The Children of God/ Family International

[Marquis]

I am almost finished reading Not Without My Sister. I have always been fascinated by charismatic leaders and cults and this book offers a voyeuristic look into one of the largest cults ever with a very sexual bend (as many seem to have).

Has anyone else read this book, or have any experience with COG/TFI? I can just vaguely remember a news story on the group from the 80's when I was a very young child. I can't say that I've come across the group directly in any way that I could recognize or remember, but I do feel that I see some commonalities between what the characters in the book are experiencing and some other people I know who were immersed in alternative lifestyles as a kid.

I also want to say this, it takes a lot for me, but some of the details in this book really angered and repulsed me. I have done a little independent research and it seems that a lot of people know the authors of the book and the story is highly corroborated. It is amazing to me that this organization still exists today. I am so sorry for anyone that had to endure a childhood like the ones described in this book.

This brings me back to something I've often thought about, regarding BDSM and my own proclivities, and those of friends and loved ones. Sure, we put up hard limits here and there based on a lot of beliefs. No sex with children is an easy one to adhere to, and popular. And yet, the casual way in which members of this cult decided to toss that rule out makes it seem like the rule itself is more arbitrary than we might really think. Is the human psyche really so lurid and debase? How is it that all these people were so ready to get on like this? It's something like the old question of the atrocities committed in Nazi Germany, the Milgram experiments, etc., I guess.

It occurs to me a lot in recent years that some degree of sexual restraint can be a damn virtue. Not tip-toeing around hard limits that are extremely taboo or illegal, but actually saying to oneself "I don't need to do every little fucked up thing I think of. I don't need to stoke the fire of my perversion so much that it burns me up."

I realize most people come to this forum looking for support in experimenting, but surely there is another side as well? When do you know you've taken things too far?

In my case, I know I have had periods in my life where fulfilling sexual fantasies was my number one priority, over my relationships, my health and my happiness. I've sacrificed a lot for all the threesomes and orgies and kinky sex I've had.

What about the rest of you? Is anyone willing to admit that they've gone too far at times and prefer to live dialed back a bit? That sometimes its ok to say no, even before you hit any of those hard limits, but just because enough is enough?

 

[Netzach]

I am almost finished reading Not Without My Sister. I have always been fascinated by charismatic leaders and cults and this book offers a voyeuristic look into one of the largest cults ever with a very sexual bend (as many seem to have).

Has anyone else read this book, or have any experience with COG/TFI? I can just vaguely remember a news story on the group from the 80's when I was a very young child. I can't say that I've come across the group directly in any way that I could recognize or remember, but I do feel that I see some commonalities between what the characters in the book are experiencing and some other people I know who were immersed in alternative lifestyles as a kid.

I also want to say this, it takes a lot for me, but some of the details in this book really angered and repulsed me. I have done a little independent research and it seems that a lot of people know the authors of the book and the story is highly corroborated. It is amazing to me that this organization still exists today. I am so sorry for anyone that had to endure a childhood like the ones described in this book.

This brings me back to something I've often thought about, regarding BDSM and my own proclivities, and those of friends and loved ones. Sure, we put up hard limits here and there based on a lot of beliefs. No sex with children is an easy one to adhere to, and popular. And yet, the casual way in which members of this cult decided to toss that rule out makes it seem like the rule itself is more arbitrary than we might really think. Is the human psyche really so lurid and debase? How is it that all these people were so ready to get on like this? It's something like the old question of the atrocities committed in Nazi Germany, the Milgram experiments, etc., I guess.

It occurs to me a lot in recent years that some degree of sexual restraint can be a damn virtue. Not tip-toeing around hard limits that are extremely taboo or illegal, but actually saying to oneself "I don't need to do every little fucked up thing I think of. I don't need to stoke the fire of my perversion so much that it burns me up."

I realize most people come to this forum looking for support in experimenting, but surely there is another side as well? When do you know you've taken things too far?

In my case, I know I have had periods in my life where fulfilling sexual fantasies was my number one priority, over my relationships, my health and my happiness. I've sacrificed a lot for all the threesomes and orgies and kinky sex I've had.

What about the rest of you? Is anyone willing to admit that they've gone too far at times and prefer to live dialed back a bit? That sometimes its ok to say no, even before you hit any of those hard limits, but just because enough is enough?

Prodomme, NYC. Need I say more?

It's not so much that I was asked to do anything that keeps me up at night but it's the collective culture always pushing toward more crazier more that made me go "uh uh I'm out"

That mass momentum freaks me out. I don't like the public scene because I see the same energy, where light play is pooh pooed as amateur hour.

