Cult Myths
Debunking Bad Cult Identifiers

Though Cult Myths is for critically analyzing the anti-cult movement and its claims (with discussions of some counter-cult claims sprinkled in), the list of cult identifiers here, and instruction for self-awareness, is accurate, honest and reliable, providing proof and deep research. Cult Myths is not for getting rich, but to act in defense of freedom of religion. Scriptures will not be used or needed in the Cult Myths Series to establish facts since use of the Scriptures is for convincing ones of the rightness of one way of religion which works against the neutrality required by the subject. Besides, the facts in this series are self-evident.

The editor, who is also the primary author, is not a psychiatrist nor psychologist, and does not claim to be a "cult expert", but has been involved with several religious organizations, read many different religious texts and met members of truly destructive religions in the course of his door-to-door ministry. He is an autodidact with little to no institutional psychology training. He has done quite a bit of study on destructive religions, has been the subject of religious bigotry, is a member of a group he truly believes is maliciously misidentified as a cult by religious bigots and profiteers, and has been exceptionally dissatisfied with the anti-cult information to date for its imprecision and obvious exploitation of fear and religious hatred. Additionally, he observes exit counselors performing the very same things they accuse their targets of doing, which makes their methods at the least ethicly questionable if not morally bankrupt.

The editor is fully aware of the irony that he is religious. Steven Hassan attends synagogue, but no one finds that peculiar. As long as a person can divorce their work from religious life, there should not be a conflict. The neutrality of the Cult Myths blog will be evident with each post. Cult Myths is expected to one day be moved to its own site so as to maintain complete neutrality on the Cult Myths blog. Consider this the gestation period.

The problem with so-called anti-cult professionals and exit counselors is that they want to be able to pick and choose who is a "cult" at will. They make lists that cover a broad range of influential practices that rarely harm anyone, and that pretty much everyone does. Why do these "specialists" do this? It seems obvious that it is usually about money because they can't catch these groups through honest means and stay relevant. Their lists become like using dynamite to catch fish in a barrel. Some of these exit counselors charge outrageous fees for just one hour of their service while they go on book tours and talk shows because recognition becomes more important than actually doing their jobs.

Fixing the Problem

Being "new", "strange" or "different" does not qualify a religion as destructive in the least. Neither does not believing in a particular doctrine. While a religion may demonstrate many qualities of destructive religions, it itself is not a destructive religion unless it actually negatively impacts its members.

So, because no one seemed to be willing to do it honestly without corruption, it has to be corrected by someone not in the inner circle. This, in the list labeled "Danger" in the sidebar, Cult Myths separates out all the meaningless items that have no bearing upon control or destructiveness and compiles a list of more qualified items. The claims made by anti-cultists that do nothing to determine a cult are discussed under "Harmless", and things that could pass from harmless to harmful are labeled "Red Flags".

white-space: pre-wrap;">To construct this list, some of the most influential lists of "cult" behavior were carefully analyzed and deconstructed to reveal very little that can be used to identify destructive religions. Therefore, I have turned to analyzing actual destructive religions, not simply for influential behaviors (which I cover seperately), but for ultimately and consistently destructive behaviors. In doing so, I found a substantial list of identifiers that is effective at consistently identifying dangerous cults, rather than something that can be loosely applied by someone who has already prejudged a group as a cult.

If a religion practices anything on my list of dangers, then they are almost certainly a dangerous or destructive cult, not just 'maybe if you squent your eyes.' This blog represents the culmination of this study. It is firmly believed here that those on the lookout will find this considerably more helpful than previous information on dangerous or destructive cults.

Information is provided here for distinguishing between the conditioning by a dangerous or destructive cult and the otherwise standard behavior of the human psyche and group behavior by combining individual human psychology and group sociology and dynamics. You will even learn how to think for yourself while still being a productive part of any group to which you consciously choose to belong.

This blog does not assume the existence of mind control or brainwashing, due to the need of individuals to submit themselves voluntarily to such control or else are forced to do the will of the religion out of fear, thus actual brainwashing and control of the mind does not take place. Such terms have been described as "quackery" by the psychiatric community. The symptoms of a negatively impacting cult are provided so that you do not have to become a victim of these in order to recognize them.

