Hubbard used the word “wog” to describe the world outside of scientology.
Non-scientologists are all wogs. Thinking or acting in a way that is not in keeping with what scientologists believe is right is “woggy.” Things seen to be irrational in the eyes of scientologists are deemed to be “wog-think.”
It is a derogatory, condescending and ugly term.
Some scientologists have sought to defend its use, claiming “It’s not racist”.
The term (a contraction of golliwog — an old “blackface” child’s doll) was something derogatory and racist. Here is the information from Wikipedia:
Wog is a slang word in the idiom of Australian English and British English. In the UK, it is usually employed as an ethnic or racial slur, and considered derogatory and offensive. In Australia, it tends to be applied to a wider range of peoples, and although it may be used as a slur, to some extent has been reclaimed and is used as a self-descriptor by them.
Origin:
The origin of the term is unclear. It was first noted by lexicographer F.C. Bowen in 1929, in his Sea Slang: a dictionary of the old-timers’ expressions and epithets, where he defines wogs as “lower class Babu shipping clerks on the Indian coast.” Many dictionaries say “wog” derives from the golliwogg, a blackface minstrel doll character from a children’s book, The Adventures of Two Dutch Dolls and a Golliwogg by Florence Kate Upton, published in 1895; or from pollywog, a dialect term for tadpole that is used in maritime circles to indicate someone who has not crossed the equator.
Suggestions that the word is an acronym for “wily Oriental gentleman”, “working on government service”, or similar, are examples of false etymology.
Scientology’s use of the term transcends racism. It goes beyond singling a class of people out for derision because of ethnicity. Instead it singles everyone not them out based on failure to accept the writings of Hubbard as infallible truth.
Here is how Hubbard defines the term in his world — the entry in the official Scientology Technical Dictionary:
WOG, 1. worthy Oriental gentleman. This means a common ordinary run-of-the-mill garden-variety humanoid. (SH Spec 82, 6611C29) 2. a wog is somebody who isn’t even trying. (SH Spec 73, 6608C02
This is part of the “us against them” mentality that comes with a cult. Jehovah’s Witnesses designate everything that is not JW-think as “Satan’s World”. Non-JW’s are “worldly.” A better choice of term to denigrate the non-JW’s than Hubbard chose (as it is less obviously derogatory), but the same thing nevertheless.
Scientologists look down upon EVERYONE who is not a scientologist. They believe (because Hubbard told them so) they are the elite of planet earth and have superior knowledge, abilities and intelligence than the run-of-the-mill “humanoid” that populates this planet because they have the “tech” of Hubbard.
This word is a sad peek into the mind of scientologists. There is not a single person who was ever in scientology who has not at least heard the term used in a derogatory fashion (if they haven’t used it themselves).
The ONLY people who try to defend this horrible epithet are scientologists or those apologizing for them.
A discussion about this term in the comments section prompted me to clarify further.
Well, I learned something new today by reading this blog.
I had previously thought a “wog” was the past tense of a “wig”. Silly me!
Yeah, pick on the Scientologists and Jehovah’s Witnesses for their exclusive terminology for non-adherents, but conveniently leave out Judaism’s use of “gentile” and “goyim”.
This is the silliest comment I’ve seen here yet. It’s 2020, my friend. Everybody knows about gaslighting and whataboutism.
Try something else.
Spotted the jew !
OY VEY !!!!!!!!! (((SPOTTED)))
Except that those of us who are non-Jewish but Christians, understand that gentile was never meant to be offensive, just a way of distinguishing the difference in the Bible because Jews had specific restrictions on diet, etc. So yes, there’s a difference. Try doing a little research.
As an Aussie, the use of the term Wog in Scientology caught my interest.
The linguist in me leads me to believe that the term Wog came into usage in the UK through the nautical reference to pollywog.
I tend to believe that LRH just picked it up as a derogatory term that distinguishes “us” from “them”.
I’ve never been involved in CoS, nor has anyone close to me. I grew up in a fundamentalist strain of a religion that put pretty much that mindset in children, that we were the only right, true religion and anyone who wasn’t a follower was going to go to Hell. You didn’t question, you didn’t dare think for yourself or show any kind of intellectual inquisitiveness. It’s legal child abuse. I’m not sure how I broke out of it, but all of my siblings did, too, happily. But it had a strong hold on my parents’ and grandparents’ generation. Church officials knew just which red hot buttons to push in people. They controlled people through fear. So I wish the best to people who got out, who have loved ones still in it, people being targeted by CoS because they broke out and they speak out, and people living with the pain of families torn apart by Church of Scientology.
Off topic, I’m in Philly. Church of Scientology has a storefront at 1315 Race Street in Philly. They have surveillance cameras aimed at their store front. I stick to the other side of the street. In nice weather they leave their door propped open, though. Just an FYI.
That WAS all off topic. Sheesh!
In Australia the term “Wog” has never been used as a slur against black or Indigenous peoples (to my knowledge).
It was generally used as an insult to those of Italian or Greek heritage.
And yes, it has mostly now been absorbed into general vernacular by those it was once used to vilify.
The term no longer has the sting in it’s tail that it once did.
That being said, I would never use the term myself as I grew up during the time it was considered a racial slur.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Added on:
When I first began my journey into Scientology and heard the term…”Wog”. I remember being startled. That was a word that was not used. It was a racist term and was abhorrent.
After a time I realised that LRH took such an horrid term and used it to create more hatred.
“Wog” means different things in different cultures… it is NEVER positive however.
LRH really was a nasty bastard.
