Re: 12-step-free digest

August 30, 1999

>Hey people,

>

>I just subscribed after being referred by a friend who shares my

>inability, despite years of trying, to accept the 12-step ideology.

Sounds like a good friend. ; )

Alan

______________________________________________________

August 30, 1999

>Hey people,

>

>I just subscribed after being referred by a friend who shares my

>inability, despite years of trying, to accept the 12-step ideology.

Sounds like a good friend. ; )

Alan

______________________________________________________

September 1, 1999

>Hi Fred:

>Welcome to the list. Some people are taking vacations so the list

>isn't too active right now, but please don't be discouraged. Maybe

>they'll come out of the woodwork.

I don't know. I think the last list was probably the best so far. God,

that pseudo-dream sequence about the flying aadeprogramming.com

advirtisement over the AA convention was sooooo freakin' funny. Goddamn...

anyway...

I think I like the flyer idea the best - in terms of cost and practicality.

Apple - please explain what you have exactly? Are they templates on

computer, or what?

I can definitely see acquiring a washie meeting list and distributing fake

flyers - for the entertainment/socially productive value of it.

Alan

______________________________________________________

September 1, 1999

>Hi Fred:

>Welcome to the list. Some people are taking vacations so the list

>isn't too active right now, but please don't be discouraged. Maybe

>they'll come out of the woodwork.

I don't know. I think the last list was probably the best so far. God,

that pseudo-dream sequence about the flying aadeprogramming.com

advirtisement over the AA convention was sooooo freakin' funny. Goddamn...

anyway...

I think I like the flyer idea the best - in terms of cost and practicality.

Apple - please explain what you have exactly? Are they templates on

computer, or what?

I can definitely see acquiring a washie meeting list and distributing fake

flyers - for the entertainment/socially productive value of it.

Alan

______________________________________________________

September 1, 1999

>Hi Fred:

>Welcome to the list. Some people are taking vacations so the list

>isn't too active right now, but please don't be discouraged. Maybe

>they'll come out of the woodwork.

I don't know. I think the last list was probably the best so far. God,

that pseudo-dream sequence about the flying aadeprogramming.com

advirtisement over the AA convention was sooooo freakin' funny. Goddamn...

anyway...

I think I like the flyer idea the best - in terms of cost and practicality.

Apple - please explain what you have exactly? Are they templates on

computer, or what?

I can definitely see acquiring a washie meeting list and distributing fake

flyers - for the entertainment/socially productive value of it.

Alan

______________________________________________________

September 1, 1999

....oh sign me up to chip in for the banner behind the plane and the flyers.

Kathy

September 1, 1999

....oh sign me up to chip in for the banner behind the plane and the flyers.

Kathy

September 1, 1999

....oh sign me up to chip in for the banner behind the plane and the flyers.

Kathy

September 1, 1999

Yes, I have a template. I really like the idea of fake pamphlets. Of

course, when printing, setting the job up on the press is the expensive

part, then choosing 10,000 vs. 1000 copies is insignificant in price

difference. I need a really honest printer who can keep his mouth

shut. Last thing I need is a damn stepper at the press calling the GSO

or something. I'm totally enamored by the idea, and would like to take

them to conferences etc.

Apple

> >Hi Fred:

> >Welcome to the list. Some people are taking vacations so the list

> >isn't too active right now, but please don't be discouraged. Maybe

> >they'll come out of the woodwork.

>

> I don't know. I think the last list was probably the best so far.

God,

> that pseudo-dream sequence about the flying aadeprogramming.com

> advirtisement over the AA convention was sooooo freakin' funny.

Goddamn...

> anyway...

>

> I think I like the flyer idea the best - in terms of cost and

practicality.

> Apple - please explain what you have exactly? Are they templates on

> computer, or what?

>

> I can definitely see acquiring a washie meeting list and distributing

fake

> flyers - for the entertainment/socially productive value of it.

>

> Alan

>

> ______________________________________________________

September 1, 1999

Yes, I have a template. I really like the idea of fake pamphlets. Of

course, when printing, setting the job up on the press is the expensive

part, then choosing 10,000 vs. 1000 copies is insignificant in price

difference. I need a really honest printer who can keep his mouth

shut. Last thing I need is a damn stepper at the press calling the GSO

or something. I'm totally enamored by the idea, and would like to take

them to conferences etc.