One thing people must remember is that if an individual appears well-rounded, comfortable in their skin and pleasantly happy, they are not likely a member of a destructive religion. Members of destructive religions are typically not balanced individuals. This does not mean they are always crazy, but true happiness and clear thinking is not usually readily apparent because of their undergoing negative cult impact while suppressing their personal feelings about the abuse.

At the same time, though, one person being crazy, unhappy, or lacking clear thinking is not automatically an indicator of the person belonging to a destructive religion. Any number of factors could contribute to a person's unbalanced nature. However, if there is a consistent presence of such indicators among multiple members, especially in the immediate presence of a leader, then take note.


About Cult Myths

There are many claims about how to identify a cult. Some are less effective than others and some are downright dishonest, and at the very least perfectly useless for identifying dangerous or destructive cults. We take a magnifying glass to these and reveal them for what they are.

In these posts, we will consider innocuous claims (actually healthy or harmless) of cult identifiers (That these make it onto anyone's list is puzzling) as well as what is truly dangerous or red flags that reasonably indicate a practice that is questionable from a secular standpoint or could be misused. A group can have a combination of these practices. We will also consider the biographies and reputations of anti-cultists and counter-cultists to try to understand their unique lists.

We will document known dangerous religions so that the reader may have a co-experiential knowledge of what a dangerous religion really is without all the doom and gloom of emotionally charged music, unnerving visuals, ominous storytelling and deep-voiced narrators to influence you. Instead, we will look only at the facts.

Subjects

Biographies. Cult identification lists do not create themselves. We take a look at the people who have come up with some favorite cult identification lists of anti-cultists. We consider their pasts, their influences their histories in the anti-cult or counter-cult movements, as well as analyze possible motivations for their viewpoints.

Identification Models. We examine the scope and effectiveness of various lists of cult identifiers, as well as who could get caught up in their drag net. You will no doubt find that non-cult-specific laws in most countries are more effective at identifying dangerous cults because they are only after those actually harming others, whereas cult specialists tend to rake in every kind of fish.

Areas of Identification. These will be the primary identification posts to discus what is not and then what is destructove or dangerous behavior. These are the posts most people will be interested in. You can get a sense of all the subjects covered in this post.

Communication. A healthy way to maintain cohesion and promote trust is to share information in common in clear language, minimizing ambiguities. This builds relationships and removes any reason for suspicion. No one can do this perfectly, but it can be done effectively. Minimal communication would be harmless. It is when communication is unnecessarily restricted and used to control members beyond a simple rules structure that it begins to be unhealthy.

Structure. A group with a transparent structure with the minimal number of organs that facilitates its smooth operation is going to be organizationally healthy. Generally too many organs and opacity can undermine the smooth operation of the group, but as long as it is strictly accidental, it is fairly harmless. But when opacity and overly specialized organs, otherwise known as compartmentalization, are practiced as a rule, then the group begins to become totalitarian.

Autonomy. The self-actualization of members should be promoted within reason. Obviously law-breaking would be prohibited in a healthy group, but anything that encourages freedom to act within reasonable bounds would be healthy. Minor limitations on autonomy would be harmless. But when autonomy is unnecessarily restricted, then it begins to be replaced by oppression.

Community Relations. It is good for a group to have strong relationship with the community in which they live on the community's terms. This means following social norms, interacting with the community, providing helpful services to the community and the like. Simply attending to the group's needs or sitting like a rock in the community is harmless, but does nothing to curb fears. But it is when the group begins to negatively impact the community that the community becomes justified in its concerns.

Teachings. A group that promotes the mental, emotional and physical health of its members is healthy as a group. Generally the other areas flow out from the health of the individuals in the group. Inattention to health is relatively harmless. A group is under no obligation to promote health. It is when health begins to be negatively affected by the operation of group that there is cause for conscern.

Internal Conduct. How a group treats its members is the primary concern most people have when they hear the term "cult". Here we will analyze the various ways a group can help or damage its members.

View of Life. A healthy view of life is one in which the lives of individuals inside and outside the group are respected regardless of opposition. A permission of involvement in political strife is harmless. It is when aggression, bigotry and devaluing life is promoted that respect for life begins to fall away.

