Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
This thread was on Training- whether to attend, or not? My point has been, who would want to get trained by this group? Their teachings and practices are clearly contradictory. I mentioned the role of women as an example, not the only one by any means, but one of the more curious ones. Yet no one says a word. Why? Culture. And yes, this was strongly conditioned by the culture of origin. China was not "virgin soil" but had 5,000 years of social conditioning in their society.
I have named names - the women who were touted in the official organs of the group as lionesses of the recovery in its first few decades. Margaret Barber, a "Miss Groves", Peace Wang, Ruth Lee. . . well over a half dozen names of you include the influences coming in from abroad like Guyon, MacDonough and Penn-Lewis. By contrast, how many lionesses has the group advanced in the past 40 years? Zero.
One must be assidiously trained in non-thought to miss this kind of obvious discrepancy. Well-practiced in the art of mindless oblivion.
|
Besides Lee, they have no "lions" either, unless Philip is included.
Wasn't there a song, "Where have all the cowboys gone?" They got Quarantined!
Talk about contradictions. They teach inclusion, they practice exclusion.