Hello Ooglie. I cannot speak for anyone else. But I enjoy reading other peoples’ TED talks here.
One of the best things about this blog is how many new things I learn. I almost learn at least one something new each day and most of them are OT.
There are many knowledgeable and intelligent people here. They all deserve to be congratulated for having what it took to break free from the chains of this scam.
So, I congratulate you for that same reason. Bravo!
Some peoples’ break-out stories are truly inspirational and amazing.
If you have never seen the episode of Mike & Leah’s TV show featuring Valerie Haney’s break-out story, I recommend it to you whole-heartedly. I re-watch it at least once ever month because it gives me hope and courage for the future. I fills me with joy for at least a week.
I agree with everything you said Ooglie about the term WOG in Australia. I think tonality can play big roll, said in the wrong tone it can still offend. Australians have generally accepted us Greeks and Italians as one of them now as we have been in Australia for over 50 years, gone are the days when they would say we are different – they now call us Australians and racism has moved to other cultures therefore thesedays they seldom try and differentiate us from them by using the term.
This is a part of the article on “wog” from Wikipedia.
The word “wog” is used by Scientologists to refer to non-Scientologists. Scientology’s founder L. Ron Hubbard defined wog as a “common, everyday garden-variety humanoid … He ‘is’ a body. [He] doesn’t know he’s there, etc. He isn’t there as a spirit at all. He is not operating as a thetan.”
and here is the first sentence from Wikipedia from the article on racism.
Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity.
From my time in Scientology I only ever heard the term “wog” used by white Scientologists to describe white non-Scientologists. i.e. The Wikipedia article got this right.
Is this offensive and inappropriate?
Most certainly it is!
Is it racist?
No! Not if it is used by people to describe others of the same ethnicity.
For myself personally, I have been out of Scientology for well over a decade and do not feel any need to defend it . I just try and tell how I remember it without spewing out a lot of over the top vitriol.
Cavalierf – I agree and I left over 35 years ago. Who felt contempt for or superiority over friends and relatives simply because they weren’t “doing” Scientology. Surely some people do and did but it’s just another generalization about “all Scientologists”.
No one said Scientology’s use of the term was racist. However, it’s effectively the same in principle, based on group identity and belief in supremacy, other than on race – it might better be classified as bigotry, which of course Scientology likes to accuse others of.
It still has the same fundamental definitional elements, “belief in the superiority of one [group] over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their [group identity].” And what about “psychs,” who Hubbard and Scientology portray as a sort of separate race hiding in human and often “white” bodies?
Cav —
Question for ya…
You say you try to talk about your experiences while in $cientology, and do it “without spewing over the top vitriol..”.
Is that because you didn’t suffer any type of abuse, be it physical or emotional? Or your family and/or friends weren’t forced to disconnect? Or because you still believe in the “tech”?
Since ‘vitriol’ basically means “harsh, cruel, or nasty criticism”, I’m just wondering where you’re coming from.
My questions are not a judgment or insult. I’m truly just curious.
13 million views and counting … Tom Cruise going off the deep end for almost 10 glorious and unedited minutes of delusional scientology mania. Complete with a cheesy voice over intro and nauseating mission impossible style music in the background throughout. It never gets old.
Poor Tom’s neural pathways are and have been quite clearly and for a long time, irreparably damaged by the cult’s insidious programming.
It’s just an amazing world we live in to see someone like this who could and should be certified legally insane. He belongs in a mental ward.
How many people have been damaged, destroyed or degraded thanks in no small part due to the vast amounts of money he has infused into this soul destroying machine?
Here you go…
https://youtu.be/UFBZ_uAbxS0
For quite a hefty fee
You’re hunting for BTs
Never getting to OT
Conned by Scientology
Bowing down to Dave
Trained to be a slave
Brainwashed to behave
Like a corpse inside a grave
A wog is Hubbard’s term
To make all others germs
One thing that I’ve learned
It’s all a can of worms!
Mikey, I am genuinely impressed. I believe you have some real good talent and I love to see that kind of writing in this blog.
Awesome Mikey! I love it.
Kat
Clever, and even shows some wisdom.
I initially searched the definition of the word “wog” bc I’ve always used this term as a combination of walk and jog. Lol!
That being said, I find myself here. Having read the comments, I beg you to please humbly contemplate my thoughts.
The definition of cult is a small religious group having beliefs that are extreme or dangerous. Or, a small group of admirers who devote or care about someone or something too much.
It is human nature to crave a sense of belonging. And depending on our self confidence, we will find where we belong, satisfying our individual needs.
There are also those who feel they are leaders, and who may build such groups, or faiths.
And then there are the ones who thrive on assuming the role as protector and feel that justice is needed for those “poor wayward sheep without a shepherd”. When in all actuality, they too are longing for a place to belong, so they form a group by redirecting ones to think as they do to fulfill their own needs and desires.
I find a lack of love in this forum. And lots of judgment.
That fact of the matter is, we are all slaves to something. We can’t fight gravity and we all must breathe oxygen, drink water, and face death whether we are religious or not.
Because of freewill, we can choose what we will be slaves to. Slaves to materialism? To sexual impulses or drugs and alcohol? Slaves to family, obsession?
Really now, is being a slave to something that makes your life better, happier, gives you direction when a life event trips you up, AND gives you hope, better than living a life of mental and physical anguish?
And isn’t it reasonable to say that all of our brains could use a little washing?
And nooooo, I’m not, nor was I ever scientologist. But I DO believe in loving God with all my heart, mind and understanding, loving my neighbor (mankind) as myself, and treating others the way I’d like to be treated. No acceptions.