Worship. Worship has been found to be a psychologically healthy practice when structure is observed. It provides a sense of community, it is a means of self-expression and it helps us feel valued by a higher authority. This is a largely subjective area. There are many different forms and ways of worship. Most of them are covered in other areas of concern, but some are unique to this category. Most forms are harmless. Some may rise to the level of a thought-stopping red flag.

Cult and Non-cult Identifiers. These will be links in the sidebar to the relevant Area of Identification post that discusses the particular trait indicated by the link title. This allows the reader to look through the posts by trait under any of four categories.

Healthy Practices. Before you can objectively analyze what is dangerous orh destructive, you need to understand what is healthy behavior for a group. However, not exercising a healthy behavior does not automatically mean a group is exercising bad behaviors. These are simply behaviors that benefit the group, the individual, and/pr secular society. In each of the following four categories (Healthy, Harmless, Potential Red Flags, Dangers), we will be considering the following seven areas.

Harmless Practices. These are practices, or lack of practice, that are either not the responsibility of the group or are typical mismanagement common to human endeavors.

Red Flags. Some cult identifiers are not so cut and dried. A red flag does not automatically mean that the group that exercises it is a dangerous cult or is even using it in a suspicious way. It only means that the topic can be used to ill effect of one degree or another. It may be an indicator of something wrong, but is not in itself a clear identifier of dangerous or destructive behavior or abuses. Some red flags may at one time seemed like a danger, but over time have been shown not to be so clear as such. It clarifies what could tip the subject into the danger zone.

Dangers. A danger is an action or policy that actively produces negative effects that are harmful to an individual's mental, physical or financial wellbeing or poses a physical danger to any number of non-members (Supposed "Spiritual" harm is highly subjcctive and not relevant). These are things that create actual victims who become stressed out, taxed, and may suffer longterm physical and/or psychological scars if they survive. There are enough of these traits that it is a wonder that cult specialists bother with anything else.

Cult Types. As a primer to the next section, we examine the various types of true dangerous and destructive cults that have unquestionably damaged their members with intent.

Dangerous Cults. Here we explore true dangerous and destructive cults whose activities as such have been proved time and again. We examine the media and police reports concerning these groups, as well as testimonies of former members.

Psychology and Sociology. The area of religion analysis is actually more subtle and complex than so-called "cult specialists" make it out to be. Many other features of human psychology and social interactions play fundamental roles in the religious leaders, the group and the individual members. Things glossed over by the supposed professionals.

Flip-side Anti-cult News. Where we report on harmful cult activity, it will be reported here. We will also investigate and debunk anti-cult claims in the news.

Anti-cult Definitions. It is important to understand the terms that are used in the anti-cult sphere. The terms are recaptured away from the mythifying and redefinition by anti-cultists. Read these terms to familiarize yourself with the subject of cult identification and the issues associated with anti-cult buzz words.

Related Advice. If you have specific questions about issues related to any of these subjects in this list, use the contact form under Contact Us in the sidebar. We will respond in a timely manner. You may keep up with our advice by following over at Jehovah's Witness Advisor.

Advice. We proved both solicited and unsolicited non-professional advice about how to identify, avoid or escape dangerous and destructive cults. We also provide counsel for building a support group and distancing oneself from a cult past.


Disclaimers

Though the Dismythed blog is religiously affiliated through its founder, the Cult Myths section takes no stand on religion. It neither promotes nor discourages any type of religion. We recognize each person's right to make their own choices about religion. Cult Myths is strictly for helping the public to reason on erroneous "cult" claims and to provide the tools to genuinely identify religious groups that are truly dangerous, not simply sectarian, and to give or identify sensible advice about how to avoid or overcome them.

Though Dismythed offers advice on various subjects, it is not a site for licensed psychiatric, psychological or mental health advice of any kind. What is posted here is the opinion of the authors. No diagnoses of any individuals will be attempted. Any statement that may seem like a diagnosis must be taken as the opinion of the author without the intent to give professional advice or diagnosis.

We believe, by the abundance of lies and disingenuine claims of anti-cultists, that no psychiatrist or psychologist has ever demonstrated an honest assessment of what constitutes a dangerous or destructive religion, herein identified as a "cult". We are seeking only to give our honest assessments of their claims that anyone with a reasoning mind would honestly conclude with careful analysis.

Comments