All people need for their worst is enough peer pressure and enough weakness of character.

 

[xssve]

Cult behavior largely follows pastoral/feudal patterns, in which particular religions, sects, cults, etc., might be loosely described as "herds", or "flocks".

Pastoral economics itself is largely concerned with two things, both involving breeding, one is selective breeding, which in this case is both genetic, and possibly more critical, culture - socialization, in terms of political-economy, hierarchies in resource distribution, i.e., religions act like discrete economic as well as social institutions, "tithes" are taxes by any other name, there's a lot of internal mutual economic back scratching, etc. The Mormons have a lot of power where I live for example, and life is a lot easier if you're a Mormon and related to one of the more powerful families who run a lot of the banks, shops, businesses, etc.

But as a herd, you don't want your herd mixing with the other guys - my nephew married a Hispanic girl, her family is Catholic, and the Catholic priest refused to marry them, kind of a shock to everybody in what is a mostly liberal family, who thought this sort of thing was pretty much an anachronism - My Father converted to Catholicism when he married my mom, I don't know what he was before, Lutheran probably, but I was raised a Catholic, but about the time they were beginning to work on my head in earnest, the whole system was somewhat depreciated in the meta culture, and when, after one year of Catechism and confirmation, I said, "screw this, I'm not going back", it was received mostly a shrug rather than any big dramatic throw down: my parents' divorced, my brother was living with a girl out of wedlock, my oldest sister had become a militant lesbian, etc., i.e., this was the height of the sexual revolution, and I think we all assumed such political infighting had gone the way of the Dodo

Apparently not, and there is still political infighting over how the children are raised, whose "brand" they will wear, so to speak, because those who are enculturated into ones paradigm also represent political leverage, they comprise a voting bloc among other things, including and economic community, as I already touched on, and so there is a lot of fighting over power.

Naturally, it's easier to enculturate somebody into a particular institution if get to them when they're young, and you can control the information streams they receive, as opposed to conversion, where you have to compete with other alternatives in the open market of religion.

Nothing ties a woman, particularly, down like getting knocked up, and since we're talking selective breeding, both genetic and cultural, women basically are the means of production, and so, not surprisingly by now, are treated like little baby factories, and it's in the best interest of the herd to compromise them as early as possible and anyway, that's all they're good for, yeah?

As for the recreational sex with children, it's a cock worshiping culture, where masturbation is strictly forbidden, see prostate health.

The masturbation thing is a real sticking point, "Onanism", with a sodomy backup, although in fact Onan was punished for refusing to knock his sister in law up after his brother died, she posed as a prostitute and seduced Onan's father, and succeeded at long last in this fashion, in getting knocked up, god is mightily pleased with the whole thing, and this is considered a happy ending.

The actual punishment for masturbation in Leviticus, BTW, is not death, but to wash the linen.

Sodom is a little less clear, but it the sin largely appears to have been idolatry, and mistreatment of visitors, Leviticus proscribes sex between men, possibly the productivity issue, possibly so they didn't mix with the Greek herd, but there is not really much mention of heterosexual practices, and nothing is explicitly proscribed, there is even what appears to be some mention of fisting in positive language.

Anyway, doesn't matter, the average Christian assumes that missionary position is written in the Bible somewhere, and it doesn't really matter that it isn't, so much as they think it is and vote accordingly.

 

[xssve]

Insofar as Catholic are concerned, it seems to me to be the result of some weird combination of Greek/Roman culture combined with Catholicism's roots in radical dualism. With CoG/The Family, it's complicated by Calvinist predispensationalism, which is a radical enough departure from the New Testament to basically call it a completely different religion than Christianity, and the resemblances are mostly superficial.

G'head, ask me, lol.

 

[Marquis]

Prodomme, NYC. Need I say more?

It's not so much that I was asked to do anything that keeps me up at night but it's the collective culture always pushing toward more crazier more that made me go "uh uh I'm out"

That mass momentum freaks me out. I don't like the public scene because I see the same energy, where light play is pooh pooed as amateur hour.

All people need for their worst is enough peer pressure and enough weakness of character.

We all want to fit in so bad, don't we?

I used to do some wild scenes. I wanted to be the bad boy and for a little while there, I was. The attention and approval is addictive.

