bella wrote:...I don't think anyone here questions that what you experienced was over-the-top. What I do question is whether you can write off an organisation and its teacher's beliefs because people acted wrongly.
IF (big if) the organisation concerned was to recognise past mistakes and did everything within their power to make amends for those "wrongs", then yes I would agree that it would be unfair to write them off. On the other hand, if the organisation makes no such attempt to learn from or rectify the "wrongs" (and indeed attempts to cover up and spin away the same) then I would suggest that the organisation is at fault and not the individuals concerned, as it is quite clear that they were (are) acting within the sanction of the organisation.
This is the main point that current members of the SES appear to miss when coming on here to discuss their views. They keep saying to us..."That was then"...but the organisation continues to show exactly the same arrogance and stupidity that it always did. How can it expect us to start the reconciliation process when they are not admitting to themselves that their whole experiment went badly wrong.
bella wrote:..Surely you'd be looking at making things clearer to the next generation, and trying to eliminate the chance for screwups and misinterpretation. It may or may not work, but I'd think that was the logical next step, at least for the people still involved.
You would think so, wouldn't you!
bella wrote:...I dunno if it will make you feel any better, but the people assigned to take the children's group (the "Sunday School" on Saturday) now are required to have teaching qualifications.
As you guess, it doesn't make me feel any better at all. Why, because I don't believe the SES has any place educating children, or advising the children's parents on parenthood. The SES has set itself up as an organisation which gives spiritual guidance for a fee. That guidance should only be given to consenting adults who sign up and pay for the courses.
bella wrote:...For the record, I just joined the marketing team.
Well, I don't know if you're being serious about this position Bella, or are just making a comment on your views, but I will offer a couple of suggestions all the same.
[Transparency]
As transparency is one of your aims, how about publishing a few sample weeks worth of material. Publish also the views of the husband / wife relationship and the views to homosexual relations.
[Spiritual affiliations]
The public should be made aware of the relationship of the SES to various spiritual leaders, and the financial support that is given to those leaders. They should also be made aware of the authors of the material that is given out, not just the publication which are quoted, but the people who put together the material itself - and their qualifications to do so.
[Spiritual practices]
It is absolutely necessary to let potential joiners know exactly what form of "mind-calming" exercises they will be introduced to including details of exactly which branch of meditation they will be following.
[Physical practices]
Again, it should be detailed what dietary recommendations are made, along with the recommendations for work / sleep ratio, and the amount of time that a "student" can expect to spend working for the SES.
[Essence of the SES]
Lastly, I think the SES should describe itself as a religion, not a school of philosophy (as philosophy, it is not). It would also be a sound idea to publish a set of texts which people can refer to as representative of the ideology being sold - i.e. what is the SES's bible / Torah / Quran etc.
If you publish these things then it will solve several of the current problems associated with the SES. Firstly, people will have a greater understanding before joining, and so will have a far smaller chance of leaving after the first few weeks. Secondly, it will open up the SES to a much wider debate and will possibly attract more visitors as a result (surely this is the point of a marketing department). Thirdly, it will enable current members to talk more openly about what they do in the evenings / weekends to non-members, destroying the ridiculous veil of secrecy that is surely one of the SES most controversial policies.
I know that even if you don't dismiss these recomendations out of hand, then others in the organisation will. It is a shame, because even if half of them were followed there would be a reasonable chance that the SES would be able to join the rest of society instead of remaining covertly-aloof.
Alban