ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

for ex-BKs to discuss matters related to experiences in BKWSU & after leaving.
  • Message
  • Author

ermine

BK supporter

  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2008

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post17 Jun 2008

Many thanks for your understanding.

I, personally, appreciate far more someone's personal input in this form than someone who just throws out standard and boring spiritual 'teachings' and expects people to accept it as their truth. I like people who understand it, personality of others and their uniqueness.

In my point of view, if there were more souls in any spiritual associations and confessions who can share different ideas together, without negative or unnecessary confrontation, it would be beneficial and could advance any ideas further and further. Sorry for inconveniences or late comments.

I will be very busy next months and will not be able to write down (very limited internet here and too many physical and spiritual practice to do).
My personal and elevated thanks to unique ex-lady. She made me think.

yours sincerely
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10421
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post31 Jan 2009

terry wrote:Sorry ex-l, once more I have to take issue with the style of the opening piece of this topic (not the substance) ... I disagree with attacking the actual VIPs ... What is your goal? To attack all and sundry who have any association with BKs, or to warn them? Are you The National Inquirer/News of the World or The New York Times/The Independent?

Thank you agreeing about how BKs use unsuspecting VIPs, please post your off topic comments about me here.

I was particularly moved because the Brahma-Kumaris were using beautiful environmentalists to sell themselves to the "save the world" crowd, when they know the whole of nature is going to be destroyed, and humanity die, in "two to three years" to quote Sister jayanti.
nobody-loves-me.jpg
nobody-loves-me.jpg (19.7 KiB) Viewed 13830 times
I think the posts are fine bar the odd typo. The factual accuracy of them is well researched and the ethics behind them are very high. It realy only has been BKs or BK supporters ... erm, 'apologists' ... that squeal "attack, attack" to distract from the far more important issues at stake. I am sorry but it reminds me of that scene out of 'Carry on up the Khyber' ... "Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it in for me". No, sorry, that was 'Carry on Cleo' but I was thinking of the BKs as the Khazis of Kalabar.

Mate, its all a farce until they sort it out and I am strictly "gutter press" ... but don't the BKs belong in the tabloid press for what they are doing to both Gyan and these individuals?

Same rules apply as before. The forum is copyleft, not copyright. You take the material and re-work it into something more upmarket. Send it off to the VIPs as a valid letter of concern. You are very welcome to do so. Other members of the forum, including me, will follow and help you.

I don't think you will again but, please, write a serious article and get it published. Offer it up as a news item for this site and others. I think it is a very worthy story. Meanwhile, a nod to my best cultural references above ...

User avatar

rayoflight

beyond BK

  • Posts: 361
  • Joined: 17 Mar 2009
  • Location: Truth.

Re: Dreams narrated, dreams explored

Post26 Mar 2009

Dear ex-l,

I have really enjoyed your insights and you obviously seem to know enough about the Brahma Kumaris to inform and expose the truth.

But I need to tell you that I think you're being a bit controlling here. We are not perfect and sometimes we will go off topic. So what is wrong with that? Maybe there will be a jewel hidden in the digression somewhere. It's like taking the scenic route you know? You see some pretty sights and discover things you may not have seen otherwise, and then once you're back on the original road you have a new perspective that could possibly be valuable.

I also want to tell you that I thought you were a woman so I have been writing you with that in mind and I apologize. Maybe it has something to do with the icon of a female angel? Perhaps a neutral gender icon would be better as I am having feelings of being misled again. I know anonymity is important, but the icon is misleading, at least to me. I could try speaking to you as a genderless soul, but the female angel threw me off. Sorry.

Thanks,
rayoflight
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10421
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post26 Mar 2009

This is not a forum for general chit-chat. It is really the only resource for non-BKs, ex-BKs or exiting BKs - on or off the internet - that comes anywhere near discussing and documenting the truth of the BKWSU.

If it become filled with irrelevant, erroneous or even just distracting information - or impossible to navigate through - that will make it useless for others.

Lane discipline is hard for some people, others struggle with the software and formatting. All they can think about is themselves or their idea. Its good discipline to always check the title at the top of the page and judge how your comments are going to benefit it. If not ... check older topics to see if your comments belong elsewhere. Or start a new one, if it is important enough.

Private chit-chat is best kept off forum via PMs.