Apple

> >Hi Fred:

> >Welcome to the list. Some people are taking vacations so the list

> >isn't too active right now, but please don't be discouraged. Maybe

> >they'll come out of the woodwork.

>

> I don't know. I think the last list was probably the best so far.

God,

> that pseudo-dream sequence about the flying aadeprogramming.com

> advirtisement over the AA convention was sooooo freakin' funny.

Goddamn...

> anyway...

>

> I think I like the flyer idea the best - in terms of cost and

practicality.

> Apple - please explain what you have exactly? Are they templates on

> computer, or what?

>

> I can definitely see acquiring a washie meeting list and distributing

fake

> flyers - for the entertainment/socially productive value of it.

>

> Alan

>

> ______________________________________________________

September 1, 1999

Yes, I have a template. I really like the idea of fake pamphlets. Of

course, when printing, setting the job up on the press is the expensive

part, then choosing 10,000 vs. 1000 copies is insignificant in price

difference. I need a really honest printer who can keep his mouth

shut. Last thing I need is a damn stepper at the press calling the GSO

or something. I'm totally enamored by the idea, and would like to take

them to conferences etc.

Apple

> >Hi Fred:

> >Welcome to the list. Some people are taking vacations so the list

> >isn't too active right now, but please don't be discouraged. Maybe

> >they'll come out of the woodwork.

>

> I don't know. I think the last list was probably the best so far.

God,

> that pseudo-dream sequence about the flying aadeprogramming.com

> advirtisement over the AA convention was sooooo freakin' funny.

Goddamn...

> anyway...

>

> I think I like the flyer idea the best - in terms of cost and

practicality.

> Apple - please explain what you have exactly? Are they templates on

> computer, or what?

>

> I can definitely see acquiring a washie meeting list and distributing

fake

> flyers - for the entertainment/socially productive value of it.

>

> Alan

>

> ______________________________________________________

September 2, 1999

>Hi list:

>I've been wondering something... I think the deprogramming site is

>really useful for women especially, and addresses many problems which

>women face in AA (AA's effect on abuse issues, gender issues, >predator

>problem). Despite this, I seem to get a lot more mail from men. I

>wonder why this is?

>Apple

Hmmm... could be a dangerous question to reply to, but...

First, there's definitely more men that become substance abusers, in

general. That's verified in psychological and criminological studies(Can't

get in trouble for that one).

Also, I like your " more men on the internet " theory.

Those two together seem like they would explain the phenomenon. Other (more

dangerous) theories:

- Women seem to be more easily brainwashed by the program. Like, they get

into religion more and they are more likely to buy into the whole

subserviance to a higher power thing (very dangerous - I think I might get

hanged for that one). Not saying that its a biological thing. Just that

society deems those attributes more appropriate for women.

- Women seem to be less rebelious, in general. Its more of a guy thing to

be into rebelling from things. Although I know of plenty of women who do

rebell, I still think it more likely for men to do.

I think I'll stop there. I think I've given a little too much ammo for the

feminists to use against me.

Anyway. I have a question of my own - I've heard people on the list saying

that the evidence out there points to the program not being as good as other

forms of treatment. I was a psychology major with a focus in substance

abuse (both personal and through research) - and as far as I understand it,

the overwhelming evidence points to the program as the tested, successful

method of choice. Most of that research is pretty strong, simply because

the program has been around for long enough for long term research to be

valid. Although there are more recent isolated studies, it would be a hard

case to make that there is a " large " body of scientific evidence concluding

that the program is not the best form of treatment... if anyone knows

otherwise, please advise...

That is, pointing to the one study that Trimpy did does not suffice...

By the way, I'm not trying to defend the program, per se. Just trying to be

intellectually honest about the whole thing... I think its still a valid

position for a " Free-thinker " to take that the program is the proven " best "

method out there for the average person, but that the program still SUCKS!!!

Whew... anyway...

Laterz,

Alan

______________________________________________________

September 2, 1999

> By the way, I'm not trying to defend the program, per se. Just trying to

be intellectually honest about the whole thing... I think its still a valid

position for a " Free-thinker " to take that the program is the proven " best "

method out there for the average person, but that the program still

SUCKS!!!>

Speaking for myself: I don't want you to apologize for telling what you know

to be the truth. I carry some fairytales near and dear to my heart, but I

don't want to pretend they are the truth. They are more to comfort me when

things are tough--not a lifelong place to live.

