Hello from Terry - The Power of Anonymity

for ex-BKs, exiting BKs, Friends & Family of BKs and newcomers to the forum.
  • Message
  • Author

Terry

ex-BK

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

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post01 May 2009

An interesting post ex-l. Reading it, I feel that you still don't "get" me. I do not recognise the person you are asking the questions of.

Firstly, the Levy paper - very interesting, worth everyone's time to read it, for sure. But your excerpt is about winning a court case, vetting a jury to get the outcome required. And applying it to me is a little illogical.

    • Young - I was once.

    • Atheistic - definitely not when I was young but I was never a tradtional "theist" (even as BK, I used to say "there is no God but there is • Shiva") and if you wanted a label for me now that I am aged but not bowed, the best would be "pantheistic".

    • Non-achieving - depends what you want to achieve. And any choice means sacrifice of other choices. I have written earlier in this thread (I think) specifically about that, and will restate that I probably overstayed my beneficial BK life by a factor of 2 - stayed twice as long as I should have. If you want me to list my achievements - well, I will if you will; want to match me in a reply? I do not presume to know anything about where you are at, other than what I have read here (and you are personally secretive). Things could have been different, and that is how it is for everyone.
As for "freeeze drying" personal development - I'd say that would be true for me in some ways and not others.
ex-l wrote:Your position in defence of the BKWSU has drawn criticism on this forum

Again? I have only tried to be realistic and fair, not "defending" them. If they disappeared off the earth tomorrow, no one would be happier than me. To view or describe things as they are (from my experience or perspective), is not to defend it. It is to understand it. "Warts and all" means not just the warts.

Yes, there was a period of anger and resentment. I worked past it - I could take a more aggressive role against the BKs here if it was neglected by others (no worries there), and I could post only pro-BK stuff if it was helpful in any way (cannot think of how it would be). No, let's just try, from the different facets we all bring, to get a handle on the reality of it.
I am wondering if the BKWSU provide ... an environment which we were actually comfortable in ... being the obtuse, the malcontent or non-conformist, whilst at the same time feeding our other undisciplined interest in impractical "gee-whiz" cosmic matters

Hmm, interesting. Any large collective would eventually create "niches" and roles for different personality types. And, conversely, different personalities find their place easier in larger groups. I think the adjectives you use are readily applied to the young (men in particular) in almost any community. That's my point - that BKs are really no different (corruption, greed, politics, abuse all co-existing hand in hand with religious impulse, desire to serve and make a difference) - to any other society. It's the (lack of) checks and balances, review etc that is this forum's main work.

starchild

ex-BK

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2009

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post01 May 2009

I am a little uncomfortable with what I have read here today. I already asked Terry when he gave a "move on" lecture whether he had ever felt damaged as others posting on the site have.

Apparently not. I now read that Terry wrote he was here to see what makes people tick, psychologically. Voyeurism or using people's suffering for information in his area of interest.

Today, he said no one would be happier if they were to "disappear off the face of the face of the earth".

Yet in the past few months he is giving talks at their venues.

What is going on here?

starchild

ex-BK

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2009

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post01 May 2009

OK I do not need a reply. I see that this has come up before and a number of explanations given.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post02 May 2009

Yes, well, I think you nailed it in two, starchild. It made others uncomfortable too. And it is good to revise as he is someone involved in dabbling with other people's minds ... but even I have accepted that terry has "moved on" from those earlier positions!

Not as far as to deliver his masterpiece ex-BK "no soul, no mediumship, no such thing as spiritualism" equation, although he does keep promising. Perhaps terry is a "Babarian" [sister in charge] ex-BK who keeps making promises and predictions, but never delivers, just to keep us hanging on ;-) (... and I am the Barbarian ex-BK ready to sack his Athens). You can take the ex-BK out of the BKWSU, but can you take the BKWSU out of the ex-BK?.

Kindly, I think it is only a bit of a defensive front and hope he gets around to voicing deeper, more personal issues in time. The real reason for his being here is something else.
terry wrote:Firstly, the Levy paper - very interesting, worth everyone's time to read it, for sure. But your excerpt is about winning a court case, vetting a jury to get the outcome required. And applying it to me is a little illogical.

Perfectly and simply logical, just beyond yours ... you read it. It worked. And I agree with you it should be "required reading" for any exiting-BK. The sentiments voiced were identical to your own.

Terry

ex-BK

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

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post02 May 2009

ex-l wrote:even I have accepted that terry has "moved on" from those earlier positions!

Wow!!!
The real reason for his being here is something else.

Twas just to join in a discussion, no agenda. Some have picked up on my reason for joining the forum - "what makes people tick" - and call it voyeurism. I accept that people think and act differently from me, and have had different experiences. A voyeur sits back and does not engage. I have engaged, changed some people's views, and had some of mine changed - that's what a forum is about surely. But you seem to always ask a lot more of me than you do for yourself or others.

