carlynnm8 wrote:…who are they taking their advice from re the psychological stuff? Do they take responsibility when someone suffers severe stress disorders or depression through these tactics?
The SES doesn’t hold much respect for the field of psychology. Looking at the philosophy itself would indicate that the SES believes the mind to be stronger than the physical body. I don’t think they have much respect for the fragility of human mental well being.
They believe their philosophy to be the ultimate truth and as such they believe that it cannot cause harm and therefore does not need to be scrutinised in this fashion.
Looking back at my school days, I think there were a lot of cases where my contemporaries getting into trouble. I think there was plenty of behaviour that was regarded as naughty, unruly or belligerent that was more likely to be symptoms of learning difficulties, dyslexia, depression, and perhaps even mild forms autism.
Interestingly they don’t have much respect for mainstream medicine either. The school doctors were homeopaths. It is quite common to watch the word of mouth recommendations work there way round groups of SES members for their latest alternative or naturopathic fad.
carlynnm8 wrote:How could a seemingly wise, enlightened and spiritual group treat children like that?
Two points here. Firstly I think the word is “can” not “could”. This is not necessarily a past tense issue. It also isn't just children, your experiences highlight that there is much cause for concern about the effect on adults too. Whilst much has changed in the SES, principally due to the change in leadership the philosophy itself has not changed and I do not believe things been significantly examined to mitigate the risks to children. There is plenty of room for things like this to happen again. The school remains entirely secretive. Secondly, any belief system allows a person to bypass their own critical thought processes and act a less than decent manner. It is a criticism that may be levelled at any organised religion or group where there is an overriding deference to the authority of that group. The deference to Lambie now and MacLaren and his guru in the past is significant. It is this that meant the governors of the St James and St Vedast schools and the staff bypassed their responsibilities and allowed the mistreatment to occur.
carlynnm8 wrote:I dont think many of the people on the residentials thought there was anything strange about the content of these weekends, no-one seemed to comment on how difficult it was or if they liked the set up - strange - as if they feel they have no opinion just blind acceptance.
Some are used to the residential, others believe that they are good. I suspect that most who are critical don’t survive long and choose to leave. A small minority do indeed voice their criticisms and choose to stay. Personally I don’t understand why.
For me, when I first went on a residential I was a 16 member of a Foundation group. It didn’t really occur that this wasn’t normal however hard it was; after all my parents would do it regularly and so would the majority friends and of course all my teachers at school. I always knew from the moment I joined the Foundation group that residentials were part of deal. I can’t really imagine what it must be like for a group of members of the public off the street going on their first weekend.
carlynnm8 wrote:…i was lucky, warning bells were going off for quite a while and i decided to listen. It was quite difficult giving up the idea of a "happy, peaceful and blissful" existence when I eventually became realised, it can seem like a nice, safe place to be..........eek! I have to admit I did like it all in the beginning
It’s easy to see why it’s attractive to people. It can be a big escape from normal life. The people are generally very nice people, well meaning and pleasant. It’s hypnotic. But it’s no more true than life outside.
carlynnm8 wrote:…Are there any others that feel angry about being taken in so badly?
Yes there are others, some of whom who contribute to this board. The majority of people here do tend to be talking about the children’s schools. I think us former pupils feel bad about it principally because we did not have the choice to leave. There are parents who contribute here too about being taken in and not understanding the true connections between their children’s school and the SES.
I was aware at school that I was having an unconventional education. I didn’t know how unconventional until I was well out of it. And to be honest there are still things that get raised here these days that take me by surprise and I realise that yet something else was not right or normal.
Free Thinker wrote: The Youth Group residentials were really fun, actually. Everyone there was under 35, and we ordered in pizza, had a great time playing music at night, and I felt very comfortable. I wore ripped jeans and nobody cared.
Ripped jeans, pizza and listening to music. That’d never be allowed in a foundation group.