 

[Marquis]

Insofar as Catholic are concerned, it seems to me to be the result of some weird combination of Greek/Roman culture combined with Catholicism's roots in radical dualism. With CoG/The Family, it's complicated by Calvinist predispensationalism, which is a radical enough departure from the New Testament to basically call it a completely different religion than Christianity, and the resemblances are mostly superficial.

G'head, ask me, lol.

Georgetown man that I am, I am hardly a Theologian.

I just thought the book Not Without My Sister was amazing. It make me want to write my own story. There's a lot of fucked up shit in my life I feel like I want to share. Maybe I'm just bored cause I don't have a job.

 

[xssve]

CoG is a lot like the Illuminatti, hard to say exactly what they're up to, it's a bit cryptic, but the vibe is distinctly feudal, and they appear to be aligned with the reconstructionist/dominionist element, albeit it's a mix of politics, economics and ideology, not necessarily in that order - it's usually easier to sort out if you follow the money, the utility of theology here lies basically in supplying rationale I suspect.

They are cryptic by necessity though: I think if everybody knew what they were really up to I think they would not enjoy popular success for long.

I recommend American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips, the SBC is largely the working end of the thing, albeit it gets more complicated as you climb up the hierarchy, and things are not always what they seem, i.e., the threads here literally go back all the way to the fall of the Roman empire, although I'd start with the Levelers s. the Puritans, which adequately crystallizes most of the issues - previous to that head, it's much sketchier.

If I had to pick a single analogy, I'd have to say the dispute is about flat vs. hierarchical management styles, and it's conflict as old as civilization, but when it comes praxis it gets pretty occult.

 

[Marquis]

Hey xssve, I don't really have much a clue what you're talking about, I don't really have any interest in COG as a religious organization, just think it's nuts what they decided to do with the power they had.

It's amazing to me how many of these people are able to still walk free. It gives the impression somewhat that abuses against children are crimes that are really not taken quite as seriously by the law as they should. I guess the Catholic church cases of abuse really shows that as well. I am not very informed on the issue, but I have heard that evidence exists that the Pope had a direct hand in covering up instances of abuse? Why is he not dragged from his fucking throne and thrown in the slammer for this shit? This type of thing is just beyond beyond to me.

 

[xssve]

It's actually more of a Three way thing, the Puritans technically came in last, not really that clever a bunch, and it might be more accurate to describe the dispute as between the Levelers and the Cavaliers.

The Levelers won the round, but this shit dies hard.

The Puritans still represent the polity to some extent, i.e., the SBC, and their politics is largely concerned with immediate issues like how to feed the kids, but being unsophisticated in these larger issues, they are fairly easy to manipulate.

And significant politically because they form a sizable demographic.

 

[xssve]

It is a mystery, but that's where theology becomes important, it serves as a trump card in praxis, you can't argue with god - but ultimately, it's that old power and privilege thing.

Google Jeff Gannon, Bohemian Grove, Steve Kangas, etc., etc., there enough conspiracy to keep you going for a while, it gets pretty weird.

Anyway, I think you'll enjoy Phillips, and you won't feel the need to take a hot shower afterwards.

 

[xssve]

"All people need for their worst is enough peer pressure and enough weakness of character".

Words to be carved in stone.

 

[xssve]

It's amazing to me how many of these people are able to still walk free. It gives the impression somewhat that abuses against children are crimes that are really not taken quite as seriously by the law as they should. I guess the Catholic church cases of abuse really shows that as well. I am not very informed on the issue, but I have heard that evidence exists that the Pope had a direct hand in covering up instances of abuse? Why is he not dragged from his fucking throne and thrown in the slammer for this shit? This type of thing is just beyond beyond to me.

I hate to pile cynicism upon cynicism, but from a perspective of political utility what you have here are a lot of powerful people in compromising positions, which is called "leverage" I believe.

 

[LadyVer]

Hey xssve, I don't really have much a clue what you're talking about, I don't really have any interest in COG as a religious organization, just think it's nuts what they decided to do with the power they had.

It's amazing to me how many of these people are able to still walk free. It gives the impression somewhat that abuses against children are crimes that are really not taken quite as seriously by the law as they should. I guess the Catholic church cases of abuse really shows that as well. I am not very informed on the issue, but I have heard that evidence exists that the Pope had a direct hand in covering up instances of abuse? Why is he not dragged from his fucking throne and thrown in the slammer for this shit? This type of thing is just beyond beyond to me.