From this forum, you know my marital & family status, a lot about my history and background, my work and interests and so on. None of this is apparent about you or many other contributors. It is obvious many of you who use an alias know each other and have physical proximity and contact with each other beyond the forum, and create collective opinions, whereas other contributors are "in the dark' in this regard, and can feel ganged up on. Many wilt and fade, or maybe I misjudge them and they actively decide life is too valuable to put their time here
Not as far as to deliver his masterpiece

Well, it is obvious you are salivating & waiting to rip into it whenever I get the time to put it together. I have a full and busy life (which includes enjoying a good debate and argument - it's in the genes) and every day ask if it's worth my time contributing here. I respond to some immediate posts to stay in the discussion, and have not a lot of time for writing a thesis (I had little work earlier in the year when I first joined in, fortunately that has picked up).

I was hoping my main ideas were revealing themselves gradually in all the "little" posts - if I state things, you ask for validation and authority, then if I quote others, you attack that for not being my own. You don't debate a point on its merits if it doesn't suit you, instead you use diversionary tactics. You contributed the piece about false arguments, and use a lot of that yourself. So, as for my "magnum opus" it may not happen the way life is going.

Here it is in brief, how my view of reality can be tagged - Pantheism, Ch'an Buddhism/Buddhist Yoga, the Tao, the pre-Socratics, science, arts, psychology, history, humanity, society, facts, mystery. None in a dogmatic way.

Re: the Levy paper
Perfectly and simply logical, just beyond yours ... you read it. It worked.

Of course it worked, that's the idea - vetting the jury or rigging the jury, the aim is to get the desired result. And seems to be your approach to what is an acceptable ex-BK, or an acceptable point of view on the forum. Only those who are vehemently critical are really "EX", only those who will respond to the evidence in the desired way are worthy. Anyone who has moved on happily or easily is not. (It wasn't too hard or too easy for me, a conscious piece of work once I realised what my unconscious, my instincts, were screaming at me).

But what I see is that the confrontational approach has been inneffectual. The BKs roll on down the road, while this forum has divided and conquered itself.

starchild

ex-BK

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2009

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post02 May 2009

The traditional painting of women, in the nude but not exclusively, so an example of a non-nude voyeuristic painting would be The Laundress is considered to be extremely voyeuristic. The painter engaged in the act of painting but did not engage with his model as a human being with feelings; as is very apparent.

It is probably doubly voyeuristic as the paintings were put on public view and sold. He probably discussed his wife and children with her as well.

Sorry Terry. I could not resist ...

Terry

ex-BK

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

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post02 May 2009

starchild wrote:The traditional painting of women ... is considered to be extremely voyeuristic.

By whom? I don't think I really understand the point of the reply.

I have revealed more of myself than most participants on this forum, particularly those who ask for more - name; location and much much more as stated. Besides, an artist sharing with the model - one person in a private room - is very different to publishing on the web.

Or maybe if what you say, as I understand it, is being voyeuristic, no one should paint, write or read about anyone else but themselves. And there's another name for that.

starchild

ex-BK

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2009

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post04 May 2009

Terry wrote:By whom, I do not understand the point of this reply.

By those who study visual art and the history of. I was thinking in particular of the salon period in Paris.
A voyeur sits back and does not engage

The point of my reply was to show an example of how one can seemingly engage or engage on a certain level. I do not think the number of people present is relevant.
... is being voyeuristic, no one should paint, write or read about anyone but themselves ...

On the contrary, artists have created very intimate portraits of their subjects that could not be interpreted as voyeuristic. Perhaps some of the differences are that these works feel sympathetic towards their subjects. I would also not dismiss work, where an artist is just concentrating on his/her self. Self-exploration can also be valid and useful to others in various ways.
I have revealed more of myself than most participants on this forum.

I probably have not read all your posts, but you seem to be referring to sharing details of your personal life; sometimes complaining that others are not doing so.

With all due respect, I think this forum is intended for people who may be having difficulty with emotional and psychological difficulties during or after exiting BKs. I have only been here a short time and I would not find it particularly helpful to share the personal details of my life (although there are no secrets), or indeed to hear the details of others lives, though that is always interesting. And, of course, from a moving on perspective, its good to hear of people fulfilling their potential etc.

What I have been reading, and what has deeply moved and touched me, is that many of the writers on the forum have revealed, their conflicts, anguish, sadness, outrage and even the benefits they experienced from the BK experience. It is invaluable to me after all this time to know that there are people out there who have gone/are going through the same struggles as myself. So thank you all from my heart. The level of articulation and intelligence is also very impressive.

