All about cults

[Binglebong]

A very interesting starting point about cults.

Please do not suggest anything is a cults or thread will get removed

This is basically but the description if cults is suggestive.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj4w95452eeo

Do you know if they are still alive?

I really encourage people to watch the documentary mentioned in the article. It is really interesting in its own right and talks about how the Jesus army in particular targeted young people looking for a sense of place and identity and how they got swept away with it.

There's also a number of people whose parents were involved in the cult who became the target and victims of group sanctioned punishment. Curiously they also talk about how the group had a good side and how aspects of their childhood were idyllic - which in turn makes it somewhat harder to process and deal with because of this conflict. They also were in a situation where they didn't know any different so their point of reference about what is 'normal' and 'acceptable' is off and that's one of the reasons they have so many issues into adulthood.

I have been saying for sometime that I think that the ideology IS cultlike. Even before it was permitted to even mention such things on MN. Somehow we've managed to slowly highlight the issue and it's become tolerated within reason. The ONLY thing trans ideology falls down on is the charismatic leader thing. However having given it some thought, I think my counter argument is probably this; that the concept grew and then was taken on by a number of groups which did have charismatic leaders and managed to then have significant influence over various other centres of authority and this wasn't questioned.

For example in the UK we definitely DID have Susie Green and Mermaids. There's definitely others in the US who filled similar roles.

As Mermaids was hit by scandal she left and actually their influence has diminished. In the wake of that and other developments we've had other prominent figures rise to the surface. This is very much in keeping with the cycle of cults were when one implodes followers fracture and new leaders emerge. We currently have the Good Laugh Project and Jolyon which is having significant influence. Another identifiable group is the Webberleys.

The worrying group emerging ATM is the one around the bloke who mutilated himself. The fact Vogue were promoting him says a lot.

The problem is social media distorts and dilutes the effect - but we do have the dynamic of literally 'following' 'influencers' on social media and then not following alternative views and blocking people we disagree with. It makes it somewhat harder to identify the charismatic leaders as there are a probably a number. All who demand compliance in different ways. And it's probably possible to follow multiple leaders at the same time.

Reflecting on the point about MN being the 'biggest cult', well MN largely actually reflects public opinion. It just says it out loud. It's not a cult for that reason alone. MN emphasises safeguarding and known protocols to prevent harms and that makes it a target. Stressing why we developed single sex services, identifying patterns of behaviour that harm and highlighting reports which are high quality and how and why they are reputable rather than flawed due to bias are crucial to this - and follow safeguarding. That doesn't make it a cult. It encourages critical thought and it does not have a narrow political base - it has views from a broad spectrum. There is considerable opposition to omnicausing. MNetters actively do try and look at 'the otherside' and frequently ponder the question 'are we the baddies'. In other words it most definitely has a healthy level of questioning.

MN also stands out as being slightly different to other social media because you don't 'follow' particular individuals and you can't block people. Other views CAN be voiced, regardless of what people think - the point is you can dissent but you need to be able to hold a coherent argument. That's where cult members are coming unstuck and going to struggle coming on here because the only thing they have is The Script and Mantras. The comparable parallel is effectively the Jehovah's witnesses going around the streets knocking on the general publics front door and getting somewhat short shrift. We just don't do bollocks and that's a perfectly normal reaction and not an outlier.

So I think it's crept along and been allowed to become cultlike as a movement. It's not the only movement that's doing this- there are other political cults that have emerged in recent years. The Tate Brothers is a particularly good example, noting that they are not the only leaders in the same field. The trans movement has managed to get more reach than others though because it did manage to get a foot in the door legally and that has allowed recruitment and a sense of legitimacy others have not enjoyed to the same degree.

Lifton outlines the "Eight Criteria for Thought Reform":

• Milieu Control. This involves the control of information and communication both within the environment and, ultimately, within the individual, resulting in a significant degree of isolation from society at large.
• Mystical Manipulation. The manipulation of experiences that appears spontaneous but is, in fact, planned and orchestrated by the group or its leaders to demonstrate divine authority, spiritual advancement, or some exceptional talent or insight that sets the leader and/or group apart from humanity, and that allows a reinterpretation of historical events, scripture, and other experiences. Coincidences and happenstance oddities are interpreted as omens or prophecies.
• Demand for Purity. The world is viewed as black and white and the members are constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection. The induction of guilt and/or shame is a powerful control device used here.
• Confession. Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members' "sins," "attitudes," and "faults" are discussed and exploited by the leaders.
• Sacred Science. The group's doctrine or ideology is considered to be the ultimate Truth, beyond all questioning or dispute. Truth is not to be found outside the group. The leader, as the spokesperson for God or all humanity, is likewise above criticism.
• Loading the Language. The group interprets or uses words and phrases in new ways so that often the outside world does not understand. This jargon consists of thought-terminating clichés, which serve to alter members' thought processes to conform to the group's way of thinking.
• Doctrine over person. Members' personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.
• Dispensing of existence. The group has the prerogative to decide who has the right to exist and who does not. This is usually not literal but means that those in the outside world are not saved, unenlightened, unconscious, and must be converted to the group's ideology. If they do not join the group or are critical of the group, then they must be rejected by the members. Thus, the outside world loses all credibility. In conjunction, should any member leave the group, he or she must be rejected also.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

And an insightful essay.

Something has gone wrong with the flow of information. It’s not just that different people are drawing subtly different conclusions from the same evidence. It seems like different intellectual communities no longer share basic foundational beliefs. Maybe nobody cares about the truth anymore, as some have started to worry. Maybe political allegiance has replaced basic reasoning skills. Maybe we’ve all become trapped in echo chambers of our own making – wrapping ourselves in an intellectually impenetrable layer of likeminded friends and web pages and social media feeds.

But there are two very different phenomena at play here, each of which subvert the flow of information in very distinct ways. Let’s call them echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. Both are social structures that systematically exclude sources of information. Both exaggerate their members’ confidence in their beliefs. But they work in entirely different ways, and they require very different modes of intervention. An epistemic bubble is when you don’t hear people from the other side. An echo chamber is what happens when you don’t trust people from the other side.

Current usage has blurred this crucial distinction, so let me introduce a somewhat artificial taxonomy. An ‘epistemic bubble’ is an informational network from which relevant voices have been excluded by omission. That omission might be purposeful: we might be selectively avoiding contact with contrary views because, say, they make us uncomfortable…

An ‘echo chamber’ is a social structure from which other relevant voices have been actively discredited. Where an epistemic bubble merely omits contrary views, an echo chamber brings its members to actively distrust outsiders.

[People in an echo chamber are alienated from outside sources. Outside is labelled as malignant and untrustworthy. So, for people like Limbaugh follower under discussion] exposure to contrary views could actually reinforce their views. Limbaugh might offer his followers a conspiracy theory: anybody who criticises him is doing it at the behest of a secret cabal of evil elites, which has already seized control of the mainstream media. His followers are now protected against simple exposure to contrary evidence. In fact, the more they find that the mainstream media calls out Limbaugh for inaccuracy, the more Limbaugh’s predictions will be confirmed. Perversely, exposure to outsiders with contrary views can thus increase echo-chamber members’ confidence in their insider sources, and hence their attachment to their worldview. The philosopher Endre Begby calls this effect ‘evidential pre-emption’. What’s happening is a kind of intellectual judo, in which the power and enthusiasm of contrary voices are turned against those contrary voices through a carefully rigged internal structure of belief.

https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult

The Witnesses are an interesting case because they have some of the classic features - high commitment, high barriers against the outside world, shunning of dissenters - but they don't have charismatic leadership. I doubt if most Witnesses could name the members of the Governing Body. I once read a memoir by someone who worked at their headquarters, and his reaction to meeting Fred Franz was disbelief that this shabbily dressed little old man really was the leader.

I think this is Max Weber's insight into how movements in their startup phase have charismatic leadership, then that gives way to bureaucratic leadership. This is how sects become denominations, though some never make the transition.

I can see charismatic figures emerging from the world of social media influencers, but I'm not sure that influencers are willing to put in the hard yards of building institutions that will outlast them.

I'll check that out, thanks.

I see I lasted about ten minutes as charismatic cult leader before somebody decided we didn't need one. Typical. 🙄

To some extent many parts of cult behaviour are pretty run of the mill group behaviour. Just as what we call 'grooming' has overlap with normal social interaction. The 'in group' emphasis, and othering and 'out grouping' happen in probably almost all groups to an extent.

People are drawn to cults/groups/movements when vulnerable. It's common and normal to want to find something to cede control to, especially at times of vulnerability.

I see the author of the documentary talks about barriers to leaving being crucial, too. What happens to apostates? (Could 'flouncer's corner' use a bit of rebranding? More menace?)

Steven Hassan PhD is an expert on cults and deprogramming. He might have had more to say on the subject since 2020 but these are relevant threads on what was then called Twitter:

July 5 2020, 4:30pm

As a mental health professional and someone who has researched undue influence, I have interviewed 12 detransitioners M-F-M and F-M-F who have read my work on cults and mind control. Several told me they watched trans “hypno porn”. They gave me links to 1/4

Thread:
https://x.com/CultExpert/status/1279799792974147588

Threadreader:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1279799792974147588.html

Archive:
https://archive.md/LpZ8d

July 5 2020, 10:31pm

I retweeted a @jk_rowling tweet and weighed in as a mental health professional who has written 4 books on cult mind control and how to help those who have been harmed (and their families). I have spent over 4 decades in the field of research and helping those who have 1/15

Thread:
https://x.com/CultExpert/status/1279890717507227648

Threadreader:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1279890717507227648.html

Archive:
https://archive.is/W9sxV

Steven Hassan's BITE Model of Authoritarian ControlTM

Many think of mind control as an ambiguous, mystical process that is difficult to define. Mind control refers to a specific set of methods and techniques, such as hypnosis or thought-stopping, that influence how a person thinks, feels, and acts.