I hear what you're saying. I think much of this has to do with power and money, as well as the ability of a religion or cult to say one thing and do another and to convince people who can't or won't think for themselves that it's the words that matter. For example, when a political party has a poll that counts how many times a candidate mentions God to prove how faithful or moral a candidate is, something is defintely wrong. Sounds like an interesting book you read.

 

[BiBunny]

<snip>

In my case, I know I have had periods in my life where fulfilling sexual fantasies was my number one priority, over my relationships, my health and my happiness. I've sacrificed a lot for all the threesomes and orgies and kinky sex I've had.

Ditto.

What about the rest of you? Is anyone willing to admit that they've gone too far at times and prefer to live dialed back a bit? That sometimes its ok to say no, even before you hit any of those hard limits, but just because enough is enough?

Yes.

I wouldn't say I ever did anything reprehensible in the sense that most people mean when they use the word. But I hurt people, people whom I loved, because I would not--or could not, I'm not sure which--stop. When silencing the sexual demons that whisper in your ear becomes more important than your relationships, you should've stopped a long time ago.

I'm not sure if my next observation has anything to do with your topic or not, but it's been on my mind for awhile, so I hope you'll forgive me for the tangent if this isn't the direction you want this thread to go.

You see it mentioned often, both here and other places, that the BDSM "lifestyle" provides a safe haven for sociopaths, gives them places to hide and ways to conceal their true selves, etc. etc. But I actually don't believe that sociopathy/psychopathy is much more prevalent here than anywhere else.

I would argue, on the other hand, that "we" do provide an excellent safe haven for narcissists of every stripe. (I include myself in this category, for the record.) You can't go a week here without someone starting yet another thread about how to "make" a spouse or partner more dominant or more submissive or more experimental or what-have-you. There's hardly ever any mention of whether said spouse or partner is actually interested in these things. Often, it's quite the opposite; the spouse or partner is not interested. But the thread-starter is rarely concerned about what the other party wants.

The Last Psychiatrist (an excellent, insightful blog) describes narcissism as the belief that you are the main character in your own movie, and the sole purpose the people around you serve is to act as supporting characters in your movie, not to have lives or feelings or anything outside of their relation to you. I think that belief is a lot of what underlies the "always push the boundaries and get my fetishes fulfilled, no matter what the cost" mentality that you see among BDSM-ers. It's one reason I've taken several steps back and not played in over a year now, because I'm trying to break that tendency within myself. And not so much because of how it affects me, but how it affects the people around me.

Sorry if this was TL;DR or not in the vein intended for this thread.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Prodomme, NYC. Need I say more?

It's not so much that I was asked to do anything that keeps me up at night but it's the collective culture always pushing toward more crazier more that made me go "uh uh I'm out"

That mass momentum freaks me out. I don't like the public scene because I see the same energy, where light play is pooh pooed as amateur hour.

Oh yeah, this. Me, I have been deliberately promoting light play as something worth doing.

My new motto is "Sexuality is not a competition."

All people need for their worst is enough peer pressure and enough weakness of character.

It's not so much a weakness of character IMO, it's that tribal instinct to join in. A little bit of opposing peer pressure can go a very very long way.

 

[eastern sun]

We've definitely gone too far, and had to scale it back due to the effect our behavior was having in our kids lives. In fact, for the last few years, I've felt like a poster child for BDSM lite because I've wanted to prove to myself that it was possible to maintain an M/s relationship within the context of a vanilla world. To be "invisible," so to speak.

I'll admit, it's less exciting sexually. It's less edgy. I feel less like a renegade, a rogue, an outlier. But I know that limits are arbitrary.

And, in my opinion, knowing precisely why limits have been set is a very important development in the maturation of an individual.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And, in my opinion, knowing precisely why limits have been set is a very important development in the maturation of an individual.

FUUUUCK yeah.

 

[Marquis]

I hear what you're saying. I think much of this has to do with power and money, as well as the ability of a religion or cult to say one thing and do another and to convince people who can't or won't think for themselves that it's the words that matter. For example, when a political party has a poll that counts how many times a candidate mentions God to prove how faithful or moral a candidate is, something is defintely wrong. Sounds like an interesting book you read.

It was really interesting and I highly recommend it. Highly voyeuristic view into a bizarre world you kind of know exists but doesn't really feel real until you hear the stories of three people who grew up in the center of it tell you about their lives.

Yes.

I wouldn't say I ever did anything reprehensible in the sense that most people mean when they use the word. But I hurt people, people whom I loved, because I would not--or could not, I'm not sure which--stop. When silencing the sexual demons that whisper in your ear becomes more important than your relationships, you should've stopped a long time ago.