Terry, I did not say you are a voyeur. I gave a quick response to uncomfortable reading and then having read more, said I did not need a reply as you had already put forward explanations to others.

Perhaps where you are being misunderstood is through (wrongly or rightly) a perceived lack of empathy. You seem to have moved on from the BKs relatively unscathed. That is really good. But unfortunately everyone is not so fortunate. in my own case, I suffered post-traumatic stress disorder which was aggravated by the fact I had been following the BK way of life and had successfully detached myself from my emotions. I was still living in the BK environment and was so confused that I could not allow myself to grieve the tragic deaths of people who were very close to me.

It took me several years, first to extract myself from the BK life and then to seek help to allow me to grieve and address the post traumatic stress, which is hugely disabling. Add to this, trying to readjust to life outside the bubble.
... life is too valuable to put their time here ...

It has taken me a long time to get to this point, and I am very glad to have this site. Life is valuable, but it can seem less so if you are too wounded to pick yourself up off the floor. And I think that seems to be one of the purposes of this site, to give support to the wounded. Thank you all again.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post04 May 2009

For a long ex-long term BK to come around to a staunchly but informed "no soul, no God" equation, rather than a just a kneejerk reaction, is notable. To take people through the self and thought process to get to that point, and whatever sense of freedom and well being it gives you, would have been value to contribute and document.

Contrary to your assummptions, at the end of the day I would not profess to "knowing" anything. I do not "know" whether there is a soul or God or not, I do not think it can be "proven", and I have specifically chosen to practise giving up believing (although not exploring and documenting) as much as I am able and aware of. I do not have a "position", I am just developing a nose for what smells 'real'. As time allows, I currently hope to write up some of the many scientific studies of "the power of prayer", believing in God etc that have been done recently ( ... the bottomline is, evidentially, the statistics show it makes no difference at all).

I would like to pick up on what Starchild has said but, firstly, I have to point out that you are making a whole heap of false assertions yet again in the beginning of your last post.
(you) know each other and have physical proximity and contact with each other beyond the forum, and create collective opinions, whereas other contributors are "in the dark' in this regard ...

From my own point of view, this is absolute crap and yet, again, you state it as if it were a truth ... rather than asking a question instead. What I "knew" about you came off 30 seconds on the internet and from "common knowledge" within the ex-BK world before you said anything, e.g. your 'married to a BK status'.

From my point of view, I totally agree with Starchild about what this forum is all about, and I think this is important. I think you may misunderstood it. Or, at least, your wrong impression of it was formed during one phase it was going through. How and where you chose to jump in (when the reforming BK entered the stage), your focus on me, your general MO ... if you are not here to talk about your own difficulties (and you yourself spoke about them in passing relationship-wise), document or sort your BK stuff, what are you here for?

To goad or belittle me ... have an argument ... what? I have to admit that I am completely bewildered about "why" by now.

Look, come one, give it one more chance. Get to the point and give something to others.

Please, none of the uncomfortable humour, none of the 'mirroring back to me what I said to you', no putting on pretenses, just strip it down and speak from your heart about you. No mock BK talks, no need for gee-whiz enlightened quotes or leaning on sages, just speak about 'your experience', where you have got to

    ... and leave behind what you consider to be your best advice to others facing or going through the same exiting process or losing a partner to the BKWSU.
Hell's teeth, man, you lost your loved one to the BKWSU, had your family divided in two, everything's Om Shanti, and your felt NOTHING about it!?! May be you ought to feel something about it and feeling something would be entirely justified?

So, look, I think you have two things here to deal with; a) your real feelings about your current self/soul concept, and b) your experience about what BKs, the BKWSU, do to families. I just find it funny you expend yourself belitting me and this forum, or the reforming BKs, but put up a sheild to protect the BKs from what they do best. Break up families.

The BKWSU was always going to "roll on down the road". What did we do to "confront" them!?! ... they were the ones that started the legal battle.

starchild

ex-BK

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2009

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post06 May 2009

Terry

I hope I did not offend you. I did make a few flippant remarks but I did not have a malicious intent and I agree with ex-l that you probably have a lot to offer.

Best Wishes.

Terry

ex-BK

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

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post07 May 2009

Dear Starchild : No offence taken (but a little irritation to be honest) - I have little time at the moment, busy with work and other areas of life, just checked in to read quickly today. Miscommunications happen when limited to text on screen. I also learnt when I started here not to presume by only reading a few posts. I, too, presumed ex-l was a Victorian spinster (to use eromain's description) from some posts, only to find later that she's a he, and more ... I also learnt that what sometimes appeared to be intolerance was really fatigue and I now try to give the poor overworked bastard leeway (BTW that's an affectionate term here).

ex-l: I wanted to try to expand on "there is no soul" - I tried to build that position up in posts here - see at end of feb, and beginning of March - but then got diverted again by other questions asked (most of which had already been answered). It is obviously needing more than a sound bite or an aphorism. Like your request for clear air in another recent post regarding those deaths in India. I asked for clear space for a while then, but again got hammered & diverted.