Oh,one last thought. True, Jehovah’s Witnesses use the word “worldly” because it’s the term the scriptures use to describe those who do not live by Bible principles. This word has been used in common english, I’ll say for forever. It is not in any way derogatory. Christ said his “kingdom was no part of the world just as he was no part of the world.” To say that the term “world(ly)” is derogatory is to say that Jesus was belittling the world he died for. And he died for EVERY man and woman.
I wish you all peace of heart.
This is a new factoid I never read about or heard before. Interesting. And another puzzle piece to answer “how” smart people become brainwashed.
“They believe (because Hubbard told them so) they are the elite of planet earth and have superior knowledge, abilities and intelligence than the run-of-the-mill “humanoid” that populates this planet because they have the “tech” of Hubbard.”
☝️This ???
?the tech?
How bout them BT clusters? Pesky little critters ain’t they.
I just got unbogged when I cogged I’m a wog.
Hubbard used some sneaky ways to make people feel ‘superior’ to everyone else. These methods were usually insidious and not obvious to the people who were ‘learning’ to be members of a cult. The way he sold the idea of us versus them was actually masterful, even though it was completely sick. The word ‘Wog’ was just one way he used ‘redefined’ words to indoctrinate his followers. When you see it from a different perspective, it is obvious what techniques he employed.
The good thing is that once you leave, these little things start to become obvious. Im able to look at it and see areas where my logic would have been stretched to the point of asking too many questions, which would likely have gotten me flogged or worse. But that is ONLY because I was never in to begin with and can see the whole thing at one time. I realize that the people in the cult are not seeing the whole picture- Hubbard didn’t want anyone seeing too much at one time (which is why its a slow bridge up to the OT levels).
Like I have said, this is an indoctrination over time, and it takes tremendous strength and courage to open your eyes and make that first step to freedom. While I may be against the cult, I am never against the people still in the cult (maybe not Miscavige and Ed…), but I know that the people in are only doing what they truly believe is the right thing to do (even though its the wrong way, its for -mostly- good reasons).
If you look at the way Mike acted at one point, none of us would have believed that he would have this much strength. That he could change his life the way he has should be a beacon of hope to anyone who has loved ones still in the cult!!
Kat
Being in for almost 5 decades and I was a young man when I joined. I was primed and seduced. I agree creating the slow ascent to a godlike state that never delivered was Hubbard’s clever scheme. And he paid for it before he died and he will go down in history as one of the most horrible, destructive cult leaders of the 20th century.
You nailed it Kat.
Kat, you’re right he was sneaky. Also, “homo novis” should be juxtapositioned with “wog,” as I noted in another comment, to see how Hubbard set up a definite, though slyly couched, relationship of superiority and inferiority. “Homo novis,” the new man of Scientology, is described as “desirable” – casting “wogs” as undesirables.
Also, besides using “wog” internally, Hubbard used the the term Homo Sapiens, shortened to “homo saps” – with obvious reference to the derogatory term “sap” – in lectures and publications as well.
From the Scientology tech dictionary:
:homo-novis
1. Homo man, novis new. (BCR, p. 12) 2. a theta-animated mest body posessed of new and desirable attributes; a mest clear, a good, sane rational mest being about a skyscraper higher than Homo sapiens. (HOM, p. 40) 3. the Second Stage Release”
From Webster’s
“sap noun (1)
\ ˈsap \
Definition of sap (Entry 1 of 4)
1a : the fluid part of a plant
specifically : a watery solution that circulates through a plant’s vascular system
b(1) : a body fluid (such as blood) essential to life, health, or vigor
(2) : bodily health and vigor
2 : a foolish gullible person
3 [ probably short for sapling ] : BLACKJACK, BLUDGEON”
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sap
Thinking that I knew things other people didn’t or couldn’t know was a good feeling. What I didn’t know in the then now I’d discover as I continued. Who wants “their thetan” floating around in “unknowingness” to use sciospeak.
I think know versus not know is a Buddhist consideration. Do you know your place in the universe or not know it and don’t give a crap. lol
Kat, I like your well-spoken comments, insights and conclusions.
Besides the over-the-top propaganda about Hubbard and his accomplishments, the demand not to look or listen to “entheta” (criticism about Hubbard and Scn), there is also the insidious Orwellian indoctrination to not think bad thoughts about Hubbard, what is like a thoughtcrime in Scn.
There is even a “List One” which contains sec check (security check) questions to interrogate the members if they have unkind thoughts about Hubbard, about Scientology and management which was written by Hubbard.
The Thought Police (thinkpol in Newspeak) are the secret police of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is their job to uncover and punish thoughtcrime. The Thought Police use surveillance and psychological monitoring to find and eliminate members of society who challenge the party’s authority and ideology.
Crimestop
“Crimestop” means to rid oneself of unwanted thoughts immediately, i.e., thoughts that interfere or disagree with the ideology of the Party. This way, a person avoids committing thoughtcrime. − https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime
Not only do Scientologists look down on everyone who is a non Scientologists, but there is also a “looking down” hierarchy among those in too. Sea Org members look down on public, (those lazy assed, namby pamby dilettantes), and non S.O. staff. Execs look down upon on non execs. There’s always someone talking about how so and so is not cutting it, or is fucking up or? And then you’ll get an S.O. mission in and wholesale declare the whole org. If you want to get an idea of what’s going on inside Scientology, just read “Lord of The Flies”.
YEP.
I can’t fathom how I put up with it for all that time, how I didn’t see it.
The further out I go, the easier it is to see how jaw-droppingly ludicrous the whole shit-show is.
I got treated like dirt … and could nod, “yep, well, they’re so and so and up and up and thus, they are taking more responsibility than I, and they’re sacrificing more, and blah blah blah”
It’s all so plainly awful and ridiculous now.
Rip —
I just love reading your posts and watching your journey out of Hubbard’s vile, criminal cult.
It’s wonderful to be able to see people finally leave and reclaim their lives. I’m so happy for you.
As you said, $cientology truly is a shit show.
Wow, scientologists suck at everything, don’t they?
I’ve thought theyerm wog came from the British who called the people in India wogs. It was it the 1900 s or earlier. If someone wants to check it out,great.
Mike, I agree, the most important thing about the term is just that it serves that sort of purpose, typical particularly in high control groups or cults but seen in many ideologies, of the lumping non-believers or outsiders together in a way that effectively puts them down. Plus, it goes hand-in-hand with Hubbard’s labeling of his following as “homo novis,” or new and more “desirable” (as the tech dictionary puts it) people, elevating them in comparison.
Implicitly or explicitly, such a categorization of others denigrates and objectifies them. The logic of Hubbard’s own statements and definitions is that “wogs” are then un-desirables – and we know what the implications of that are.
Pathological personalities of the types that have been discussed here previously, view others as objects or instruments to be used for their own ends, including sometimes their vision of some supposed greater good. We see that in Hubbard’s “scripture,” with outsiders labeled “raw meat” and so on, and even lower status or non-compliant insiders referred to in similar ways such as “coins” and “particles.” Such perspectives are carried forward in ruthless end-justifies-the-means policies that are rife with ugly symbolic (at this point) references such as “heads on a pike,” “pink legs” (piles of bodies), and so on.
Tony Ortega’s Underground Bunker has a great piece today about how Scientology’s superiority and arrogance got them in trouble in a country where the local culture had little tolerance for such attitudes: https://tonyortega.org/2019/04/02/thetans-in-the-jungle-scientology-in-papua-new-guineas-highlands/
Hubbard’s a kook.
I first ran across the word wog while reading some books or articles written by Winston Churchill written in the late 19th, early 20th century. He used them as a racial slur against people of the Far East. He was the highest paid and one of the most widely read reporters of that era. Being read by people in all “civilized countries of the day. I will rely on his usage as being correct and any current day naysayers as being uneducated on the subject.
So what are Nation of Islam non scino members referred to as?? I hope that they realise that their scino indoctrinated members refer to them as “wogs”……….!!
Guess we’ll never know for sure. Another version of where ‘WOG’ originated…
According to a very old, circa 1889, article in The China Mail newspaper, the British High Commissioner in Hong Kong issued a bulletin to all British troops stationed there to refrain from using racial slurs, such as ‘babu’, ‘chink’, etc., when referring to Chinese and Indian inhabitants. He required the troops to refer to them as ‘Worthy Oriental Gentleman’. Troops being troops, turned this into an acronym and began calling the local population ‘WOGs’. Which was just as pejorative as the other names for the locals. Since then, the term ‘WOG’ has been extended to mean Europeans from southern Europe and natives of middle eastern countries.
The one thing that’s sure, Hubbard’s use of it was intended it to demean anyone who was not a $cientologist.
Mike,
I’m glad you’re so woggy these days!
Hubbard probably picked up the word ‘wog’ during his time in the US Navy. Wog, short for pollywog, is a term used for an inexperienced sailor with no racist connotations. When he crossed the equator by ship in 1942 he would certainly have been called a wog by King Neptune.
The joke here is that his staff didn’t know about naval wogs but they did know about its use in British English as a racist term for Arabs and South Asians. In the Technical Dictionary they therefore tried to cover for him by using the false derivation!
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk/wog_faq.htm
I think it’s just as likely that Hubbard was well-enough read to have known its more perjorative connotations. Also, I checked, and it was put in Webster’s larger dictionaries starting in the mid-1930s – so if he wasn’t informed, he failed to word clear!
And if nothing else, and almost worse yet, many of Hubbard’s followers would have known the term’s worst connotations and must have brought its unsavory meaning to his attention, particularly the British and Australians and Saint Hill. It speaks to the atmosphere of indoctrination, that many who knew better acceded or submitted to continued use of the term, regardless – and that it continues to be defended by loyalists and apologists.
No hartley, he probably picked it up from the writing of his time. It was a contemporary term used in British news articles and writing.
Hartley,
I have absolutely NO doubt that Hubbard knew exactly what the word meant. His defining it the way he did makes it clear that he used it in a derogatory sense, not a ‘sailor’ term. He meant it as a way to denigrate anyone who had the audacity to question his view of things, just like he decided that the APA was evil and was a global conspiracy responsible for every thing from the Holocaust to criminal activity. He only turned to that tack after the AMA and the AMA rejected his work. I guess the people who joined scientology didn’t logically think about this. If Hubbard had really believed this, WHY would he have sent them his ‘brilliant’ ideas. If he had really believed they were responsible for all of that, why would he solicit their support?
Im sure that Hubbard didn’t want any of his followers to realize this and start asking pesky questions. Just like he didn’t want anyone to actually think about WHY he would call everyone who didn’t buy his con a wog.
Kat
That is so true, Mike. It was drilled into us that we were elite and everyone who wasn’t a scientologist was a wog, unworthy of our consideration. I threw away years of my parents’ wise upbringing to follow an insane narcissist who told me I was better than everyone.
We were trained how to look down on others. Trained that they didn’t deserve our attention.
Oh how I wish I could take back the way I acted, the way I treated the people with condescension simply because Hubbard convinced me that I was better than them.
That. That is why I threw out the baby with the bathwater. Putting aside the fact that the “tech” as Hubbard laid it out was mostly stolen from others without attribution, not a single word I learned in scientology, not a single piece of tech, admin, or auditing was worth the thought processes that were instilled in my very psyche that made me believe that others were unworthy of my company when the inverse was true.
While I read and enjoy and read your blog daily I must disagree on your take of Jehovah Witnesses. My husband and I are not JW. My husband was raised a JW and left many many years ago. He was divorced (I am his 2nd wife). We have been married over 20 years. His brother is an elder in the JW religion and has never been anything but loving, nice and helpful to us. As a matter of fact everyone I have met that is JW has been nothing but caring and helpful. My husband was diagnosed with cancer and I can’t tell you how many JW came to visit and offer words of encouragement and offer to help in any possible way and not 1 time did any of them try to convert us. They were just sweet caring people who really cared. My husband still golfs with many of them to this day. So in short not all JW are crazy bad people. I’d say its the exception not the rule. Just wanted to let you know.
My wife used to be a social worker. She had a couple of severely disturbed clients who were royally screwed over by the JWs. The JWs don’t understand mental illness, any more then scientology does; they believer their cherch can fix everything and you don’t need psychiatrists or social workers. Disconnection in JW jargon is called being “disfellowshipped” but it has the same outcome: breaking up families. They’ll die and let their children die from not taking blood transfusions and describe it as “heroic.”
They don’t fair game the way $cion does – so there’s that to be said for them.
FYI, I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, raised as one actually. I have been taking psychiatric drugs and seeing shrinks since I was 14. My mother is also one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, as are several other relatives on her side. Mental illness runs in my family, we’re all on meds. Please do your research before commenting. Also, our magazines talk about mental illness from time to time, and while it doesn’t recommend any specified treatment, as they are not doctors, it does say there is nothing wrong with having to be on medication.
Also, no one wants to die, or wants their kids to die. We accept alternatives to transfusions, there are now several of them. Jw.org goes into this further.
Ilea —
I’d like to ask, with respect, what your feelings are regarding the rampant child sexual abuse and subsequent cover ups. This is not intended to start an argument; just curious as to your view on this matter.
JW’s doctrine has a “two witness” rule regarding sexual abuse, right? As we all know, abusers and rapists don’t generally attack their victims while two people watch. I mean, that’s just absurd. How do you reconcile this?
There’s a ton of information online from people who were abused, raped, etc., and the JWs cover it up and tell members not to report these vile things to the police.
Wives who have been abused or beaten by their husbands are also told not to report it. And the husband basically gets no punishment.
How do you feel about these issues?
Ilea —
Do you not want to answer my questions about sexual abuse and the cover ups?
Is it too much to confront?
Again, I ask this with respect.
Sorry, but I don’t know what answer you will believe. You all seem to have made up your mind about us. I’ll give it a shot anyway. The elders take sexual abuse very seriously. They look at the evidence, if there is evidence, that includes witnesses to it, if others were also abused, which is likely, as sexual abusers don’t usually limit themselves to one. If they can’t find any, they may watch him more closely, he may lose some privileges for a time, it depends. But they aren’t going to disfellowship him without proof. And they do not discourage anyone from going to the cops. I could go into a personal story about how I know that with certainly, but it’s a rather long and complicated story. But surely you can understand that they cannot act on a victim’s word alone. Unfortunately, people can lie about this…(you know, Mike, how some are lying about Paul Haggis right now). Now, i’ve tried my best to explain the blood issue. I will try one more time. I was raised a witness, and while I was quite young, it was explained to me by my mother why we don’t accept blood transfusions, in a simple way, of course, that I would understand. Therefore, my own desire not to have one was made by me, at a very early age. Same with my brother. Now, I can’t speak for every child, past or present, but the examples i’ve heard of, where the doctors tried to force a transfusion on a child, if that child could tell a judge why he or she didn’t want it, and not just say, because my parents say so, it usually was not forced. Now, while we feel proud of these little ones who stand up for bible principles, we don’t celebrate them as heroes. Again, we do believe in a resurrection of the dead, but of course we hope that a non-blood solution will present itself, which, like I said before, there are a lot more choices than when I was a child. Now, if you have any other questions regarding sexual assault, I sugggest you call your local Kingdom Hall and ask an elder. Unlike Scientology, they will answer you. I hope you all have a great rest of the day.
Did you see the episode of the Aftermath where we showed the clip of the Governing Body member celebrating the martyrdom of a child who did not accept blood and the Watchtower Magazines that did the same? And the testimony from the Australian Enquiry about the sex abuses and two witness rule?
No, I did not. I don’t know how else to explain the blood transfusion issue. Perhaps we have a different view of what celebrated and heroic mean. Yes, we tell these people’s stories. Is that a bad thing? And I tried explaining the two person rule, as you call it. Don’t know what i’m doing wrong. I really encourage you to call a local Kingdom Hall and speak with an elder about this matter. Do you have anything to say about the alternate treatments we will accept? Would you like the names of these treatments? Like I told someone else, I can get them, since my mom was a medical transcriptionist for many years and knows the technical terms.
I suggest you watch the episode. You might discover some things. At least find out about the Australian Inquiry and the positionthe elders took.
As for alternate treatments — in certain circumstances there is no alternate that will save a life. If you need a blood transfusion it doesn’t matter that you will take aspirin, or agree to be sedated or have blood cleaning or anything else. That is an illogical position in trying to argue that it is ok to refuse blood. It’s like saying “I refuse to talk to Indians” and when challenged that this is wrong, saying “yes, but I talk to Iranians and Italians” and that does NOT change the fact you don’t talk to Indians. Loss of life due to an archaic principle is silliness. But you can choose to be silly as an adult and kill yourself I& you wish. But it should never be enforced on a helpless child who are not given a choice.
I beg you to watch the episode we did. There are real people and real footage from your own Governing Body members and leaders.
You, like most scientologists, are a good person. You have been indoctrinated to believe things that are not true and are harmful.
Sigh. Don’t suppose saying a lot of doctors are now agreeing with our position, that bloodless surgeries and procedures are a better way to go, huh? I believe what the Bible tells me about not taking blood, i’ve read it for myself, and I don’t see what’s wrong with the governing body telling people’s stories, whether online or in our magazines. There are a lot of stories of successes with alternative treatments, too. We’ll have to agree to disagree. I look forward to your next season of Aftermath. Take care.
Ilea, you have no way to explain the blood transfusion issue, because it’s so tenuous that no one else in nearly 3 millennia of Judaism and two millennia of Christianity has ever seen that in the bible. JWs themselves accepted and even lauded blood transfusions in publications until the mid-1940s, when for some reason the leadership suddenly decided that the particular passage, written about diet when medical uses of blood products were unknown, applied to the modern procedure.
Also, Jesus actually opposed and taught against rigid, theoretical religious observance when it made no sense. Which is a reminder that none of even the most observant, scholarly and biblically-focused Jews, people who will do things like unscrew the lightulbs in their refrigerators and stoves to try to comply rigidly with the details of biblical injunctions, have ever read that meaning into that passage, and they are people who understand the Old Testament (Torah) in its original language much better than JWs relying on English translations ever will.
Don’t know why my comment isn’t here. I’ll try again. I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and i’ve been on phychiactric drugs and have seen a shrink since I was 14. My mom is also a witness, as are several family members on her side. Mental illness runs in the family, and most of us take meds for it. Please do your research before commenting. Our magazines address mental health from time to time, and although it does not advocate a specific treatment, as those who write it are not doctors, it clearly says mental illness is not due to a lack of faith in God, and it’s perfectly acceptable to take meds, see a shrink if needed.
Also, no one wants to die, or let their children die. Not celebrated, not considered heroic to live by bible standards regarding blood. We do, however, except several alternatives to transfusion, and lately there are quite a number of them. More can be found about this at jw.org. (Really hope this gets through)
“Also, no one wants to die, or let their children die. Not celebrated, not considered heroic to live by bible standards regarding blood.”
I guess the comments I saw were all lying; shame on them.
Yep, or they don’t understand why we say no to transfusions. Would you like examples of the bloodless procedures we will except, since you don’t seem to believe me? I can give you the technical, medical names too, since my mom was a medical transcriber for many years. Or you can go to the source online at our website, Jw.org, if you really would like to understand our view on this. Really, no one wants to die. Life is a gift from our Creator, we cherish it, but we won’t violate his standards about eating blood in any way, shape, or form. And we do believe in a resurrection of the dead, if bloodless options don’t work. It is our bodies, after all, surely you agree that we have the right to decide what is done with them, what’s put in them, don’t we?
It is our bodies, after all, surely you agree that we have the right to decide what is done with them, what’s put in them, don’t we?
Not with children you don’t.
Perhaps the most disturbing thing I saw when looking into the JW’s was the children who had died because of refusal of taking blood being held up as heroes who will survive Armageddon.
And the idea that sexual assault (or any sort of assault) requires two witnesses before being actionable. Not many sexual predators are stupid enough to have audiences for their crimes.
These things are indefensible.
I asked Ilea about that very thing — the “two witness rule” — and still no reply.
It’s incredible how anyone can see that “rule” as anything other than protecting sexual predators. Makes me sick.
And the refusal of life-saving blood for kids… sigh. Don’t even get me started on that madness.
I respect your view on this.
Having said that, the higher-up JW’s are despicable and utterly vile. The rampant sexual abuse of children is absolutely disgusting, and will have a life-long affect on those poor children. The fact that it’s covered up all the time is beyond criminal.
The level of abuse within the JW’s makes me incredibly angry and disgusted.
I’m curious as to whether the person who went nuts in Inglewood was a wog. I can only assume not, since they haven’t attempted to blame everything on Mike and Leah yet.
Is poor Ed Parkin in The Hole now or what?
MarcAnon,
The jury is still out on that, but his social media shows that he had some sort of connection with the cult at some point in his life. There was a ‘playlist’ of scientology videos on his media, but I think the investigation is ongoing and I haven’t had time today to do any more looking.
Regardless, scientology is probably going to be mute on it because there is obviously some sort of tie somewhere. And Im sure old Ed will likely be in the hole soon….
Kat
Shhh! Don’t tell FP. He may go ballistic.
Suggesting that the word “wog” isn’t condescending, rude, or arrogant is simply asinine.
I’ve never referred to myself as a “never-in” or “wog”. I refuse to give credence to a word which Hubbard used to describe anyone outside $cientology. That bastard had some kinda nerve to insult anyone… considering his criminality, abuse, and lies.
I too am working diligently to return to the state of Woghood.