I'm not sure if my next observation has anything to do with your topic or not, but it's been on my mind for awhile, so I hope you'll forgive me for the tangent if this isn't the direction you want this thread to go.

You see it mentioned often, both here and other places, that the BDSM "lifestyle" provides a safe haven for sociopaths, gives them places to hide and ways to conceal their true selves, etc. etc. But I actually don't believe that sociopathy/psychopathy is much more prevalent here than anywhere else.

I would argue, on the other hand, that "we" do provide an excellent safe haven for narcissists of every stripe. (I include myself in this category, for the record.) You can't go a week here without someone starting yet another thread about how to "make" a spouse or partner more dominant or more submissive or more experimental or what-have-you. There's hardly ever any mention of whether said spouse or partner is actually interested in these things. Often, it's quite the opposite; the spouse or partner is not interested. But the thread-starter is rarely concerned about what the other party wants.

The Last Psychiatrist (an excellent, insightful blog) describes narcissism as the belief that you are the main character in your own movie, and the sole purpose the people around you serve is to act as supporting characters in your movie, not to have lives or feelings or anything outside of their relation to you. I think that belief is a lot of what underlies the "always push the boundaries and get my fetishes fulfilled, no matter what the cost" mentality that you see among BDSM-ers. It's one reason I've taken several steps back and not played in over a year now, because I'm trying to break that tendency within myself. And not so much because of how it affects me, but how it affects the people around me.

Sorry if this was TL;DR or not in the vein intended for this thread.

I worry a lot about being a sociopath and a narcissist, and sometimes I read things like what you wrote and my heart jumps into my throat for a second. I say that because I often describe life as a movie where I am the main character. I think that perspective came from feeling out of control for so many portions of my life, and I wonder if experiences like those I've had are often precursors to narcissism. Well, I can definitely say I have some narcissistic traits and the BDSM community felt like a good place to foster them. Maybe that's part of what I'm talking about here. I've tried to step away from that in recent years and I think stepping away from the BDSM community has helped me regain some footing. I don't resent the community or think it's evil or anything like that, but for me I needed some space.

We've definitely gone too far, and had to scale it back due to the effect our behavior was having in our kids lives. In fact, for the last few years, I've felt like a poster child for BDSM lite because I've wanted to prove to myself that it was possible to maintain an M/s relationship within the context of a vanilla world. To be "invisible," so to speak.

I'll admit, it's less exciting sexually. It's less edgy. I feel less like a renegade, a rogue, an outlier. But I know that limits are arbitrary.

And, in my opinion, knowing precisely why limits have been set is a very important development in the maturation of an individual.

This makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing. I think people need to hear this side of things as well.

 

[Keroin]

As BDSM activities go, I'm on the very tame end of the scale and always will be. Maybe because I satisfied my thrill-seeking urge through "legitimate" channels, maybe because I've always known that not every fantasy needs to be acted upon to be enjoyed. In my time on Lit, I've definitely seen competitive and one-upmanship behaviour, and I have no doubt that it can take people down some roads best left untraveled.

But "too far" isn't limited to BDSM. Looking back on my late teens and early 20's, the pursuit of sex took over my life for a time. I did a lot of damage to myself and others. I was selfish, narcissistic, and short sighted. I didn't step back from any community, but I did eventually step back from my behaviour and sex in general. Then I set limits. As ES wisely said, it is part of maturation.

I have mixed feelings about the BDSM community. For me, it was wonderful to finally discover I was "normal" and find a place where I could learn about this kink of mine. In that regard, it changed my life for the better and I am deeply grateful. But had I found this community 20 years ago, I think I might have gone off the deep end with it. Just because a person can do something, doesn't necessarily mean they should. In my experience, however, that's a sentiment that doesn't get put forward here very often and when it is the response is usually not favourable.

 

[Netzach]

This said, it was extremely important for me to figure out what my OWN "too much" was, and I sometimes see younger people in the scene discouraged from more intense activities for reasons I find problematic - like, adults projecting themselves onto them, or adults wanting to maintain status in the group as "the expert on..."

 

[Etoile]

The Family is/was some crazy shit, I'll have to read this, thanks Marquis. I find the flirty fishing almost as bizarre as the kid stuff, too.

 

[Marquis]

The Family is/was some crazy shit, I'll have to read this, thanks Marquis. I find the flirty fishing almost as bizarre as the kid stuff, too.

It is all very bizarre. One of those stories that just doesn't seem like it could be real.