I need time for other stuff now, so don't presume anything by my absence other than I am living life (that's my idea of Yoga with God).
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post07 May 2009

Well, hopefully, come back at some point with a different approach and attitude. If you could treat the forum more like a magazine and your posts as article ready for publishing, it would be really good.

No, it wasn't obvious. For all the time spent on ping-pong, you could have just delivered a worthy "no soul, no spiritualism" paper that might have helped others.

Taking of "irritations" one of your problem that you really ought to get over is the misrepresentation of others. Eromain's description was not of me but the person that wrote the original draft of the Code of Ethics. I find inaccuracies obstacles to good communication. What you know about ex-l and what ex-l are two entirely separate things.

Terry

ex-BK

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

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post07 May 2009

Vicky Pollard wrote:Yeah but no but yeah ...


ex-l wrote:Eromain's description was not of me but the person that wrote the original draft of the Code of Ethics

Yes, I just checked and that's what he referred to. I stand corrected. But I was clarifying that we misunderstand members from their posts (replying to starchild and not taking offence at his/her misunderstanding). e.g. I have the impression that starchild is female, but don't know. I did actually think for a while that ex-l was a menopausal female with a chip on her shoulder because of a particular thread I had followed before registering & actively joining the forum (while I was still a voyeur!). I then read a lot more and learnt to respect ex-l's perspective - often strongly disagreeing (and often strongly agreeing, which usually means I don't reply). Peace.
User avatar

admin

site admin

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: 01 Jan 1970

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post19 Jul 2009

This User has made false accusations complaining that posts have been deleted from this topic.

    This is entirely incorrect.
Many have, however, been moved and merged with the topic on "The Brahma Kumaris: Spiritualism and Channeling" where they were more relevant.

On 26 Jun 09, User "Terry" changed his e-mail » from “constantcreate@optusnet.com.au” to “pissdoff@hotmail.com” (presumably a false email address) and password thereby deactivating their account themselves and not by any moderator.

    This user has never been suspended nor banned.
See enclosed copy of the user logs:

terry-constanti.jpg
terry-constanti.jpg (7.81 KiB) Viewed 16825 times

For the following reasons, this account will not be re-activated by any moderator.

Brahmakumaris.info is committed to accuracy, accountability and protecting individual's privacy where they request it, attempting to set standards lacking in the BK movement.

Our Code of Ethics, which all users must agree to, clearly states:
2) Members must preserve any confidential information acquired through their involvement in the forum and protect the privacy of individuals and organisations about whom information is held, including that given in private messages, even after leaving the forum.

Recently received information, has evidenced that user Terry is seeking to expose another forum member and breach their confidentiality in public, whilst attacking this forum's credibility.

These actions concern us as Terry presents himself as an unlicensed therapist and has spoken at Brahma Kumari Meditation centers.

Please note, in the first place, Terry joined this forum in his own full name, and published it in his posts, but later requested that we delete it. We did so for him in order to protect his identity.
User avatar

ex-l

ex-BK

  • Posts: 10661
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2006

Re: Hullo from Terry - The Power of Archetypes

Post20 Jul 2009

I wrote to Terry a short while ago asking him to discuss whatever the problem he had with me was and how what we are aiming here is something like 'client-practitioner' confidentiality, or academic standards. IF he gives permission, I am VERY happy to publish all our private messages and allow others to judge what I said, or my intentions. I suspect he will not.

I made it clear to him that individuals reading this website are often at the coming out stage, might be unsure of themselves, and not wanting to be revealed or pulled back into BK relationships.

For exiting-BKs ... seeing someone on this forum goading others by alluding to their identity in order to try and cut them down to size ... it is not good for the forum.


On more than one occasion, I have asked him to present his ideas properly. Having been a BK for decades, he now believes there is no soul. I would like to see that line of thinking and how he came about it.

I think it would be valuable for BKs and ex-BKs to consider.

Its a shame because if he could be valuable asset to this forum but all we get is weird ridicule. If he cannot play by the rules, we are better without him.
terry wrote:I wasn't convinced, but found the Gyan not unlike the Zen koan, i.e. a great tool for taking the mind outside the box.

Great ... I hope you find a great tool for putting your mind back inside its box too, mate! :D

He being married to a BK, I was genuinely compassionate for the guy, but I have had enough now. It seems like he has been working the private message system, like they all do, too.
PreviousNext

Return to Newcomers