Fornits

Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry

Thank you, Guest.

by the way, by and large, I don't think JU was lobbed softballs, but I thought his "apology" post contained more sanctimony than remorse, and as I said, I was surprised no one called him on the "degrading to you and me" business. I should have done it myself, since it bugged me at the time.

Same with me, Greg. I actually did not read the whole book at the time, but I came across it shortly after The Seed, and I got the gist of what happened in the story (I knew Winston Smith had been tortured into submission, and that he'd cried "No, do it to Julia, not to me!" when confronted with his most profound fear, and that that was what broke him entirely), and I read that one passage I mentioned above, and it chilled me, because that was kind of how I felt. I felt nothing could restore what I had had with my friends, because I had betrayed them.

Glad I don't feel that way anymore. I'm good friends again with the guy who was my best friend before I went into The Seed.

I wonder sometimes about the limits of resilience. The Seed was incredibly abusive, and we were at such a tender age, so open and vulnerable and unprepared for The Seed's assault on our minds, but of course people have recovered from much worse.

The Seed, more than the book 1984, remains my personal standard for how twisted things can get, how words can so easily be perverted to mean their exact opposites. (Words like "love" and "honesty" and "empathy")

Greg, I know you remember when John Underwood posted here for a short period of time. After a while, I got tired of fighting with him in this forum--or not so much tired but just dubious about the value of it, and questioning myself for getting off on it. In the end, I stopped responding to him, though I was surprised how forgiving people were (including you, Greg!) when he apologized for that one totally insane (and downright nostalgic) "come down" ranting post of his, and he called it "degrading to you and me"--I was surprised no one called him on that. No one pointed out that it was, in fact, degrading to only one person.  Sometimes I think back to that little window of opportunity I had to fight it out with John Underwood, and I wish I had taken it to its limit, though I'm still not sure what the value of it would have been . . . Oh well.

For the record, I also still believe he beat up Fuelaw, despite his sneering articulate denials. We know Underwood habitually minimized things ("So you had to sit in a drug rehab for a few months . . . boohoo") and lied, I believe (claiming the vast majority of Seedlings were there voluntarily--that CERTAINLY was not the case when I was there!) . . . and why would Fuelaw have had reason to lie?

Oh well, I confess it crosses my mind once in a while, that unfinished argument. Thought I'd take this random opportunity to get it off my chest. Thanks, as always, for providing the forum.

I remember reading it when I was fifteen, and what hit me hard was Winston's reflection at the end that he and Julia could even get together and have sex now if they wanted, it didn't matter, because the Party knew it had triumphed; it had eviscerated them internally. Don't remember how that was worded.

Hey Eudora, what was "the rap from hell"?

Hey Greg, did Seed staff have a big clusterfuck or something? It makes me sad to think that they actually had fun while lording it over the rest of us.

Here's my capsule assessment of the differences between Seed and Straight, Seed and WWASP, and Seed and most of the current spin-offs: The Seed sought to break kids' spirits. Straight and the spin-offs have sought to break kids' spirits and also psychologically scar them for life. Hands down, I would "prefer" the Seed, and you know how much I think the Seed stank. Still, as you pointed out, Greg, there was an endearingly goofy quality to the Seed amidst all the posturing and meanness. That goofiness was a mitigating factor; it made it less harsh. LOVE YOU!

ah, I see. "Anonymous" was referencing an old John Underwood post above. It was verbatim what John U wrote in an old thread he initiated entitled "Some Insights" but substituting VCA for The Seed.

Well, whatever floats your boat there, Anon. Got any more kind words for me? Seems like you've been practicing those old Seed chops. Maybe you never stopped.

Isn't it weird how the meanest posts around here are always anonymous? Guess those are the true Seedlings, protecting their anonymity to the end.

Well, we all have weird and troubled stories, I think, but I give the prize to Ginger. Most of our families were sucked up to some degree into a cult; Ginger's family WAS a cult! Actually, it's amazing, Ginger, what you've done--giving us this forum, and giving everyone all the survivor forums--as a way of responding to your intensely weird, cult-drug-rehab-suffused childhood. Talk about turning weakness into strength! I mean . . . thank you.

Walter, I understand your ambivalence, because you're a happy person now and wouldn't change anything. My suspicion is that the reason you're happy now is because you're a kind, honest, open-hearted, intelligent, naturally self-aware person who, one way or another, was going to do the soul searching necessary to find peace and clarity in life, with or without an ordeal like The Seed.

For myself, when people ask me, I put it like this: I wouldn't trade the life I have now for any hypothetical alternative life I might have had if I could have avoided the Seed.

But at the same time, if the clock was turned back to 1972 and I was fourteen years old again, and some god-like entity told me that I could go through the Seed again and live the life I've lived, with the wonderful adulthood I've had and all the blessings in my life today, OR skip the Seed and take my chances, I would skip The Seed and take my chances.

I interviewed Maia Szalavitz by phone in early March, and I submitted the interview to THE SUN magazine, for possible publication. Don't know yet if they'll use it, but I am going to take a little liberty here and quote a relevant portion of it. Speaking of all the "tough love" programs in aggregate, she said this:

"Based on my observations, the people who seemed to get the least damaged were those who basically said 'This is fucked up, and I?m just gonna fake it until I make it.' Another subgroup of people who did reasonably well were those who genuinely did have big drug problems. They didn?t have to make up a lot of false confessions, and they could believe they were being helped. The people who did absolutely the worst were those who really didn?t have much of a problem going in, but who had to make up stuff, and who resisted doing so, and therefore got the most punished."