The smoking gun - do survivors lie?

[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?



...

[Anne Bonney]

In case there was confusion:  Keep the title of the thread to "Why do Survivors need to Lie?" and speak your mind.

They don't.  The reality of what's done to them/us is bad enough.  Whooter started this thread with the sole intention of making it appear that survivors routinely lie about being abused.  We don't.  Let it die the death that is Danny's "authentic self" thread.  He's talking to himself, which is what Whooter should be doing here by starting off a thread with such a loaded question.

 :feedtrolls:  :fuckoff:

[DannyB II]

It has been established throughout the Troubled Teen industry that the graduates and non graduates who did not do well have a need to embellish or lie about their time spent at one or more of the programs.

Has it been established? Where? Please cite your source or proof for that presumption!

The only source *I've* come across for that kind of statement has been from EdCons and program proponents trying to pooh-pooh the credibility of abuse accounts. And those folk have a pretty compelling incentive to protect their profits.

Well, then keep reading, because I am a program survivor and I have been listening to people like yourself whore for attention for over 30 years.

[DannyB II]

I dismiss the premise of this thread based on the OP's credibility problems.

I fabricated a son

Statements like the one above make me dismiss this thread out of hand.  Now, if some credible poster wants to start a credible topic, I'd be glad to weigh in with my thoughts.  This thread is desperate attention-whoring and deflection from Whooter's really bad week that culminated in his confession that he made up his fake family which he does not have.  Where do you go from there, really?

"Survivors lying" hasn't been established by any credible person, so the rest of this thread is fluff.

Well you can dismiss anything you like, you have a room full of zealots on your side but what you can't take away is my experience first hand. I have been listening to freaks like you for 30 years, you never get any better. If anyone is a attention whore or creative at deflecting issues away, well come on my friend, you win the "award".

[DannyB II]

Fucking liar.

Gee, I wonder if this is acceptable. Everyone has lied.

[Whooter]

In case there was confusion:  Keep the title of the thread to "Why do Survivors need to Lie?" and speak your mind.

They don't.  The reality of what's done to them/us is bad enough.  Whooter started this thread with the sole intention of making it appear that survivors routinely lie about being abused.  We don't.  Let it die the death that is Danny's "authentic self" thread.  He's talking to himself, which is what Whooter should be doing here by starting off a thread with such a loaded question.

 :feedtrolls:  :fuckoff:

Anne, why are you trying to invalidate the thread by assuming you know my intentions?  Every group has people who lie.  I dont think I could name one that doesnt.  But not everyone within the group lies.  Shaggy demonstrated that he could show us he/she was abused at Straight without having to resort to exaggerations or lying. Do you think you could communicate your time at straight and what happened to you without exaggerating?  Do you think you could address a panel of senators and explain what happened to you without embellishing the facts for drama effect?

What is the advantage of someone saying they were kidnapped when everyone knows they were taken to the program via an escort service?  Does this gain sympathy?  add drama?  gain more attention?  To fit in better at fornits?  Would police or the GAO use this description?  

Do you see what I am saying?  I am not saying all survivors lie but trying to understand why many survivors try to trick us into believing they were kidnapped or brainwashed or tortured etc..



...

[Watchful Yeoman]

But a big step in getting people to listen is to try and make your story as credible as possible.

I fabricated a son

 

Sorry, folks, but I won't be lectured to about "lying" by this guy.

[DannyB II]

Has it been established? Where? Please cite your source or proof for that presumption!

The only source *I've* come across for that kind of statement has been from EdCons and program proponents trying to pooh-pooh the credibility of abuse accounts. And those folk have a pretty compelling incentive to protect their profits.

I think yours is a good example, Ursus.  Imagine a kid writing or talking to an edcon or anyone after returning from a program.  The child says:

Response “A”
My time at XYZ Program was terrible.  The intake process was humiliating because I was required to disrobe and change into the schools uniforms in front of another staff member.  Most of the staff were nice but this one guy Robert Newly would scream at me and forced me to miss several meals.  He made me uncomfortable with some of his contacts which I felt were inappropriate. The school wasn’t bad overall and I managed to move ahead with my studies.  The food wasn’t great.......

Response “B”
After I was kidnapped and transported to the Gulag where I was incarcerated for 16 months I was systematically tortured and abused by the prison guards, starved and held in isolation.  I underwent extensive brainwashing and now have PTSD.

Response “A” would raise a concern and the person hearing this would call immediately to inquire about this Robert Newly and report the findings.  Response “A” was communicated well enough to be believed as credible.

Response “B” would be treated as a sarcastic immature response indicating that the child never bothered to apply themselves and still seeking attention.  I think we can agree that the abuse allegations would not be taken seriously for good reason.

I don’t think you should blame the Edcon for pooh-poohing the credibility of Responder “B”.  A big part of the reason some survivors are not believed is because of the way they communicate in my opinion.  I think listening to many posters speak here on fornits confirms that this language is used very often.  If survivors really were concerned about credibility they would address this issue or at least be open to the possibilities.



...

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?
You have no basis for discounting our accounts except that they seem unlikely to you.  We do not care what seems unlikely to you because we all believe that you make your money off of these places and therefore have solid financial reasons for attempting to discredit us.  The whole LGAT treatment model is abusive.  In the program I was in, ALL of the staff was abusive, because that is what they were trained to be.  We were always hungry, always scared.  Only one way out, become one with those who are abusing me.  How is this different from brainwashing?

No, all of you have not even come close to going through a gulag, please. Elan 4 was the closet to a actual prison within a treatment center setting and not one of you were there.
So please take your embellishments and reconsider what it is you are trying to say.

[Watchful Yeoman]

OK, well we got one example now.  DannyB II is a survivor and a liar.  That's one.

[DannyB II]

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.

This story right here is a embellishment, of course you will move your eyes, every group you were in was not always about you and the focus was not always on drugs.
Listen in case you did not know, it is not Straights fault you only smoked one joint, drank one beer, kissed one girl and stayed out late one night. Some one gave Straight the impression you were a screw-up so you were placed there. Now if you want to blame Straight for the type of treatment you received, fine but take up why you were placed there with the proper folks.
I didn't believe everything Elan told me, I didn't buy into there concepts of treatment and I wasn't brainwashed.

[Anne Bonney]

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.

This story right here is a embellishment, of course you will move your eyes, every group you were in was not always about you and the focus was not always on drugs.
Listen in case you did not know, it is not Straights fault you only smoked one joint, drank one beer, kissed one girl and stayed out late one night. Some one gave Straight the impression you were a screw-up so you were placed there. Now if you want to blame Straight for the type of treatment you received, fine but take up why you were placed there with the proper folks.
I didn't believe everything Elan told me, I didn't buy into there concepts of treatment and I wasn't brainwashed.

I was there and would state under oath that what Shaggy's posted is EXACTLY what I experienced when I was in Straight.  I don't give a flying fuck what DannyBoi or Whooter think or how much they froth at the mouth.

Like I said DannyBoi......go back to talking to yourself.  I actually do get a kick out of your trying to start salient threads, only to be ignored.  :rofl:  Then you go back and talk to yourself.......as it should be.  :twofinger: