The SergeProp Feminist Revolt

I can’t call it a revolution because that would infer the sisters are sticking up for women. Rather the Brides of Serge are just sticking up for their allegiance to Serge. Also, a reader asks whether its prudent to criticize minor players and whether it might make Serge’s followers close ranks.

I’ll throw that open to readers, but I can make it clear, I don’t want to spend much time criticizing lesser members. It’s my impression the majority of UM followers are essentially decent and kind people genuinely looking for a healthy and loving lifestyle. Unwittingly, they become victims of Serge and his highly tuned system of mind control. In coming posts, I’ll delineate the whole thing, and I hate to say it, the system is so extensively designed and tuned, susceptible individuals stand little chance against it.

So while I think many of Serge’s ardent followers are victims of his aggressive pathology and deserve compassion, I draw a line between protecting them and enabling them. The man who was concerned about his partner’s strong reaction wasn’t specific about which parts of my post she didn’t like, but was concerned my criticisms might turn students more toward Serge’s side.
What do you think?
At the time I wrote it, as now, I was struck by the glaring lack of insight shown by students posting on the SergeProp blogs, where they imply media exposure of harm is worse than Universal Medicine’s harmdoing. The denial of Serge’s unscrupulous, sleazy and corrupt behaviour is extraordinary. However, they’re not denying it vocally, and their posts are more remarkable for what is not said than what is. Readers here know I’ve been posing questions to UniMed since we began this blog and not one student or apologist has made any attempt at answering my concerns. Not one. No one has disputed my questions and no one has denied the issues I’ve raised or my account of my experiences. Strange isn’t it? The only direct criticism we’ve had is the standard attacks on so called abusive husbands – as if I don’t exist – some whining that we named the UniMed cartel, some whining that I critiqued the idiotic diet and some whining that Serge doesn’t really look like crap – I just chose a bad photo.
What that tells me is the UMers are aware of the issues, even if they weren’t aware those issues are part of UM’s culture of harm until we pointed it out. The fact they aren’t publicly discussing the problems tells me they’re struggling with them. If they thought my account was a fiction and my concerns baseless, they would be clamouring to deny them and to discredit me, but because they still possess a glimmer of conscientiousness, and they know what I say can’t be denied, they’ve chosen to ignore me in the hope I’ll go away. What won’t go away is their struggle with irrefutable facts.
I want them to struggle with them. I want them to engage their critical faculties and their senses of morality, engulfed as they are by Serge’s abstractions, and examine our concerns. Not because I want them to suffer, but because the reengagement of their minds, the examination of their response to facts will be their first step to exiting the controlled milieu, emancipating themselves from the mystical manipulation, and moving toward healing. Genuine healing, that is, not ‘Esoteric’ (bogus) healing. Genuine as in moving toward the rediscovery and redevelopment of their whole persona, rather than the shrunken one currently under Serge’s spell.
I agree many hardcore devotees (try not to vomit Kyla), will turn to each other under pressure from outside. I don’t think it can be avoided, particularly since Serge has already programmed them that those not engaged in UM are automatically hostile and hell bent on obstructing ‘the work’. It’s also difficult to avoid due to the extreme potency of Serge’s thought reform tech. However, I see the alternatives as equally unfavourable. Either, the group is allowed to carry on, unexamined, unaccountable and unaccepting of their responsibilities, collective and individual, or, when Serge goes down spectacularly due to actions taken by various federal agencies, unless his highly dependent students are somewhat prepared, we’ll be witnessing wholesale collapse of personalities. 
We sincerely welcome feedback on our strategies, in the comments or privately through the contact page. We also wholeheartedly welcome your posts, so that this site really is democratic, not just me prattling on. We’d like our readers to read many voices and many approaches. 
In the meantime, we’ll continue to work a number of angles: the medical accountability angle, the cult dismantling angle and the appeals to personal responsibility angle. I won’t pretend  coming out of denial is a comfortable or pretty process. It hurts, and brings out strong reactions: defensive thrashing of arms and gnashing of teeth. Yet, to allow denial to continue has far more insidious consequences. At the beginning of the year, Serge was cranking his profit making machine at full throttle, under an illusion of impunity in spite of mounting collateral damage. As angst ridden and ugly as the exposure might get, personally, I’d prefer to be where we’re at now.
With regard to the feminist revolt, I’d like to reiterate a point about Kyla’s overt accusations directed at Lance and another Bangalow husband and father. With disgust I watched the comments to her post grow to 54, a rallying of the majority of the SergeProp brains trust. All of them echoed the cries of abuse and the claims of victimhood and how dare anyone criticize their loving lifestyle, and thanks for ‘sharing with us how awful it is’ etc. With all that moaning outrage, it appears the fervent self loving and group hugs aren’t helping them rise above the initial flickers of outside criticism.
In yesterday’s cult thought reform post, I wrote about Serge’s polarizing demand for purity, and the black and white thinking that portrays those on the UniMed workshop treadmill as good and FIERY, and anyone who isn’t as evil and PRANIC! It leads to an ‘us versus them’ mentality, and a tendency to label the slightest disagreement as hate, the slightest show of anger or frustration as a threat to the student’s path to self-loving, and the slightest criticism as abuse.
In the real world, however, domestic abuse and violence is very real and it appalls me that a group of women are flocking to support accusations that they cannot and will not substantiate. Kyla, if Lance is an abuser, produce the documentation, the records of police complaints or court documents. Until you do so, you have no right to accuse.
You and your supporters need to know that each time you make baseless accusations you devalue and discredit the testimony of a woman or family that is in real danger. Remember the story of the boy who cried wolf? When you trivialize abuse you further injure and demean its real victims.
Drs Hall and Mallatt, as doctors with supposedly high standing in the community your participation in this malicious falsehood is a disgrace, and yet another abuse (real) of your positions. 
And finally, let’s return to ‘the truth about serge benhayon’ (lol) blog, and eminent feminist, Rod Harvey’s numbingly obfuscatory hot air blowing post on the status of women. The entire thing is a comprehensive recitation of the misandrist platitudes Serge uses to bust relationships,including a generalizing inference women have zero responsibility in relationship breakdowns. Towards the end he writes: I’m not here to be an activist, or to defend women
No, except that you just expended 800 words of Sergisms doing precisely that. 
(they can do a good job of that for themselves). 
You’d better believe it.
By truly engaging with women we’ll discover their essence and how feminine, sexy, playful, loving and amazing they are. How could we possibly belittle that? 
GENIUS! Did you discover that all by yourself?
But I am now convinced that if we are to accelerate serious change, then men’s support is crucial. Let’s be in it together.
Yes. Lets. If you’re so motivated to protect women’s rights, Rod, how about you answer the questions I’ve been asking all along. Any UM students are welcome to answer, including Kyla and the women’s rights activists who commented on her esoterically unbecoming and factually deficient rant:
Is it acceptable for Serge, the unqualified anything, to be palpating ovaries and prying into women’s histories with men? 
Are you comfortable with him doing that with the women in your life? 
Are you comfortable with adolescent girls staying in Serge’s home? 
Did he offer your wife a vaginal examination? Or your sisters in the group?
Do you think it acceptable that Serge raves incessantly at his workshops about sexual violence in the presence of children? 
Does it disturb you that Serge can’t leave the subject alone? 
Does it disturb you that Serge constantly denigrates sex as impure and animalistic, actively encourages women to deny sex to their husbands and themselves, yet once he’s succeeded in annihilating your libidos with his rhetoric and his regime of malnourishment, gloats to you all about his ability to ‘make love’ and have ‘full body orgasms’? 
Doesn’t that strike you as perverse? Sadistic even?
Show us what kind of feminist you are, Rod.


7 thoughts on “The SergeProp Feminist Revolt

  1. Hi Venus.Firstly, great blog. I reckon you are doing an awesome job and I thank you for all the work you have put in.Having said that, you throw it open to readers to comment on the way you deal with some of the UMers, so I'll share my views. I have cringed from time to time when reading some of the things you (and some other people in the comments) have directed at the UMers.While I hate reading what a lot of them write, as it brings up the frustrations I have living with a UM follower, I still feel that they are victims just as much as us. And as such, I try not to take out my frustration on them.Over on the Rick Ross forum, I used an analogy that is probably pretty woeful, but seeing as I haven't come up with a new one, I'll repeat it here. I liken the interactions with UMers to fighting a battle against child soldiers. While they may be attacking you and inflicting harm, they are also victims and on some level probably shouldn't be held accountable for their actions. I repeat, on some level.It's so easy to see them as the enemy considering they can do so much damage to you. However, the real enemy sits in a mansion in northern NSW, guarded by a flotilla of Alpha Romeos. The trick is, how do you bring down the evil leader and his evil empire without harming his child soldiers?But more to the point, we all know how UMers take even the slightest of criticisms of their beliefs, let alone of them or their leader. Therefore, attacking them individually will not have a positive effect whatsoever. I do believe that critcisms and judgements of UMers as individuals should be avoided at all costs. After all, they do enough criticising and judging as it is, don't you think?(Yes I realise I may have been a little hypocritical there!)

  2. Great comment, and thanks for making it. I don't think the child soldier analogy is woeful at all. I'm in the process of preparing the next thought reform posts and you're right that UM followers are victims. In fact, everyone involved, just about without exception is a victim. I'm finding the methodology of the UniMed thought reform and the intent that is behind it incredibly disturbing and very very dark. It's kept me awake at night. The problem we have is good people – and I'm convinced they are often exceptionally good people, and certainly the kind of people who would never intend to harm, including the doctors – have found themselves unwittingly involved in harm, and enmeshed in a group think mindset that is difficult to see their way out of. Serge himself may even be a victim of his pathology, but how to bring his harmful activities to a halt. And yes, how to bring down the evil leader without harming the child soldiers? I guess I'll be contemplating that for a while and tuning my approach — it's one reason I put the question out there, because I don't want to cause more harm. Perhaps it's a bit like parenting, firm yet gentle at the same time? Having said that, going softly may not have had the impact, and as many parents know, there's a place for tough-love and strong medicine at times. This blog has been up nearly 3 weeks and consistently gets around 800 hits/day. People are paying attention and our spies tell us there are ructions in all the right quarters. But I guess subtlety is something I could work on… After tomorrow's post…

  3. "By truly engaging with women we’ll discover their essence and how feminine, sexy, playful, loving and amazing they are. How could we possibly belittle that?" [ from Rod Harvey, courtesy of Serge] This is directly from Serge's mouth. I noted it from an audio I had the displeasure of listening to. What it is referring to however, is a subverted version of the woman, one that conforms to Serge's vision. Once he has deconstructed their own individual sense of themselves as a woman, by insisting that it has arisen from outside pressures ( society, peers, advertising, men) he offers his version. It is interesting to see how the woman conform to this; dressing a certain way, walking a certain way, using makeup when it was not their habit in the past, and so forth. Again, acceptance of Serge's ideal female model by them is a sort of denial; of their former selves, and of the roles they think are 'imposed on them' while ironically, Serge has enforced a new one-size-fits-all role with constant reliance on fear mongering, of the type repeated slavishly by Rod Harvey. He employs the same techniques with religion, medicine, health, men and so forth. By focusing on the worst aspect of each, and turning generalization into brute fact, their view becomes black and white. 'The normal way" [which has those bad aspects] or "Serge's way" [ which offers salvation] Regarding Howdoesithappens comments- An issue facing anyone criticizing Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine is that the members see the group and Serge as an extension of themselves. To object to Serge is to object to them. To call him a liar, is to call them a liar. However, they are on the whole adults. They are also highly critical and judgmental about people who are adverse to their beliefs. While there is good evidence that they have come under the influence of serious heavy-duty thought reform methodology, they are still capable of making decisions about how they behave. Each member would be in a daily struggle to reconcile contradictions and the pressure of belonging, and weighing if the benefit really exists. A cult exit counselor informed me that no-one knows what makes a person decide to leave a cult. Each person's a-ha moment differs. However, not treating them like adults capable of making their own decisions, enables them further into the group mindset. While I agree comments should take into consideration the powerful effect Serge's techniques have, we should also speak frankly to them as adults; though I suggest more kindly than they might speak of us.Ultimately, we are all motivated by the same thing. We have a family member, partner or friend who has been lost to us in a way. It is our love and concern for them that keeps us going. We are not defending a bizarre belief system or personality, nor profiting. To the contrary. Perhaps should we speak plainly, we should take the time to remind the members that it is our love and concern and nothing else that keeps us reaching out for them.

  4. Are they adults, though, Richard? In the true sense? I'm yet to lay out the next thought reform post properly, but it's a question which I've been mulling over and I'm hoping the answer may become clearer. I think it's Thaler Singer who talked of the 'Cult Personality' – an atrophied or perhaps regressed version of the person they were before joining the cult. But Lifton also talked about the most intense indoctrination/thought reform as never being totally complete. You can't completely brainwash someone, which is why I think none of them have been able to deny my questions or my account. Although they're willing to defend Serge at the expense of their own dignity, to resort to dishonesty in his defence is too extreme. Now, just to add something I wrote yesterday on the Rick Ross Forum about Rod Harvey's post and which refers to the post a few days ago : It's an example of 'doctrine over person' where adherence to Sergism is regarded as more important than protecting the health and dignity of human beings – including children. It's also an example of the intellectually atrophying affects of 'loading the language'. Rather than answer any of the questions I've posted about UM's dangerous and offensive activities, Rod and the compulsive propagandists busy themselves with reciting Serge's platitudes, as if repeating them enough will make them true.From Robert Jay Lifton (bless his cotton socks) talking about the uneasiness that exists within individuals who have been programmed to follow a questionable ideology: 'This uneasiness may result in a retreat into a rigid orthodoxy in which an individual shouts the ideological jargon all the louder in order to demonstrate his conformity, hide his own dilemma and his despair, and protect himself from the fear and guilt he would feel should he attempt to use words and phrases other than the correct ones.'Keep shouting it, UMers, the questions aren't going away.Also, it continually disgusts me that Serge exploits every weakness within personalities, relationships and society in general for nothing more than his own profit. The difficulties in relationships between the sexes are a loaded area Serge extravagantly works. If he was an authentic healer and if Rod Harvey used his noggin, they'd be working to challenge and overcome archaic gender stereotypes, rather than using them for their own profit and aggrandizement.

  5. I have witnessed UMers who, in my opinion, no longer have the emotional and cognitive capacity to cope with our world as an adult does. So, in that respect, it's hard to classify them as complete adults.

  6. I might dig out some info on cult personality and write it up. It does support what you're saying. I think what loved ones find hard to accept is that the person they're dealing with looks like an adult, but their capacity to behave like one has been severely curtailed. Hence the incredible difficulties in negotiating maturely.

  7. If I may, I feel I should elaborate on my last comment.The way I see that they don't cope with our world in an adult way is to do with their anxiety over the minutiae of everyday life, and their dependence on others for guidance. There are other things, such as their inability to hold rational discussions about beliefs and habits etc, but we have covered that extensively already.I hear all the time from UMers in my life things like "I have (everyday issue to do with body, diet, mood, etc.), I need to ask (esoteric practitioner currently in vogue). This is an almost constant sentence uttered by the followers that I know. Although I don't hear it as much any more due to my opposition to anything esoteric.I see their anxiety as soon as the world presents something they have been taught to fear. To watch an adult behave in these ways gives the impression of a child who doesn't have their parent around to help through a daunting situation.Just my opinion of course…

Tell us what you think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s