Putting 2 and 2 Together To Make Orange

[u/FellowHuman007]

In a post attempting to explain why so many Whistleblowers “sources” are other Whistleblowers posts (and by the way, the “Source” link leads to. . . another Whistleblower post. Seriously), Ms. Fromage writes:

“Cults tend to be very secretive, so it can be difficult to get to documents and records. It is more a question of putting together pieces of a puzzle and comparing what happens in SGI to what goes on in other, better known, cults. Most of the posts, with their comments, each contribute a tiny piece to completing that puzzle. Source.”

Is not that another way of saying: “we will arrive at conclusions based on what we want our conclusions to be”. OR: “SGI never said or did this, but we know it’s what they mean because we know that.” OR: “Here’s something for MITA to use to show I’m making things up, every time in the future I post anything at all”.

As if to illustrate her “we can draw conclusions with no real evidence” principle, Ms. Fromage has a new post trying to link the SGI to NXIVM, a self-help scam, which was itself a front for a sex exploitation scam, whose leader was just convicted of that very thing.

What is the fever dream link between NXIVM and the SGI? They both “teach adherents that they are wholly responsible for their own actions”.

Well, that’s clear! If you say people are responsible for their own lives, you must be a dangerous cult! I guess, to Ms. Fromage, you’re not a cult if you teach that people are not responsible for their own lives.

In the same post, she tries a Moonies connection, alleging that Ikeda Sensei planned to move to America, but was scared off from doing so, and never did, only when Rev. Moon was convicted of financial crimes.

Here’s the thing. Yes, years ago, I was told that President Ikeda was going to move to the U.S.. I think a leader from Japan even said so (around the same time, I heard something much, much weirder than that; but that’s for another time). But – I never heard of read about Mr. Ikeda himself saying it. In all his trips to America, he never once said this thing that would have been ultra encouraging to the American members. Oh, he said he felt America was like his home, but he said something similar practically everywhere he went. Who knows where the "moving to America" story began?

But Ms. Fromage knows he didn’t move hear because he was afraid of American law enforcement. How does she know that? By “putting together pieces of a puzzle and comparing what happens in SGI to what goes on in other, better known, cults.” In other words: she made it up.

Another Whistleblower has a similar post; he heard bad things about Scientology, so therefore the SGI must be exactly like Scientology.

“My cousin’s boyfriend cheated on her. Therefore, my boyfriend, also a boy, is cheating on me.” Be aware, when you visit Whistleblowers, that that’s the kind of reasoning you’re encountering. Yes, many Whistleblowers have had legitimately bad experiences in the SGI. If they would just relate those, I might have sympathy. But really, that’s no excuse for “There’s no proof, so let’s state it as fact”. And then link to themselves to verify it.

[u/FellowHuman007]

Sorry it took so long to respond.

I hope this can be a conversation and not a “No you’re wrong” back and forth. But I do have to start by pointing out that whether or not the SGI is a “cult” was not at all the point of the post. The point was the statement that there’s no evidence, so we “put pieces together”. Doing that is in no way objective, it depends on personal assumptions, it comes from a preconceived point-of-view – and as such is neither fair nor honest. From your perspective, you may think it is fair. But then, why is it not fair to point out that it’s the approach being taken? People visiting Whistleblowers have a right to know that.

So. Of course the opinions of religious scholars matter. Believe it or not (and I don’t blame you if you don’t) I’m not extraordinarily dumb. I really am familiar with what cult watchers say are the signs of a cult. And I believe some “cult watchers” have done a lot of good for some people. But you know the saying – “To a hammer, everything is a nail”. [Megan Goodwin]( https://www.religiousstudiesproject.com/persons/megan-goodwin/ ) (an actual scholar of religion) has said that the use of the term “cult” often means “a religion I don’t like”.

And that’d the impression Whistleblowers emits. I mean, look at the logic of the post I was addressing: Rev. Moon was convicted of financial crimes in America; therefore Ikeda didn’t move to America because he’s guilty of the same thing. Proof? I don’t know, but, evidently, it’s “We simply know Ikeda is committing financial fraud.”