I want to be able to lie back in a lounge chair, book in hand, frothy beverage, and relax fully and completely… and to have my mind free from the disapproving judgment of others about me that rolls out unbidden without my desire or will.
Gettin better at that, every day. Thanks to this blog and our wonderful Ex Gang.
…
I just finished Hawkins, “Counterfeit Dreams” this morning. I’m making notes of my thoughts to help gel the benefits I am getting.
This is what I wrote this morning:
Scios have the idea that scn is a tool to use to change the beliefs and behavior of those about them. They judge the thoughts, ideas, actions, values of others and feel it’s their moral duty and right to judge and attempt to change that which does not align with Hubbard or their own interpretation of what Hubbard would deem correct, ethical, rational, etc.
This deeply embeds, to such a degree that there later remains zero ability to “let it be”, zero belief that it’s PROPER to allow others their own views and self governance and self judgments.
Even if they are not actively doing something to change the person, it’s 100% set in their mind of what SHOULD be changed, why, and absolute certainty in their own rightness.
In scn there is no such thing as, “I may not understand or agree with your action/idea, but I respect your right to your own mind and decisions”
there is no possibility of Hubbard being wrong about anything, thus the scio is 100% right.
……
I know it’s not just Scn that embeds the idea that we can and should judge everyone… but Scn embeds it to an all-encompassing degree. …
…
It FEELS so good to let go of this stuff. There is a distinct sense of relief as things like this peel away.
There is a very real peace and relaxation that comes to me when I reclaim some woghood.
To help me in this, I started writing some bits, identifying “how I was before Scn” .. personality traits, inclinations and bents, things that were important to me as a wee child.. this is how far back I have to go to begin to identify things that I know for sure weren’t embedded by Scn.
So bloody helpful.
Rip: “I too am working diligently to return to the state of Woghood.”
Me?: Just call me a BORN-AGAIN WOG. 😉 At least, that’s what I aspire to.
Laughter! – Born-again wogs in a state of Woghood sublime – laughter!
Top of the Tone Scale for sure.
Rip,
Just take it one day at a time and celebrate the little wins. You will get there, and you have the support of the people who have been through the same things- which is a priceless resource for you. You know you will never be alone out here when you decide to take that final step out of teh shadows and into the beautiful sunlight. Dont waste too much more time!!
Kat
Kat
I’ll be UTR until the day I will not lose spouse, job, income, family, and friends.
I refuse to give one more thing to the cult.
I will keep what I have and protect it and lie through my teeth.
I’m practicing that too.
……
I’d like to “hope” a little more strongly For The Day When We Can Speak Openly Without Consequence… I can hold my breath, but…maybe not that long. *sigh.
…
gettin over this shyte would be easier in done in open fashion, I understand. My mother gave birth to a bullheaded one, and nobody was ever in doubt as to which one that was.
They ain’t gettin anymore from me.
Becoming a “Garden variety human” again is rewarding and have attested to being in charge of my own mind. ?
This web site is very woggy. It woggles the mind and makes me want to listen to War’s All Day Music.
Where O where is our worldly FP? He is the resident expert on all thinks woggish. But with or without a word like wog Hubbard was the epitome of the me-me, and I don’t mean Meme.
No option to edit today. Do your review before posting.
It’s fun sitting here with the MR Bobblehead to remind me to smile. I gotta rig up a string and foot petal so I can shake his head. For now I just shake him and he laughs at all my jokes ?
Edit: Now it’s back on?
“they are the elite of planet earth and have superior knowledge, abilities and intelligence than the run-of-the-mill “humanoid” that populates this planet because they have the “tech” of Hubbard.”
It wasn’t that we had LRHs tech at all. It was because we stepped up the plate to help mankind. Not everyone can take on that much responsibility. So it actually makes perfect sense.
Another example of Ron the Con man. He even conned himself.
PS And I am really special LOL ?
Cece,
I understand what you said, and agree that joining the Sea Org was a huge commitment. And I can understand the concept of Sea Org members being the elite of earth because of this. I can understand this CONCEPT, mind you.
Here’s what I DON’T understand:
If it was constantly drummed into the heads of Sea Org members by their seniors that they are the elite of earth, why were they – are they – treated so badly?
Screamed at, humiliated, threatened, punished – one would think that the elite of earth would be at least treated with respect and their hard work and sacrifice and dedication acknowledged.
And I’m not being sarcastic. Nor do I BELIEVE that I’m being naive.
Because I know very well that DM is a psychopath.
Its just that I sincerely don’t understand why Sea Org members are not treated well, why they don’t treat each other well, and why DM would not INSIST upon this.
They are his PEOPLE. Without them he could not survive, without the Sea Org members he would be NOTHING.
So, why not value them, or at least, treat them with the level of respect that a cashier at Mini-Mart would expect.
He KNOWS how to at least ACT as if he were a decent, caring person. He can do this with Whales who give him large sums of money.
Somehow it just seems very stupid of him not to treat his juniors decently, to not ensure that his juniors and those below them etc. etc. get at least acknowledged when they perform well. He is COB; he sets the tone for the entire Sea Org as a group.
How schizophrenic is it to impress upon Sea Org members that they are “the elite” of earth while at the same time showing them no respect and heaping abuse on them and punishing them for the slightest infraction?
It doesn’t make any sense! This is not the way to get people to work hard for you!
WOG=”WithOut Guidance” – Bob Harvey.
