The smoking gun - do survivors lie?

[Anne Bonney]

If you speak to fellow survivors or, as Ursus pointed out to edcons or parents, survivor stories are tossed aside as not being very credible.  This isnt my fault (I know you would like to blame me).  I am trying to take a look at why survivor stories are not credible and as I pointed out I think it is at least partially due to the way people here communicate.  It comes across as exaggerated or fantasy of some sort.  

Only to those who have been conditioned by programs to respond to criticism of them the way you have.

You really think a police officer is going to take you seriously when you speak of Gulags, kidnappings and brainwashing.

Back when I was in?.....no.  Now?  Maybe.....and I think the cops are smart enough to understand that the people using those words are making....wait for it.....analogies and metaphors.


 

If a person were truly abused they would try their best to communicate this to the authorities not use fantasy mixed with reality.

It's not fantasy.  The description of gulags actually does closely mirror many of these so called "troubled teen" institutions.  You don't like that particular descriptor, but it's not that far off, unfortunately.

 The police can easily check to see if there have been any kids kidnapped recently and conclude you are lying. So why blame the edcons and police for not believing you?

Well, very often when a program moves into town they set up meetings with various local officials and condition even them to not believe the kids.  And the kids start off 'in the hole', so to speak, by being labeled "troubled" anyway.   So, again.....kids have zero recourse when they are being abused.

[Froderik]

Gulag is the best word the english language has to describe these places.  All of us have been through one of these places Whooter, unlike you, so why do you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge our inside perspective?

Well said.

[Whooter]

Gulag is the best word the english language has to describe these places.  All of us have been through one of these places Whooter, unlike you, so why do you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge our inside perspective?

But if you are trying to communicate with people who have not been through one of these places then your vocabulary looks foolish.  Amongst yourselves it seems to work fine, but if you are looking for credibility from people who have never been in a program you need to use different words unless you want to be viewed as childish.



...

[Watchful Yeoman]

Gulag is the best word the english language has to describe these places.  All of us have been through one of these places Whooter, unlike you, so why do you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge our inside perspective?

Well said.

:tup:

[Anne Bonney]

Gulag is the best word the english language has to describe these places.  All of us have been through one of these places Whooter, unlike you, so why do you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge our inside perspective?

But if you are trying to communicate with people who have not been through one of these places then your vocabulary looks foolish.  Amongst yourselves it seems to work fine, but if you are looking for credibility from people who have never been in a program you need to use different words unless you want to be viewed as childish.

Ok, ok....you've given your little PSA.  Now you can pat yourself on the back for explaining to us and others who have been abused in such programs why we won't be believed by the likes of you.

[shaggys]

I use the term brainwashing to describe what happened to me at Straight inc because that is exactly what happened. I was forced to sit in a chair and stare straight ahead for 12 to 18 hours a day. Even moving my eyes away from the wall for a moment would invite harsh confrontation by staff/group. The only movement allowed was to turn your head to face the person speaking. The conversation in group all day long revolved around how awful we were as "druggies" and how only Straight inc could save us from ourselves. I was 15 and had only smoked a little pot and had a few beers in my whole life up to that point. I was taught that i would die, go insane or be locked in jail if I didn't fully commit myself to Straights' dogma. Every aspect of my life was completely controlled - eating, washing, sleeping, speaking, - everything. After month upon month of this I started believing what Straight was telling me. Eventually I believed EVERYTHING they told me.
It is my understanding that many programs today still use Straight-like methods on kids. It is brainwashing and I will continue to use that term to describe it.

[Whooter]

Ok, ok....you've given your little PSA.  Now you can pat yourself on the back for explaining to us and others who have been abused in such programs why we won't be believed by the likes of you.

But isnt that the point?  Dont you want to be believed by non program people or people who have never been inside a program?  I have heard many here state that no one believes them when they tell their story and I am pointing out a huge reason why.  



...