I have my own experience, which was, I believe, that no intervention would

have been better for me than being pushed into 12-step treatment. I know my

experience is not generalize-able. There's a conflict: AA can be effective,

AA can be harmful. The more we learn, the better the chances that people

can get what is effective and be spared what is harmful.

Judith

________________________________________________________________

Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com

Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com

September 2, 1999

> By the way, I'm not trying to defend the program, per se. Just trying to

be intellectually honest about the whole thing... I think its still a valid

position for a " Free-thinker " to take that the program is the proven " best "

method out there for the average person, but that the program still

SUCKS!!!>

Speaking for myself: I don't want you to apologize for telling what you know

to be the truth. I carry some fairytales near and dear to my heart, but I

don't want to pretend they are the truth. They are more to comfort me when

things are tough--not a lifelong place to live.

I have my own experience, which was, I believe, that no intervention would

have been better for me than being pushed into 12-step treatment. I know my

experience is not generalize-able. There's a conflict: AA can be effective,

AA can be harmful. The more we learn, the better the chances that people

can get what is effective and be spared what is harmful.

Judith

________________________________________________________________

Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com

Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com

September 2, 1999

Don't worry Alan, I'm not going to nail you to the wall as a male

chauvinist pig or anything. Know why, cause you're right. One of the

books I read during my deprogramming is called " Women Under The

Influence " published by AFF, a foundation that studies the dangers of

cults and thought-reform organizations. The book deals with women's

succeptibility to fall for thought-reform groups, and the roots of that

succeptibility which is found in their socialization.

Women have more experience being the " lower power " , and it is a more

natural fit to meld into a group like AA because of it. It's NOT a

healthy fit, but it is a more familiar one.

I think women tend to feel more internalized rage/anger than men do,

and you're right, they rebel less. Why? Well, life is a different

experience for women all around. I can even think of a few cases in the

past when I really let a guy have it for being a jerk, and the response

was " you're so cute when you're angry " followed by a nose tweak. That's

the response to my dead-serious anger! Can any of you guys imagine

someone doing that to you? Makes me want to buy a gun.

There's always a touch of residual fear in our daily lives, and that's

why we develop the skill of not " upseting " people, meanwhile

internalizing our pain. Women are usually smaller and less strong/fast

than our male counterparts and violence against women is an everyday

part of mainstream entertainment. Watch her scream... watch her bleed

.... cool! The slut deserved it. and so on.

All of these things affect how much we rebel!

But I do think that we have a better intuition (gut instinct) than men

do, which warns us of dangers. When we drink the women's intuition

doesn't work too well.

But don't call all women complacent.... Underneath this seemingly

harmless fruity exterior, I'm a relentless rebel run riot.

Apple

>

> Hmmm... could be a dangerous question to reply to, but...

>

> First, there's definitely more men that become substance abusers, in

> general. That's verified in psychological and criminological

studies(Can't

> get in trouble for that one).

>

> Also, I like your " more men on the internet " theory.

>

> Those two together seem like they would explain the phenomenon.

Other (more

> dangerous) theories:

>

> - Women seem to be more easily brainwashed by the program. Like,

they get

> into religion more and they are more likely to buy into the whole

> subserviance to a higher power thing (very dangerous - I think I

might get

> hanged for that one). Not saying that its a biological thing. Just

that

> society deems those attributes more appropriate for women.

>

> - Women seem to be less rebelious, in general. Its more of a guy

thing to

> be into rebelling from things. Although I know of plenty of women

who do

> rebell, I still think it more likely for men to do.

>

> I think I'll stop there. I think I've given a little too much ammo

for the

> feminists to use against me.

>

> Anyway. I have a question of my own - I've heard people on the list

saying

> that the evidence out there points to the program not being as good

as other

> forms of treatment. I was a psychology major with a focus in

substance

> abuse (both personal and through research) - and as far as I

understand it,

> the overwhelming evidence points to the program as the tested,

successful

> method of choice. Most of that research is pretty strong, simply

because

> the program has been around for long enough for long term research to

be

> valid. Although there are more recent isolated studies, it would be

a hard

> case to make that there is a " large " body of scientific evidence

concluding

> that the program is not the best form of treatment... if anyone knows

> otherwise, please advise...

