When you were Hard-Core JW, did Opponents Screaming or Filming you help your Exit?

by PokerPlayerPhil 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Ninjamaskinen

  OrphanCrow wrote:

  
  

  "I am not sure what you mean by "non violent protest", Ninja. I am going to assume that your comment relates to the recent display by some young, immature men at the Memorial.

  A violent act does not need to be defined by whether or not it causes physical injury - many acts are violent in nature by the virtue of aggressiveness. There is a big difference between aggressiveness and assertiveness.

  Aggressiveness attacks other people's space - assertiveness is about claiming your own space.

  The nature of the relationship between the JW adherents and the WTS is an abusive and controlling one. And, with that in mind, any attacks or aggressive methods only serve to tighten the bond between the WTS and the JW.

  So, your comment that "it may just reach one person that experiences it. That one person is a difference maker" is a fallacy. That one person comes at a pretty high price - the aggressive actions required to 'save' that one person can, and does, throw all the other JWs under the bus, who could potentially be reached with more sophisticated methods. For every one you 'save', you sacrifice the countless others who could be 'saved' but instead are pushed into an even tighter relationship with the WTS by that aggressive action."

  
  

  I meant what I said. Non violent protest. That is exactly what happened in the video. Your opinion about how mature it was has no relevance. They did not enter anyone's personal space. The memorial is a public event. They quickly left the public space after stating their opinion of the ceremony. Your argument holds no water. You sound like an apologist. Also, your claim that that type of protest would never reach anyone is unproven, hence you are stating a fallacy.
  

  
  

  
  

  
  
• 

  OrphanCrow

  You sound like an apologist

  I am not an apologist. I just understand the dynamics of the type of situation you are speaking of. And I understand what activism and public protest entails. I also understand that some protests do far more harm than good by the way that they are carried out.

  They did not enter anyone's personal space. The memorial is a public event.

  The Memorial may be a public event, but the Kingdom Hall itself is the 'personal space' of the JWs. You know that.

  
  

  Also, your claim that that type of protest would never reach anyone is unproven

  I didn't make that claim. I said that if you save one person, that it comes at the cost of destroying many others' chances at being saved. Please do not say that I have said something I didn't.

  What is proven, though, is that aggressive action by others towards either the abuser or the victim results in a tighter bond between the two. This is common and accepted knowledge within the field of psychology.

  Did you not read the link I posted in the other thread about Stockholm Syndrome? If you didn't, you should.
• 

  Ninjamaskinen

  So an interruption to a lifeless ceremony will cause the destruction of someone being saved? HAHAHA. And NO, the Kingdumb hall is no one's personal space. Sunday meetings are listed as public. Check your facts. I know about Stockholm syndrome. I am Scandinavian. This open protest to the memorial has nothing to do with that. This is type of flawed logic jws use to justify their arguments.
  
• 

  OrphanCrow

  And NO, the Kingdumb hall is no one's personal space. Sunday meetings are listed as public. Check your facts. I know about Stockholm syndrome. I am Scandinavian. This open protest to the memorial has nothing to do with that. This is type of flawed logic jws use to justify their arguments.

  On another thread you called me 'smart'. I am unable to return the compliment.

  I will try to explain to you the difference between personal and public space in the context of the JWs by giving you an illustration that might help you 'get it'.

  Let's say that you own your own home - or maybe you just rent it. It is your home. Your 'personal' space.

  Now, let's say that you decide to have a household sale for whatever reason - you want to sell off all your old furniture and the extra car you have in your garage. So you advertise an open house - you open your house to the public for the sale.

  Now, with your logic, your house is now a target for anyone coming into it and doing whatever they want. According to you - your home is no longer a 'personal space'.

  I realize that the JWs advertise their Sunday worship as being 'open to the public'. That phrase is an invitation for the public to come and share the space that is normally for JWs. The public does not own that space - the JWs do. That is what is meant by the term 'personal space'. It is a political label. It designates the 'political' position of the parties involved based upon 'ownership' (not necessarily monetary) of space.

  So an interruption to a lifeless ceremony will cause the destruction of someone being saved? HAHAHA.

  Your statement makes it very clear that being Scandinavian has nothing at all to do with understanding the Stockholm Syndrome.
  
  
• 

  Vidiot

  The only "apostate" I ever saw was this one guy who'd stand outside the entrance to the assembly hall parking lot with a sandwich board (can't remember what it said).

  He wasn't loud or obnoxious (honestly, I never heard him say a word, now that I think about it), but he was there almost every weekend.

