven", which leaves open the possibility that it 'might be true'. Advocates say they "didn't say it was unproven" HINTING that it's, what? proven? unproven, not disproven?

Lot's of jive talk here, smokescreens, and deception. All on the pro-mindcontrol side. They are suspect. -- Uncle Ed (talk) 20:27, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Wow, this is an incredibly POV article. One-sided content aside, a much less POV name is also needed. -Sean Curtin 00:22, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

LOL! Sorry, I meant it only as a talk page. I'll replace the article text with an NPOV tag right away. Maybe a link to cult watching groups, too? -- Uncle Ed (talk) 14:41, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

It looks like the text was added back, and it is totally inappropriate. I'm going to move the bare facts into Anti-cult movement, which is where it should be anyway. -Willmcw 04:42, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Will. That was incredibly sloppy work on my part; then I just forgot all about and left it for someone else to clean up. You sure a a team player! :-) -- Uncle Ed (talk) 17:31, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)