A lot of work goes on behind the scenes to keep the forum ordered ... why should it be up to others to tidy up after us when we can tidy up as we go along?
User avatar

rayoflight

beyond BK

  • Posts: 361
  • Joined: 17 Mar 2009
  • Location: Truth.

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post26 Mar 2009

Hmmm, I see where you're coming from and I picked up on it actually. Speaking for myself, I know that sometimes I go off topic and I wondered if it was bothering anyone. Since I am new, I thought I would probably not have my hand tapped immediately, but I can see that it really does bother you. I will do my best to stay on topic and if not, then I hope you might enjoy the scenic route at least for a short time. Sometimes stream of consciousness if very healing in its own way.

The efforts that go on behind the scenes of this forum are very clear to me as I have noticed how organized this website is which is very much appreciated. In any case, I find your insights so helpful that it sort of saddens me to feel your unhappiness somewhere behind the need for control. Well, we are all just growing up, down and sideways, so I guess these bumps in the road will happen.

Be well!
rayoflight

Terry

ex-BK

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Location: OZ

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post27 Mar 2009

(this is a diversion from the topic"dreams narrated. dreams explored" - where certain clarifications are required). Bear with me while I set up my point ...

As we all know, what is intended and what results can be different. It is said " the road to hell is paved with good intentions”. As well as unintended bad outcomes implied by the saying; often the result, though different is also good, or sometimes better than the original intent.

I have been a shop keeper at times, and have also supplied wholesale to shops. Sometimes just keeping the place running is so demanding that you even start to resent the customers! This forum does a lot of good work. It has the best of intentions. Let's open up the doors so that ex-BKs can come in and share, and help each other, as well as reveal experiences and understandings about this thing we have in common (BKs). It takes a lot to run this shop, it is obvious (which more like a cafe really). But it seems the cafe managers have decided to limit the range of ideas, to categorise those ideas which arise. There's ex-BK on one section, BK/PBK etc on another. And you'd better be easily defined or else! These customers are such nuisances, just create more work.

But I believe a lot of what I have seen happen on this site is wonderful, a lot of it not being a conscious intention of the Admin and other organisers. Whether going off-topic, or generating difference & debate where none existed. So much good stuff and change and healing and truth and so on. We were all pushed into the same mould as BKs, we don't want to be all in the same mould as ex-BKs.

Because I don't fit the sterotypical ex-BK, just as I did not fit the stereo typical BK, since my first posts on this forum, I have been treated with suspicion, and repeatedly accused of things (including collusion in covering up child abuse) - see posts under "Hullo from Terry". Because I have brought a different language to the forum, I have been repeatedly questioned with the same questions, replying with ever expanded answers. I have often been terse, but that is because the questions have often been put that way to me.

When Leela was attacked after honestly relating her experience as a victim of child abuse who found temporary refuge in the BKs, I asked the attacker to "be a man, withdraw and apologise". He did not reply, instead I am attacked for defending her. When dealing with such a sensitive issue as child abuse, instead of defending the integrity and right of the member to share without pressure, well - that just seems cruelly absurd.

It appears that an orthodoxy has been established - low level spirit entities are behind the BKs. Any articulate or well argued position that challenges the orthodoxy seems to be taken as threatening. I say that because, although one would suppose the onus of proof to be on those who say such unseen entities exist, any argument to the contrary is asked to prove a negative. How do you prove that the unseen does not exist?

There are acceptable ways of disagreeing on forum. This orthodoxy is, by its circular logic, able to insinuate anyone who disagrees disagreeably, is also under the 'entities" influence. (Of course, they themselves are "clear" but they are the ones who have fear. Arthur Miller where are you?)

Terry

ex-BK

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Location: OZ

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post28 Mar 2009

This is part 2 of the above post. I had trouble posting as one post ...

I would like to respond again, and hopefully finally, to this endless questioning of my qualifications as a Dream Analyst.

I put it to anyone to inquire of any University psychology department; out of all the different subjects they cover, ask them- how many hours a psychology graduate dedicates to learning dream analysis or the dynamics of the unconscious?.

Out of that, ask them - how many of those hours are spent reading and regurgitating and how many hours are practical? I can tell you at Sydney University the answer is in single digits for all of those.