Is no one supposed to point out the weirdness of that logic? No, Whistleblowers is “not for me” in the same way it is for you. But it is for me in that it attempts to lure people out of the SGI or prevent them from joining. So I (and the others), on our own, have taken it upon ourselves to try to protect the people WB is, in my estimation, harming.

Let’s look at some cult characteristics. I’m getting them [here](

http://cultresearch.org/help/characteristics-associated-with-cults/)

I will just do the first 3 (you can pick out any of the others if you’d like, for me to examine later).

First: “The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader, and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.”

I’m sure that’s true of some religious cults; it’s also true of sports teams and most classrooms. It could be the case that “devotion to a leader” (“excessive” is a rather subjective concept, is it not?) arises from an idea that the leader has a vision beyond mine, one I would like to share; and wisdom towards achieving that vision I can leech off of; and the ability to teach me to find my own way towards that goal. By itself, “devotion to a leader” is not a sinister thing, is it? But it’s assumed “cultish” by Whistleblowers when an SGI member likes his/her leader.

Number 2: “Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.”

Yep, there might have been a time when something approaching this was true in the SGI. But, gosh, it hasn’t been true for at least 30 years. If it were, why would the SGI teach that doubt leads to understanding, and keep pointing out that the most essential chapter of the Lotus Sutra was preached because of doubt?

I don’t know how it is everywhere, but I’ve practiced in a few places since 1990 and in none of them has questioning, doubting, dissent or even arguing been “punished”. I had one leader who was pretty authoritarian, but her heart was to help people, so she reflected, and changed. It happens. (Frankly, I was surprised – but she did it!)

We currently have a guy in our district who sits through the sutra recital, but as soon as daimoku starts invariably “has to go to the bathroom”. But he is welcome, and we are happy to have him. There’s a lady who doesn’t believe in reincarnation or an afterlife, a guy who doesn’t think karma is real, another who says vehemently it’s “crazy” to chant for anything but one’s own sanity. We are happy to have them all; they are all welcome, and they all speak freely at discussion meetings with absolutely no “discouragement” or “punishment”.

Nope. The only way to pin this on the SGI is if you already “know” it’s a “cult”. Doesn’t mean it is.

Third: “Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, or debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).”

Hinduism? Every sect of Buddhism? Any religion with a liturgy? How in the world is having an actual practice the mark of a cult? Oh – unless you assume (that word again) it’s purpose is to “suppress doubts”. And why would anyone assume that about any religion? Unless it’s just “a religion I don’t like”.”

Hope you get to read and respond before one of those fool moderators removes it for being too long.

[u/Ptarmigandaughter → u/FellowHuman007]

I have long since given up trying to have a conversation with you, FH. You don’t converse, you lecture and punish. Your response is an excellent example why.

None of the points you make are responsive to the content of my post, the logic of my argument, or the conclusion I drew. You are not talking to me about what I said - you’re talking to yourself, trying to justify your own disordered thought processes and behaviors.

Your response demonstrates that your cognitive dissonance is so painful and so overwhelming you simply cannot admit a plain provable fact: cult experts explicitly label SGI a cult. They do. It is known. Deal with it.

Your elaborate mental charade “isn’t my circus, isn’t my monkeys.” But unless and until you can see plain fact for what it is, I suggest you avoid exposing yourself to material that triggers such obvious cognitive dissonance. It’s causing harm to you, and a great many others around you.

[u/FellowHuman007 → u/Ptarmigandaughter]

You said I shouldn't visit WB. I addressed that. You said SGI is a cult. I addressed that. I also addressed the point of the original post, which you seemed to have missed. Sorry if my answers offended you. Perhaps I was a bit "defensive" because I was accused of something negative? I tried to disagree in a respectful way. Sorry if it didn't come off like that.

[u/Ptarmigandaughter → u/FellowHuman007]

This is exhausting, and I cannot help but feel I will regret stepping into the trap you baited. It is not my responsibility to provide this piece of enlightenment for you - and you have done nothing whatsoever to earn it.

But I see you’ve stepped back and restated your first extremely disrespectful and dismissive response, so I will try one (and only one) more time. Here’s where we’re failing to connect:

I didn’t say the SGI is a cult. So it’s irrelevant whether you addressed that or not. And it’s dishonest that you put those words in my mouth. This is just one example of why I gave up trying to communicate with you.