>

> That is, pointing to the one study that Trimpy did does not suffice...

>

> By the way, I'm not trying to defend the program, per se. Just

trying to be

> intellectually honest about the whole thing... I think its still a

valid

> position for a " Free-thinker " to take that the program is the proven

" best "

> method out there for the average person, but that the program still

SUCKS!!!

>

> Whew... anyway...

>

> Laterz,

>

> Alan

>

> ______________________________________________________

September 2, 1999

Don't worry Alan, I'm not going to nail you to the wall as a male

chauvinist pig or anything. Know why, cause you're right. One of the

books I read during my deprogramming is called " Women Under The

Influence " published by AFF, a foundation that studies the dangers of

cults and thought-reform organizations. The book deals with women's

succeptibility to fall for thought-reform groups, and the roots of that

succeptibility which is found in their socialization.

Women have more experience being the " lower power " , and it is a more

natural fit to meld into a group like AA because of it. It's NOT a

healthy fit, but it is a more familiar one.

I think women tend to feel more internalized rage/anger than men do,

and you're right, they rebel less. Why? Well, life is a different

experience for women all around. I can even think of a few cases in the

past when I really let a guy have it for being a jerk, and the response

was " you're so cute when you're angry " followed by a nose tweak. That's

the response to my dead-serious anger! Can any of you guys imagine

someone doing that to you? Makes me want to buy a gun.

There's always a touch of residual fear in our daily lives, and that's

why we develop the skill of not " upseting " people, meanwhile

internalizing our pain. Women are usually smaller and less strong/fast

than our male counterparts and violence against women is an everyday

part of mainstream entertainment. Watch her scream... watch her bleed

.... cool! The slut deserved it. and so on.

All of these things affect how much we rebel!

But I do think that we have a better intuition (gut instinct) than men

do, which warns us of dangers. When we drink the women's intuition

doesn't work too well.

But don't call all women complacent.... Underneath this seemingly

harmless fruity exterior, I'm a relentless rebel run riot.

Apple

>

> Hmmm... could be a dangerous question to reply to, but...

>

> First, there's definitely more men that become substance abusers, in

> general. That's verified in psychological and criminological

studies(Can't

> get in trouble for that one).

>

> Also, I like your " more men on the internet " theory.

>

> Those two together seem like they would explain the phenomenon.

Other (more

> dangerous) theories:

>

> - Women seem to be more easily brainwashed by the program. Like,

they get

> into religion more and they are more likely to buy into the whole

> subserviance to a higher power thing (very dangerous - I think I

might get

> hanged for that one). Not saying that its a biological thing. Just

that

> society deems those attributes more appropriate for women.

>

> - Women seem to be less rebelious, in general. Its more of a guy

thing to

> be into rebelling from things. Although I know of plenty of women

who do

> rebell, I still think it more likely for men to do.

>

> I think I'll stop there. I think I've given a little too much ammo

for the

> feminists to use against me.

>

> Anyway. I have a question of my own - I've heard people on the list

saying

> that the evidence out there points to the program not being as good

as other

> forms of treatment. I was a psychology major with a focus in

substance

> abuse (both personal and through research) - and as far as I

understand it,

> the overwhelming evidence points to the program as the tested,

successful

> method of choice. Most of that research is pretty strong, simply

because

> the program has been around for long enough for long term research to

be

> valid. Although there are more recent isolated studies, it would be

a hard

> case to make that there is a " large " body of scientific evidence

concluding

> that the program is not the best form of treatment... if anyone knows

> otherwise, please advise...

>

> That is, pointing to the one study that Trimpy did does not suffice...

>

> By the way, I'm not trying to defend the program, per se. Just

trying to be

> intellectually honest about the whole thing... I think its still a

valid

> position for a " Free-thinker " to take that the program is the proven

" best "

> method out there for the average person, but that the program still

SUCKS!!!

>

> Whew... anyway...

>

> Laterz,

>

> Alan

>

> ______________________________________________________

September 2, 1999

Hey Apple:

Did you receive the information about the studies done regarding

psychological profiles of those that submit " hook line and sinker' to

steppism. I just want to comfirm my theory on this issue and would like to

know what others have to say that have studied those personality types.

Since I have been going to these meetings and observing behaviors in those

groups of people, I have noticed some common pathological anti social and

general mix of psychiatric disorders. I am particularly interested in

grandios dillusional thinking that exists in thinking processes of the icon

steppists wana be cult gurus. These are the dangerous ones!

Re: 12-step-free digest

> Don't worry Alan, I'm not going to nail you to the wall as a male

> chauvinist pig or anything. Know why, cause you're right. One of the

> books I read during my deprogramming is called " Women Under The

> Influence " published by AFF, a foundation that studies the dangers of

> cults and thought-reform organizations. The book deals with women's

> succeptibility to fall for thought-reform groups, and the roots of that

> succeptibility which is found in their socialization.

> Women have more experience being the " lower power " , and it is a more

> natural fit to meld into a group like AA because of it. It's NOT a

> healthy fit, but it is a more familiar one.

> I think women tend to feel more internalized rage/anger than men do,

> and you're right, they rebel less. Why? Well, life is a different

> experience for women all around. I can even think of a few cases in the

> past when I really let a guy have it for being a jerk, and the response

> was " you're so cute when you're angry " followed by a nose tweak. That's

> the response to my dead-serious anger! Can any of you guys imagine

> someone doing that to you? Makes me want to buy a gun.

>

> There's always a touch of residual fear in our daily lives, and that's

> why we develop the skill of not " upseting " people, meanwhile

> internalizing our pain. Women are usually smaller and less strong/fast

> than our male counterparts and violence against women is an everyday

> part of mainstream entertainment. Watch her scream... watch her bleed

> ... cool! The slut deserved it. and so on.

>

> All of these things affect how much we rebel!

>

> But I do think that we have a better intuition (gut instinct) than men

> do, which warns us of dangers. When we drink the women's intuition

> doesn't work too well.

>

> But don't call all women complacent.... Underneath this seemingly

> harmless fruity exterior, I'm a relentless rebel run riot.

> Apple

>

> >

> > Hmmm... could be a dangerous question to reply to, but...

> >

> > First, there's definitely more men that become substance abusers, in

> > general. That's verified in psychological and criminological

> studies(Can't

> > get in trouble for that one).

> >

> > Also, I like your " more men on the internet " theory.

> >

> > Those two together seem like they would explain the phenomenon.

> Other (more

> > dangerous) theories:

> >

> > - Women seem to be more easily brainwashed by the program. Like,

> they get

> > into religion more and they are more likely to buy into the whole

> > subserviance to a higher power thing (very dangerous - I think I

> might get

> > hanged for that one). Not saying that its a biological thing. Just

> that

> > society deems those attributes more appropriate for women.

> >

> > - Women seem to be less rebelious, in general. Its more of a guy

> thing to

> > be into rebelling from things. Although I know of plenty of women

> who do

> > rebell, I still think it more likely for men to do.

> >

> > I think I'll stop there. I think I've given a little too much ammo

> for the

> > feminists to use against me.

> >

> > Anyway. I have a question of my own - I've heard people on the list

> saying

> > that the evidence out there points to the program not being as good

> as other

> > forms of treatment. I was a psychology major with a focus in

> substance

> > abuse (both personal and through research) - and as far as I

> understand it,

> > the overwhelming evidence points to the program as the tested,

> successful

> > method of choice. Most of that research is pretty strong, simply

> because

> > the program has been around for long enough for long term research to

> be

> > valid. Although there are more recent isolated studies, it would be

> a hard

> > case to make that there is a " large " body of scientific evidence

> concluding

> > that the program is not the best form of treatment... if anyone knows

> > otherwise, please advise...

> >

> > That is, pointing to the one study that Trimpy did does not suffice...

> >

> > By the way, I'm not trying to defend the program, per se. Just

> trying to be

> > intellectually honest about the whole thing... I think its still a

> valid

> > position for a " Free-thinker " to take that the program is the proven

> " best "

> > method out there for the average person, but that the program still

> SUCKS!!!

> >

> > Whew... anyway...

> >

> > Laterz,

> >

> > Alan

> >

> > ______________________________________________________

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

> MyPoints-Free Rewards When You're Online.

> Start with up to 150 Points for joining!

> http://clickhere./click/805

>

> eGroups.com home: /group/12-step-free

> - Simplifying group communications

>

September 2, 1999