[Watchful Yeoman]

I use the term brainwashing to describe what happened to me at Straight inc because that is exactly what happened. I was forced to sit in a chair and stare straight ahead for 12 to 18 hours a day. Even moving my eyes away from the wall for a moment would invite harsh confrontation by staff/group. The only movement allowed was to turn your head to face the person speaking. The conversation in group all day long revolved around how awful we were as "druggies" and how only Straight inc could save us from ourselves. I was 15 and had only smoked a little pot and had a few beers in my whole life up to that point. I was taught that i would die, go insane or be locked in jail if I didn't fully commit myself to Straights' dogma. Every aspect of my life was completely controlled - eating, washing, sleeping, speaking, - everything. After month upon month of this I started believing what Straight was telling me. Eventually I believed EVERYTHING they told me.
It is my understanding that many programs today still use Straight-like methods on kids. It is brainwashing and I will continue to use that term to describe it.

Thanks, shaggys.  This is a horrific description.  I think we also have to bear in mind that because Whooter makes money from programs he has a vested interest in denying any abuse and portraying survivors as "liars."  But, as we all have recently learned, the only confirmed liar here is Whooter who recently admitted to making up a family and a family story of "program success."  I wouldn't worry about convincing this goon about anything because one, in the big picture he's absolutely, utterly meaningless to any of our lives and two, this entire thread is just his way to distract the conversation from his admitted and proven lies (all pro-program and anti-survivor, BTW).

I fabricated a son

Seriously, is anyone here really thinking we have to convince an abject liar like this guy about anything?  I sure don't.  The guy who made up his entire family, complete with fake kids, doesn't require any response about our own credibility.  "I fabricated a son."  For fuck's sake, this guy is not worth explaining anything to.

[Anne Bonney]

Ok, ok....you've given your little PSA.  Now you can pat yourself on the back for explaining to us and others who have been abused in such programs why we won't be believed by the likes of you.

But isnt that the point?  Dont you want to be believed by non program people or people who have never been inside a program?  

That wouldn't include "the likes of you", which is why I stated it the way I did.

[Whooter]

Ok, ok....you've given your little PSA.  Now you can pat yourself on the back for explaining to us and others who have been abused in such programs why we won't be believed by the likes of you.

But isnt that the point?  Dont you want to be believed by non program people or people who have never been inside a program?  

That wouldn't include "the likes of you", which is why I stated it the way I did.

That does include me, also, yes.  Sometimes it is difficult to differentiate between the fantasy part of the post and the reality.  If the child wasnt really kidnapped then was he really abused?  Do you see what I mean?



...

[Ursus]

Ok, ok....you've given your little PSA.  Now you can pat yourself on the back for explaining to us and others who have been abused in such programs why we won't be believed by the likes of you.

But isnt that the point?  Dont you want to be believed by non program people or people who have never been inside a program?  I have heard many here state that no one believes them when they tell their story and I am pointing out a huge reason why.

Personally, I don't think a whole lot of folk will EVER believe these stories no matter what language is used. Those people will only start waking up when they hear the stories from their peers, other parents, co-workers and other folk personally known, and/or the sheer magnitude of the phenomenon accumulated over time. Hearing opinions from savvy experts can't hurt either.

All in all, I don't think the choice in words makes a huge difference. Any group of people dealing with a subset of the human experience over a period of time develops their own vernacular. Most people realize that.

But... "clear communication" wasn't really your point in starting this thread, now was it? Your point was that "survivors need to lie." This whole discussion 'bout "word usage" sounds like yet another of your obfuscating smokescreens.

[Watchful Yeoman]

Was he really a parent?  Did he really have a kid?  These are good questions that are answered by

I fabricated a son

I admit that

When trying to differentiate between fact and fantasy, the first thing we need to do is remove the obvious fantasy from the equation, that is, we dismiss everything Whooter has to say on the subject because he made up a family and kids that he never had.  Then we can have a real discussion with real, not "fabricated," people.

[Anne Bonney]

Ok, ok....you've given your little PSA.  Now you can pat yourself on the back for explaining to us and others who have been abused in such programs why we won't be believed by the likes of you.

But isnt that the point?  Dont you want to be believed by non program people or people who have never been inside a program?  I have heard many here state that no one believes them when they tell their story and I am pointing out a huge reason why.

Personally, I don't think a whole lot of folk will EVER believe these stories no matter what language is used. Those people will only start waking up when they hear the stories from their peers, other parents, co-workers and other folk personally known, and/or the sheer magnitude of the phenomenon accumulated over time. Hearing opinions from savvy experts can't hurt either.