Those who may have resented their studies, or barely comprehended what they were regurgitating, but managed to get their degrees or diplomas, according to ex-l, are to automatically be given more credence despite his own criticisms of them elsewhere as inneffectual and dangerous. I partly agree, some are excellent therapists but others are hopeless, despite having the same pieces of paper. ex-l swings from on extreme (qualifications good) to another (qualifications useless) depending on his point at the time.

According to ex-l, that I went through at least 120 hours of specialised practical study and practice under the one teacher, & thats excluding further studies, attending lectures, and so on, it all counts for nothing.

I have run classes at 3 different Adult Education Colleges where I am required to be interviewed and assessed by education administrators as to my competence, experience and ability. I have done private sessions and group work, which has included psyche students and graduates.

Out of the many hundreds of dreams I have analysed, in a field where negative and angry responses are expected, only one person ever took umbrage, and that was because her own dream undid the years of effort to deny her own discomfort with herself. Her anger was really at herself. One other thought it was meant to be a party trick, more fun, and left. The rest have given positive feedback, I have received emails from some participants years later thanking me, and I stay in touch with some others.

A point was made - as a criticism - that I had run workshops at a BK establishment (not a fully fledged centre). I have answered that at in earlier posts - including the fact that I chose not to continue after 3 sessions, as I did not want it to be identified as a BK service. Yet this is thrown up at me repeatedly as "proof of collusion".
ex-l wrote:What do I mean by Brahmakumaritis? Hmmn, roughly, as I don't have the time right now, tendencies to;

a) exaggerate one's own experience and qualifications
b) pronounce on subjects that you really don't know very much about or have experience
c) unaccountable dabbling with other individual's psyches. By "unaccountable", I mean 'professional unaccountability' just like the BKWSU's teachers which is why I asked, and
d) attempts to personalise the discussion of issues, focus on identities (especially me); even to make a big issue about your own personal identity, as if that was important.

If you are interested dear reader, have a look for my response to this here . You don't need to understand archetypes to recognise a red herring.
I am genuinely concerned that you are still involved with or channeling spiritual energies that you are not fully aware of - to the extent now that you are even deny the like exists. This is why I asked you to qualify your ability to experience of the same "seed stage" as BKs do since leaving Gyan; and the pre-, during and post-BK psychic experiences you mentioned.

OK, this links back to an earlier point above, but it is also saying that deep meditative states - what BK jargon calls "seed' stage" and earlier as "fire of Yoga" or "tapaswi" - these experiences are either copyrighted by the BKs (meaning these are experience are only because of influence of low flying "entities") or it says that all the people and paths through the ages that have had similar experiences are influenced by same entities.

You cannot beat this church at it's own game.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10421
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post28 Mar 2009

I will offer a simple answer and let our (no doubt shrinking) 'audience' decide and polarise.

    a) You stood up and pronounced and were giving advice about psychotherapy.
    b) As a leading question to intelligent discussion, I asked you what your qualifications were as either a psychotherapy or as an individual that undergone psychotherapy.
    c) If I am able to interpret your lengthy answers correctly, you answered "none" to both questions.
So, my question was, on what authority do you then speak?

The good thing about qualified, professional psychotherapists is, that even if they are "crap" at it, at least they had to:

    a) undergo 2 years or therapy in order to get to where they did
    b) continue to undergo ongoing therapy
    c) be accountable to a professional body and have professional indemnity insurance to (hopefully) cover for their screw ups, and obviously,
    d) work within the frame work of ongoing health services where in the private or public sector
So, basically, even if they are "crap" at it, they know a little bit about what they are talking about on the basis of their own experience.

Ditto, so do the victims or patients of such individuals/systems. (So, you don't need qualifications to have valid experience).

In my opinion, your lengthy answers, targeted attack on me and deliberately exaggerated distortion of the line of thought I am exploring ... is really just a distraction.

Your front - the persona you have constructed in your mind and seek to present to others to make a good impression (which is fair and natural enough) - is challenged. Your response is to attack the credibility of those that are peeking around the sides asking what is actually going on in there - with fairly cheap and nasty methods, if you do not mind me saying.

As far as I am concerned, you are fine ... you are a good person ... you mean well ... you are trying hard ... unfortunately you suffered the same BKWSU-related insanity as the rest of us and had your life distorted by it ... you have been through a little hell .. and are since crawling your way up life on the outside. I know. It is tough.