  Many times it was pouring rain (it was the Lower Mainland, BC), but he'd still show up.

  I actually felt a little sorry for him.
• 

  Ninjamaskinen

  OrphanCrow wrote:

  
  

  "On another thread you called me 'smart'. I am unable to return the compliment.

  I will try to explain to you the difference between personal and public space in the context of the JWs by giving you an illustration that might help you 'get it'.

  Let's say that you own your own home - or maybe you just rent it. It is your home. Your 'personal' space.

  Now, let's say that you decide to have a household sale for whatever reason - you want to sell off all your old furniture and the extra car you have in your garage. So you advertise an open house - you open your house to the public for the sale.

  Now, with your logic, your house is now a target for anyone coming into it and doing whatever they want. According to you - your home is no longer a 'personal space'.

  I realize that the JWs advertise their Sunday worship as being 'open to the public'. That phrase is an invitation for the public to come and share the space that is normally for JWs. The public does not own that space - the JWs do. That is what is meant by the term 'personal space'. It is a political label. It designates the 'political' position of the parties involved based upon 'ownership' (not necessarily monetary) of space"

  So an interruption to a lifeless ceremony will cause the destruction of someone being saved? HAHAHA.

  Your statement makes it very clear that being Scandinavian has nothing at all to do with understanding the Stockholm Syndrome."

  Ninjamaskinen: reply
  

  
  

  Wrong.If you advertise something as public and invite the public to your space, it is not illegal for the public to express their opinion on that property. That is what this is. Your illustration reminds me of the dreadful Sunday morning talk speakers' useless comparisons of apples to oranges.

  
  

  Also, the events that caused the coining of the term "Stockholm Syndrome" were big when I was a child. I understand it well. I don't really think you are all that intelligent.
  
• 

  freemindfade

  I believe the most damaging thing to the organization is for any of us to appear rational and in control. That breaks their faith more than anything. you are attacking a CULT. cults exist and thrive by CULT RULES. When you yell at the meeting or at assembly or make a theatrical scene you are playing into CULT RULES. It doesn't impress us. It doesn't impress rank and file. It doesn't impress non-believers aka worldly people. It only impresses YOU. Just think how happy you are making the GB. Have you thought about that??? They know when they see this it's like you telling all the witnesses you are doing this in front of "you are right". Think about the little kids you may have a chance to leave this thing someday, and you are frightening them driving them in deeper to the hedge of the cult. They have theatrical warfare. We are fighting cult warfare, are you trying to help them? Ninja?
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Your illustration reminds me of the dreadful Sunday morning talk speakers' useless comparisons of apples to oranges.

  It isn't apples and oranges. And I intended on it sounding like something from the platform - I thought you might find a familiar format easier to understand. I was wrong.

  If you advertise something as public and invite the public to your space, it is not illegal for the public to express their opinion on that property.

  You are absolutely right - it is not illegal. I didn't say it was. But, the person who owns the property does have the right to expect reasonable and respectful behavior from the public who do attend.

  The boundary that exists between 'personal' and 'public' space is not a legal one in this context - it is a social one.

  Also, the events that caused the coining of the term "Stockholm Syndrome" were big when I was a child. I understand it well.

  The fact that you were a child when those events happened is irrelevant. That is just as silly as saying that because you were a child in Poland when WW2 broke out that you understand the dynamics of why it happened.

  The Stockholm incident is only the event that prompted an entire body of research in the field of psychology since then. The event only served as a foundation and a template in which to understand the dynamics of what occurs in power imbalanced relationships across a broad spectrum of human society. It is that body of knowledge that I am referring to when I speak of the Stockholm Syndrome, not the event itself.

  I don't really think you are all that intelligent

  I don't care what you think about me. Just like it doesn't matter what I think of you - we are all here to seek out the most effective way to combat the influence of the destruction that the WTS leaves in its wake.

  
  
• 

  Ninjamaskinen

  

  OrphanCrow

  
  

  So you are upset at the social implications of these memorial protesters. OK fine. You didn't like it. I'm ok with that. My basis for my arguments on this site are against the ones who broadly condemn any direct action and think that being a keyboard warrior or soft reasoning is the ONLY way. There is a lot of hypocrisy here and to condemn and show disgust for people going to the front lines to make a statement reeks of elitist mentality.

  Perhaps you don't like the way the message was delivered at the memorial. The jw format of question answer observe never lets ANYONE question the rhetoric of the watchtower during any of their meetings. Isn't time some people broke this silence and started asking real questions about this org during their meetings? What kind of mental prison does someone live in to think this is so taboo?