All in all, I don't think the choice in words makes a huge difference. Any group of people dealing with a subset of the human experience over a period of time develops their own vernacular. Most people realize that.

But... "clear communication" wasn't really your point in starting this thread, now was it? Your point was that "survivors need to lie." This whole discussion 'bout "word usage" sounds like yet another of your obfuscating smokescreens.

BINGO!

 :notworthy:

[Whooter]

I use the term brainwashing to describe what happened to me at Straight inc because that is exactly what happened. I was forced to sit in a chair and stare straight ahead for 12 to 18 hours a day. Even moving my eyes away from the wall for a moment would invite harsh confrontation by staff/group. The only movement allowed was to turn your head to face the person speaking. The conversation in group all day long revolved around how awful we were as "druggies" and how only Straight inc could save us from ourselves. I was 15 and had only smoked a little pot and had a few beers in my whole life up to that point. I was taught that i would die, go insane or be locked in jail if I didn't fully commit myself to Straights' dogma. Every aspect of my life was completely controlled - eating, washing, sleeping, speaking, - everything. After month upon month of this I started believing what Straight was telling me. Eventually I believed EVERYTHING they told me.
It is my understanding that many programs today still use Straight-like methods on kids. It is brainwashing and I will continue to use that term to describe it.

That’s an awful experience, Shaggys.  I have heard similar stories from other people from straight here also.  Not sure it classifies as brainwashing but I would guess it is pretty dam close.  But, to me, your story is believable because you took the time to explain the details of the abuse that took place and the name of the program.  If you had said you were kidnapped, held in a Gulag and brainwashed by prison guards I may not feel the same way about the credibility of your post.

As far as similarities to other programs, I have heard the same thing from posters like Anne Bonney.  My response is that you will always see similarities between programs because they are buildings that have lots of teenagers in them who are at-risk (or thought to be at-risk).  If someone told you a staff member  at their program made them sit in a chair and stare at the wall because they broke a minor infraction.  This would be similar to your experience at straight, but it may not be abusive.  The kids punishment may be short, (not 18 hours ).

So seeing similarities doesn’t mean the programs are the same or are abusive.  I know first hand that several programs do not do this.  But the brainwash term may apply in your case.  I couldnt imagine having to endure something like that and I am sorry you had to go through it at such a young age.



...

[Whooter]

Personally, I don't think a whole lot of folk will EVER believe these stories no matter what language is used. Those people will only start waking up when they hear the stories from their peers, other parents, co-workers and other folk personally known, and/or the sheer magnitude of the phenomenon accumulated over time. Hearing opinions from savvy experts can't hurt either.

I agree that there will always be people who will be closed minded and just refuse to listen.  But a big step in getting people to listen is to try and make your story as credible as possible.  Once you start talking about kidnappings and Gulags a lot of people will sense the story is a bit of a fantasy.  But if you look at how Shaggys explained his/her time in straight it seemed very credible to me, even with the inference of the brainwashing.

All in all, I don't think the choice in words makes a huge difference. Any group of people dealing with a subset of the human experience over a period of time develops their own vernacular. Most people realize that.

So this subset language is intended to be used between one another i.e.  survivor to survivor.  When the people involved in the GAO investigation were discussing the problems with these various programs they did not use kidnapping, Gulag, prison guards etc.  They used language which would present itself as the most credible in communicating these places and the events that occurred (because that is their job).  Why didnt they use the language that fornits uses?  I think the answer is that it would not be factual.

But... "clear communication" wasn't really your point in starting this thread, now was it? Your point was that "survivors need to lie." This whole discussion 'bout "word usage" sounds like yet another of your obfuscating smokescreens.

Clear communication was not my original point, you are right, we have drifted from the initial intent but I think it has been a good conversation to this point.  Covering the” language” was a natural progression of the topic discussion.  So I dont view it as a derailment or veering off topic.

So to Urus’s point if many of the survivors know that people who have never been inside a program do not speak this way (or use these words) then why do they embellish the language to make it appear that they were victims of kidnapping and brainwashing, torture etc.?  Why not tell it like it is like Shaggys demonstrated and lay out the facts?



...