But could you please get to the point and answer the important questions actually asked to you, e.g. develop your "ex-BK believe there is no soul" manifesto?

Coffee shop!?! Welcome to the 'Brahma Kumaris Dot Info Outlaw Group Instant Therapy Session'™. did not you read the sign when you came in the door?

(... and who accused you of "child abuse"!?! is not it all getting a little bit hysterical?)

Terry

ex-BK

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Location: OZ

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post28 Mar 2009

no further comment

Terry

ex-BK

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Location: OZ

Re: [Policy] Brahma Kumari Info: Code of Ethics - Draft

Post04 Apr 2009

ex-l wrote: how long do any of us have to put up with boneheaded idiots and what benefit is there in doing so? (I am thinking of the last PBK-type to drop by).

If you think they are idiotic boneheads, then don't read, don't reply to them, block them in your controls - but others may want to dialogue with them. Why canvas to have them banned?

You see, I wrote replies to that bonehead in a way I thought might be taken as reasonable, perhaps open the door a little so he/she could perceive an alternative viewpoint, possibly explore spirituality or whatever their need may be, outside the BK/PBK spectrum. To engage them, then share, and hopefully someone might learn something (after all we are also wanting reports about what is going on within the BK/PBK camps aren't we?).
If I need to learn patience and care, I'll go and learn how to clear landmines or something else useful to society.

A lot of what this site is about here is political. But your tactics lack tact, they are often not very politic. You prefer war to jaw? You condemn whoever is disagreeable to you, and drive them away rather than welcome them and attempt to win them over. *uck* me - you want them (BKs) to read the 'facts' on site so much, but when they react and defend their existing beliefs (naturally), rather than allow them to engage (with whoever might be willing to give them time) and be persuaded, you/Admin have them banned, reinforcing their preconceptions. Is that the idea of the forum? I don't get it.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10421
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post04 Apr 2009

terry,

I don't see your name on the administrative wishlist list for volunteers. I don't see very many people's names at all.

Everyone seems to think they have the right to take ... the right to an opinion ... but no responsibility whatsoever to contribute, to keep in mind the bigger picture ... or consider the long-term health of the forum?

So some bonehead, who from a BK/PBK point of view would hardly be following Shrimat or terribly worthy, comes along wanting advice for their multi-thousand dollar foreign holiday treating the place like a railways station.

    Is that the idea of the forum? You are right. I don't get it either.
Give me a sincere, Shrimat following BK/PBK showing the forum respect and I will give them respect by return. How long can the forum absorb all the detritus of the Brahma Kumari movement?

Instead of standing up to supporting their "rights" yet again, as you do ... what can you offer by way of practical actions to solve these problems?

Terry

ex-BK

  • Posts: 389
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2009
  • Location: OZ

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceived?

Post04 Apr 2009

Not a reply at all to the points made - instead distracting with side issues. Do you have kids?

I will reply directly to you though.

I have looked at the list of work required, and did not feel I could commit to any at this time as I have many other commitments which I choose to prioritise above the needs of this forum. (That is why I have still to put my case for "no soul'' - no time. It is a different thing to respond spontaneously to posts).

If you did not want to make the time to welcome Nivi-k and then allow the time to talk him/her around to a different view point, why reply?

I ignored Nivi-k until a post seemed appropriate. Just by coming here is a sign that something is shifting in them, (possibly unconsciously). Aggression will only make them put up ego defences.

New people will learn soon enough what things interest other members. If inanities are ignored, they will either eventually get the hint and stop by themselves, or they will start to post more relevantly, or they will test the patience of those who have been patient enough to correspond, and be told politely. If they don't, then a complaint to Admin, but you have to give them a chance to understand the ''culture" of the forum.

Just ignore them otherwise.

clearernow

BK supporter

  • Posts: 93
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2010

Re: Janki: Biggest Trophy or Biggest Hypocrite?