Steven Hassan developed the BITE Model© to describe cults’ specific methods to recruit and maintain control over people. “BITE” stands for Behavior, Information, Thought, and Emotional control. The BITE Model should be used within The Influence Continuum© to help determine authoritarian control. Not every group or relationship uses every one of these. Some are universal such as deception (Information control), indoctrinating people to distrust critics and former members, or installing phobias to make people afraid of questioning or leaving.

Full article:
https://freedomofmind.com/cult-mind-control/bite-model-pdf-download/

There are several other very relevant articles and videos I could list but I am mindful of the warning by the OP.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck etc….

The Skoptsy were a Russian Christian cult who practiced genital mutilation including removing women's breasts and male castration. It lasted a surprisingly long time given that members of the cult were removing the ability to reproduce and it must have been horrifically painful and prone to infection.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skoptsy

The late Mike Rinder was one of the great experts on cults, having seen it from the inside. I still can't quite believe he's gone. I didn't know him at all well, but I had some contact with him years ago, and he might be one of the most heroic people I've ever encountered.

This is someone who literally grew up in a cult, ascended to its top ranks, did terrible things for it with brutal efficiency... and then snapped, escaped, and having been a bad man for so long, spent the last 15 years or so of his life trying to be a good man and put things right. I'm amazed he never lost his humanity or his wicked Australian sense of humour.

His memoir is fantastic, but here he is with Megyn Kelly and doing a deep dive.

Sissy hypno porn mentioned in PP. Just did a Google on that (not the actual content but on people discussing the content in articles, Reddit, Wikipedia etc). What a weird thing to exist. Very "now".

"It lasted a surprisingly long time given that members of the cult were removing the ability to reproduce"

They recruited children in a Pied Piperish sort of way (there are real-life analogies that would probably get my post deleted).

Castrating Children in the Service of Male Sexuality
3 Dec 2021 - Genevieve Gluck

"In a paper titled From Heresy to Harm: Self-Castrators in the Civic Discourse of Late Tsarist Russia, Engelstein points out that children were recruited into the Skoptic sect:

“There are also many examples of children being put to the knife, sometimes by relatives who adopted the faith. Children also came into contact with the Skoptsy after being hired from their parents to work as apprentices and servants. Once among the sectarians, the children were raised in the spirit of the creed and allegedly kept from contact with their families. When questioned in court, almost all said they had sought castration of their own free will.”

Naturally, Skoptsy men, having participated in genital self-mutilation, were rendered unable to reproduce. It was necessary for the cult to reach out to children in order to grow their own numbers.

Engelstein explains that this was made possible by the fact that “the appearance of virtue among the Skoptsy aroused the peasants’ admiration”, and that their “repetitious recitations… exerted a powerful force” that created a “dependency”.

“The wealthy sectarian community provided shelter for vagrants and runaway criminals, whom they supplied with false papers and new names. To the poor peasant they offered relief from the military draft, escape from serfdom, economic support, and the hope of equality and fellowship. They adopted the children of their own needy relatives, took in orphans, and hired the offspring of impoverished villagers as apprentices.”

In modern times the Skoptsy sect has become the namesake of a male sexual disorder called Skoptic syndrome. The definition of Skoptic syndrome, “persistent preoccupation with castration or penectomy,” is listed as a form of gender dysphoria found under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV section 302.6: Gender Identity Disorder Not Otherwise Specified.

This definition of gender dysphoria has been obscured by means of “inclusivity”, a term which, in reality, reflects the forced inclusion of women and children into the sadomasochistic sexual proclivities of men in order to normalize either their own fetishes (paraphilias) or the renunciation of an overactive male sex drive."

https://genevievegluck.substack.com/p/castrating-children-in-the-service

Excellent article that also covers other castration cults and the known effects on the adult bodies of little boys who were castrated, eg. discovered from the skeletons of deceased Castrati singers.

I see the Hijra are also included in that article about emasculation.

Quote-replying to save this very useful post and also tosay thank you to POWN for posting.

This theme being discussed has been on my mind from early on as someone who has been fascinated by cult dynamics from way before the gender stuff.

I'm very glad, and not surprised, that Lisa Marchiano asked SH for his input.

Co-incidentally, a profile of Simon Amaya Price who was socially affirmed but desisted and faced abuse for doing so. He says: They are members of a cult, treating me like an apostate'
donoharmmedicine.org/2025/08/04/simon-amaya-price-desister/

Yes, they're still alive and still in the cult. And are still a rubbish human being whose grandchildren will never get to see them, which doesn't seem very Christian to me but it's their choice. Fortunately their kids can't remember them as they've been gone so long.

Me neither! I think I may have been 'very unMumsnetty hugged' once (ONCE! In all these years!) but that's it.

Is there a secret board I don't know about? Have you all been direct messaging love bombs to each other? WHAT THE HELL HAS BEEN GOING ON BEHIND MY BACK?!