And this ‘us vs them’ or ‘the elite’ was also applied later on in the Sea Org when miscabage took over. It started as: ‘is forbidden for S Org members to talk to the wogs or public in CW, such as the owner of One Step Shop or other similar public.
Then it turned into: we are the Sea Org and do not fraternize with the public after events, just sell the new books, but do not engage in personal conversation.We are after all the elite.
Absurd and insane, but it did happen.
Silvia, your comment brought up two memories. One was as a public waiting with auditor for after session exam. She wouldn’t engage in any small talk or any talk with me despite my efforts. After the exam she said there is a new rule that auditors cannot fraternize with their pcs outside of session. I found it to be cold. How do you build ARC for the session when it’s ice cold everwhere else?
When I was on the EPF we read a reference that SO are not permitted to fraternize with public, even public Scns. No chewing the fat or hanging out, no dinners at their house, not even a ride with them if you were walking and they offered a ride home. I queried this to my SO terminal there. He said, “Well you wouldn’t jump into a dirty pool with scum on it to swim would you?” I said no I woudln’t. He said this is the same way. We are the elite, ethical and we don’t want to dirty ourselves with lesser beings. And besides, he said, we have to be three feet back of society’s head and that will keep our ethics presence and elevation. He said how else can we pull their withholds off them if we are at the same level as they are? That, my friend, is why I didn’t join the SO after all.
The picture of the golliwog dolls at the top of this story is very jarring. Though it proves the point, it is a bit over the top. Maybe consider using a different image? Either no golliwog dolls or a less severe image of them. The text of the article is enough to say what’s needed.
To me it looks like a big happy Golliwog family. Wikipedia says Kate Upton’s Golliwog character was jovial, friendly and gallant. Children of the the day in the early 1900’s would be happy to have such a collection. Obviously we now look at things differently.
Here’s the interesting Wikipedia article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golliwog
A bit of irrelevant trivia: Debussy wrote a solo piano piece titled “Gollywog’s Cakewalk.” Evidently the term was in common usage in that era in his neck of the woods.
Well gee, if being considered a WOG by the cult of scientology means I’m not a soul sucking lying cheating despicable zombie slave to a despicable old nut case science fiction writer (and his mini mouse lying cheating replacement) then all I can say is Thank You!
Oh, baby, baby, it’s a wog world
And it’s hard to get by just upon a cog, sir
In the movie ” Lawernce Of Arabia”, Lawerence ( Peter O Toole ) is chastised for ” bringing a Wog into the officer’s lounge “. The wog was Indian, and not British, like the officers. Even when I was a devout Scientologist, I used the term Non-Scientologist, as opposed to Wog which I felt is derogatory and arrogant to use.
Laughter! Good punning, Mary. “Advanced wogs” now become wwogs or w-wogs. Add it to the Tech Dictionary.
When you’re on staff in a Foundation org, you are under continual pressure to leave your ‘wog job’, which is considered a completely dishonourable occupation compared to ‘clearing the planet’. I was once on staff with a doctor who referred to her profession as her ‘wog job’.
I’ve been working very hard at becoming a wog again and maybe if I study real hard and meditate enough I can become a worldly wog.
Mary – “In Australia, it tends to be applied to a wider range of peoples, and although it may be used as a slur, to some extent has been reclaimed and is used as a self-descriptor by them.” Sounds like us Ex Scientologists!
I clicked off my first reply to you to look something up which caused it to not show up as a reply but to repeat, good punning – laughter – Wogdom, WogWorld etc. etc.
And I’m doing the real Learning How to Learn course (on-line free) and creating new pathways in my brain and it’s actually getting bigger and more lit up! I’m going to be the best wog I can be ?
How interesting Cece. Send us the link to that course please.
Mary, you are the woggiest wog I can think of. Greetings from Mission, BC, Canada.
Your certificate is on the way. You have successfully fulfilled the requirements and coursework and may use the letters Ph.d., umm, I mean W.o.G., after your name.
Mary Kahn, W.o.G.
Certified Woman of Goodness
I’m also working on being a worldly wog Mary.
Those mental impressions that were instilled in us, of being the cream of the cream, the loyal officers, the real OTs and everyone else a lowly humanoid is such an evil thing to put in a child’s mind who is looking for an identity in the world.
That Hubbard manufactured separation from society, with such words as wog, causes such an arrogance and elite superiority that is hard to get rid of.
As an insecure teen, these ideas were easy for me to assume. They made the world (parents) wrong and me right.
The word evil still is the best description of Hubbard and his “tech”.
The SO recruiters take the “we are superior to you” idea even further when recruiting young kids into the SO. They will hound an underage kid at school before and after school, many times unbeknownst to his/her parents. They love bomb them and let them know they are superior to ALL around them, and know more and are taking more responsibility than their own mom and dad. And “you’re just an old thetan in a young body, so you can take on huge responsibility and have juniors of your own to boss around, and you will be great in the SO…” What kid doesn’t want to hear he is superior to all and that he will be an exec soon bossing around people the age of his parents? Since my son liked to write rap music, they told him his SO post would be at Int working with Chill E B writing rap songs for the church. A cushy and creative job. Ha! But he being young, believed them.
The SO recruiting children is despicable but hopefully it hasn’t spread to the rank and file even in the Church of Miscavige. Obviously some parents are raising their children in Scientology but outside of the sea org the internet is everywhere.
Hey Mary! ‘Say it loud! I’m a wog & I’m proud!’ Repeat as needed.
A Scientologist is a wog that just doesn’t know it yet.
Oh! I like that! Very clever, Mikey!
And L’il Davy is accelerating the conversion rate!