Post27 Jan 2013

In addition to earlier post on a different subject on DJ ex-l: Let me share some statistics on why this website doesn't give any balanced view about BKs and has some unknown mission of defamation which is nothing but destructive and you drag others along into this. While some of them may be with you, I suspect many of the readers actually wouldn't have supported your facade if they could see clearly what you are trying to do (I perceive this as some sort of personal rage against someone in the BK organization - which is ego clash exempified)

ex-l - you have around 6,561 posts on this forum which is around 20% of all in number. If you look at the content (bytes of data) pushed by you into this forum, it must be close to 75-80% or so from just you .. at least over recent past .. Just remove ex-l's posts and responses to them, and you are left with nothing much against BKs - yes, there will still be some negative opinions but that's perfectly understandable and seem more constructive at least. That's what I call the real picture, if any one sees this rationally ...

You don't need such a forum to heal yourself ex-l, there are more options easily available. This is not sarcasm, I really sincerely wish your welfare and thereby my heart goes out to you that you heal yourself so that you can move on.
ex-l wrote: Generally we are fairly accommodation of a wide range of point of view, if put intelligently, but we prioritise the interests of non-BKs and exiting BKs.

More food for thought:

In essence this forum was a one-man show. ex-l had good criticism to start with, when he got support of some leaving BKs who badly needed this at that time, more and more magnified and exaggerated negativity was fed to them so that the web-site appeared as general opinion regarding BKs. The people who thought were brainwashed by BKs could easily accept all the misrepresentation as is normal in when you are in that mindset.

The web-site claims to be for Ex-BKs and leaving BKs and reforming BKs but by suppressing and not encouraging positive BK opinions etc it seems more intended towards defaming BKWSU by all means of ridicule to the level of obsession, by sensationalism like using "exposed" & "truth about BKWSU" which lead to people getting attracted to the site rather than seeing this as a place to share view post BK life. Very cleverly designed and typical of such propaganda but its all turning out to be close to getting exposed ex-l ...

I still respect a lot of members of this forum and clearly they have a right for their voices to be heard but friends be watchful and careful of what you are getting fed here ... your well wisher
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10421
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceiv

Post27 Jan 2013

Sigh, here we go again. Just insult me, cast aspersions at me ... and then call yourself my "well-wisher".

You're making very vague accusations, deliberately so I think. I'll take it as a compliment.
clearernow wrote:In essence this forum was a one-man show ...

Historically, that is absolutely not true. You know nothing of who and what went on building up this forum.
if you wish you can ban all the positive opinions and BK supporters but I suspect that it's getting close to getting exposed by what you are doing these days ... Sorry it sounds a bit of sarcasm

The "sarcasm" comment I made related only to your accusing me of deliberately removing part of a post ... which I did not do. I see that you have now also removed that comment and changed your post.

So what point are you trying to make? That I should stop posting, or we should start promoting the BKWSU?

Here is your last chance question ...
    What are you offering to do for us?
If that answer to that is all you are going to do is promote and defend the BKWSU, or distract from conversations, then you have no place here. The T&C when you joined were clear.

You falsely represented yourself as an ex-BK when you joined. You are clearly not an ex-BK.
Before you removed n-b's recent post ...

I am sorry, I don't know what you are talking about and I don't know what you are trying to prove. n-b/nischaybuddhi was account deactivated in the past for who knows what ... probably just when we decided to split the forum into one for BKs and PBKs, and one for ex-BKs. I cannot remember. All BKs, PBKs, Vishnu Party etc got new accounts over there. From my point of view, once you have heard one BK, you've heard them all ... and we tend to be a bit of a magnet for the BK zombie army.

Nischaybuddhi made a yet another new account and it was closed down too. Any posts connected to that account would have gone with it automatically. We're here to help ex-BKs and non-BKs, not promote the BKWSU.

There is only so much anyone can tolerate ...

Handy

  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2013

Re: ex-l's recent postings damaging how the forum is perceiv

Post24 Feb 2013

ex-l is peforming a brilliant Service to Ex BKs and BKs, a real humanitarian.

The issue is that the big claims of the BK philosophy promoted as the "ultimate truths" have to be supported by big evidence. To date the "ultimate truths" have been exposed by ex-l and others as none other than faith/belief as there simply is no evidence of any credibility.

As scientific claims of truth have to be critiqued, it is unreasonable for the BKs not to accept that their claims also have to challenged and critiqued. If they refuse or complain then they must publicly downgrade their "ultimate truths" to just faith/belief and inform their followers.

No one likes criticism, however as the saying goes either, "Put up (evidence) or Shut Up".

So unless BKs "Put Up" then they should not be allowed on this forum.
PreviousNext

Return to Commonroom