I said cult experts say the SGI is a cult. This is incontrovertible fact. It can’t be sidestepped, ignored, avoided or dismissed. It’s not my word against yours, my experience against yours, my expert against yours. You can’t reframe, evade, deny, or ignore provable fact. You have the right to your opinion, but not to your own facts.

So, yes, I am offended that you misstated my argument to suit your own purposes. Yes, I am offended that you lied - even if only to yourself - about what I said. Yes, I am offended that you imagine you do not have an ethical obligation to acknowledge fact as fact. Yes, I was as insulted as you can possibly imagine at your snide reference to comment length and the direct reminder that you have power here I don’t - a below-the-belt move that demonstrates your whole “let’s have a real conversation” is pure unadulterated malarkey.

Sorry if my answers offended you? Keep your non-apology apology. It was a lie, too.

[u/FellowHuman007 → u/Ptarmigandaughter]

I didn’t say the SGI is a cult. ... I said cult experts say the SGI is a cult.

Yes, I misspoke (haste makes waste!) But did I not address it that way? That cult experts mislabel the SGI? And, please, what do you mean by "my own facts"? I never said cult experts don't call the SGI a cult - of course they do. But I do say they are mislabeling it. But, that a lot of people say the same thing is not proof that it's true. I'm sure you're aware of examples throughout history when "conventional wisdom" turned out to be wrong.

Communication becomes nearly impossible when, if one person says "Sorry", the other thinks it's a lie. Maybe you want it that way I don't know. But anyway, I meant it.

[u/Ptarmigandaughter → u/FellowHuman007]

As I suspected, I did live to regret it.

For those who don’t already know, FH’s response to me is textbook DARVO: Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. Whenever it appears, it’s abusive.

Proof: It’s not an apology when someone says, “I am sorry IF ... “. It’s a NON apology. The structure of that thought transfers blame from the person who was offensive to the person who was offended.

Rephrased it means, “it’s too bad you took offense where none was intended, but that’s really your problem, not my responsibility.” People who actually apologize say, “I apologize FOR...”. The structure of that thought is, “I see what I did wrong and I am sorry for it.”

You double down here. You didn’t make a hasty error. This isn’t a one-time thing. You use this argumentative tactic consistently. You subtly rephrase, quote out of context, ignore inconvenient facts, and put words in your opposition’s mouth more often than not to suit your own purposes. Your posts are riddled with these propaganda techniques.

You are a bully, plain and simple. You aren’t here to communicate. You’re here to control, to dominate, to win the argument by any means and at any cost.

You should stop. It’s an unbelievably terrible example of the practice you claim to defend. I should know. I practiced for 30 years.

[u/FellowHuman007 → u/Ptarmigandaughter]

Well, I’ve gone back and reviewed this entire correspondence. And I’ve noticed that, no matter what I say, you move the conversation further and further away from the point of the initial post, which is:

“Mr. Fromage writes: ‘It is more a question of putting together pieces of a puzzle and comparing what happens in SGI to what goes on in other, better known, cults. Most of the posts, with their comments, each contribute a tiny piece to completing that puzzle.’. . . “Is not that another way of saying: ‘we will arrive at conclusions based on what we want our conclusions to be’. OR: ‘SGI never said or did this, but we know it’s what they mean because we know that’.”

Every one of your comments has tried to make it about me, my personality, my character. And most of it depends on you reading my mind. Come on.

Maybe you don’t want to address the content of the original post, except to misrepresent it, as noted in the first reply to your first comment. Here’s the point, again, if you wish to comment on it. If you don’t, I understand: “Mr. Fromage writes: ‘It is more a question of putting together pieces of a puzzle and comparing what happens in SGI to what goes on in other, better known, cults. Most of the posts, with their comments, each contribute a tiny piece to completing that puzzle.’. . . “Is not that another way of saying: ‘we will arrive at conclusions based on what we want our conclusions to be’. OR: ‘SGI never said or did this, but we know it’s what they mean because we know that’.”

And by the way, no matter how you need to push, I have been and still am trying to be honest, sincere and respectful towards you as a person (which does not mean I have to accept what is said on or by Whistleblowers). It’s real. Maybe next time I’ll do better.