Missing a moral 'compass'?

Have you ever encountered members who seem to have completely mislaid their ethical or moral 'compass' (if they ever had one in the first place)? You know the type ….. they'll happily lecture everyone else on how to practise the programme 'right' and then do the precise opposite themselves. People like David B (founder of the Joys of Recovery and its various offshoots - didn't have a sponsor but insisted everyone else had to have one!), David C (took over the reins after the welcome demise of David B - a grade A religious bigot and control freak – last seen down El Cerrito way spreading the 'disease'!), Wayne P (sponsored by Clancy – a serial philanderer – he seems to have a big problem keeping his trousers on), Clancy (Pacific Group - likes to play the big shot with a sideline in shaming others … in other words … a thug!), Wally P (a serial monogamist who runs Back to Basics – a nice little earner), Joe and Charlie (Primary Purpose – yet more control freaks who liked to bore AA members into recovery with their incessant lecturing), Mike Quinones (serial sexual predator who ran the Midtown Groups – also sponsored by Clancy) not to mention AA's innumerable (and growing) army of recovery 'experts' eagerly mimicking their efforts as they busily rush about organising AA (?) 'workshops', churning out yet more audio files on so-called 'fast track' recovery, each one desperately seeking the attention of anyone with a few bucks to spare, and the poor judgement to pass them in their direction...... You have! We thought so ….. And then you must have wondered what kind of guy would behave like that? What must possess them? Are they stupid? Or are they just sick.... or sicker than the rest of us? Well wonder no more …. all will be revealed – specifically Narcissistic Personality Disorder DSM-5 (pp. 9-10)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS An update on our new campaign to be published shortly …. we've been very busy behind the scenes!

The Art of Chivalry

From our correspondent: 

“Picture this: a crusader Knight, clad in medieval armour, helmet & chain mail; proudly riding his trusty steed. Sword by his side, Banner in hand. Is he off to fight a new crusade ? Or perhaps on his way to rescue a damsel in distress imprisoned in the lofty tower of a far-away castle? Or maybe he is off to do some jousting with the local chapter of the Knights of the Round Table?

Well, no, actually. He is more likely to be heading off to his local AA cult home group - call it Joys of Recovery or Road of Recovery, either title will do. You may wonder what on earth this is about. Well, this is based upon the latest brainstorming idea of cult guru David C (aka the Icon).

You see, David C, like Wayne P, is preoccupied with “promoting chivalry and the ideal of the catholic gentleman”. Is it coincidental that David's website article on chivalry appeared the day after aacultwatch posted (on the 13^th July) an article on Wayne P's hypocrisy in presenting himself as a Catholic gentleman entitled to lecture us all on personal conduct, in spite of his own adulterous caprices? What we know for sure is David C has produced an Icon (below) of a knight with a horse; a sword; and catholic prayer book (lying on the ground for some reason); and an article intended to inspire and inflame our hearts and minds to acts of chivalry and true masculinity.

Tally-ho Sir Knight! And …..Alleluia !

All this could be laughingly dismissed as the harmless musings of an eccentric buffoon living in a fantasy world. However David C has a track record of imposing his prurient and fundamentalist catholic beliefs upon unwary AA newcomers and sponsees. All done (falsely) in the name of “carrying the message and working the AA program”, For example he made it quite clear to an AA acquaintance of mine, that practicing artificial birth control (i.e. condoms, the pill etc) was “not on the program”. The ultimate reason given was that the “Holy Father” (aka the Pope) disapproves of it, It would seem that, in David C's mind, the Roman Catholic Pope should have authority over AA members and how they run their lives and work their programs. So much for our Traditions, and our AA Preamble which talks about not being aligned to any sect or denomination. And notice also how David's self-justification is always based upon an appeal to authority, either his sponsor's or the Pope's. True to this fallacious and lazy mindset he also abhors sex before marriage. Indeed sex of any kind should only be for the procreation of children within the context of heterosexual marriage. And masturbation? Another heinous heresy! Strictly forbidden in accordance with true catholic dogma. And please don't even mention same sex relationships. And as for saunas.... don't ever go into one! They are to be avoided like the plague for fear of encountering the “disorder” of homosexuality. Get on your knees and say a pious prayer in a church instead. David C's fanatical prurience and voyeurism in sexual matters reached a sordid climax a while ago, with the creation of his so-called “Big Book recovery” document and webpage, in which he commanded those who wish to do step 4 & 5 to relate, in a detailed and voyeuristic way, the most intimate and devious sexual practices, including sex with children, animals and bottles. I believe he removed this creepy demand only after being shamed by aacultwatch and others.

Of course, all this is in stark contrast with the clear and simple message of AA as found in the Big Book, and other AA literature. Which wisely cautions us not be be the arbiter of another's sex conduct (Big Book page 69); to follow our own conscience in spiritual matters (ibid pp 95 & 132) - not someone else's (e.g a sponsor's), and not to lecture or talk down from a spiritual hilltop (ibid pp 18 & 95). And to choose carefully who we share with – allowing more than one person if necessary, an AA member or an outsider, to hear our story (ibid p 74 ff). Believe it or nor, we in AA are also allowed the freedom to follow a Higher Power OF OUR OWN UNDERSTANDING, and spiritual expressions AS WE UNDERSTAND THEM (ibid p 47) – which may not be the same as David's narrow understanding. (In my case, and in many others, it will never be the same). It seems David C,, Wayne P., and similar cult clowns and dunderheads, have great difficulty in grasping and understanding the simple and liberating concept of spiritual freedom and practice as suggested in the AA Big Book.

Back to our noble Knight. Think of chivalry, and maybe, like me, you think of good manners, courtesy, tolerance, respect and defense of the weak and down-trodden. Not so cult “chivalry” David C's “chivalry” in his homeland of England is remembered with disdain. Examples are too numerous to mention here. But it will suffice, perhaps, to relate just a few to give readers a flavour of his so-called “chivalry”. Some years ago, in a “Vision for You” cult meeting in Eaton Square, London, he cross-shared and silenced, in front of the entire meeting, one young lady who had begun to share about a painful personal experience regarding her young son who was ill in hospital. Oh dear! No emotional or “negative” sharing allowed in David's pure and knightly presence! The end result was the lady left the meeting, sobbing, never to return. On another occasion I recall a young lady was sharing her experience of Step 9, describing how she had made her amends to her mother, who, in turn, had received and accepted the amends very well. No sooner had the young lady finished sharing her lovely story, when our Sir chivalrous Knight David C came charging in, cross-sharing just about everything she had said, and making it clear that, in his opinion, (first taught to him by his sponsor, the sponsorless David B), she had NOT done Step 9 properly. After the meeting ended, David C skedaddled out the door as fast as he could. And well he might. The young lady in question was hurt and tearful, having been shamed and humiliated by him in front of an entire meeting. Yes, such is David C's “chivalry” and gentleman like manner. To date, there has been neither apology, amends, nor even an expression of remorse or regret from the self-appointed chivalrous Übermensch. You see, as far as David C and Wayne P are concerned, they never do anything wrong. It is the rest of us, the 99.99% bog standard AA members who are always wrong. We have long been judged as the “walking wounded” and the 'do nothings” no matter how long we are sober, or how much service we have done over the years. However, reality and practice reveal the exact opposite. And if we replace the word chivalry with hypocrisy and humbug, we have the true picture of David and Wayne, and all their co-dependent cult groupies and sock puppets.

Chivalry may exist somewhere at some times, but cult chivalry is well and truly dead. In fact, it never existed in the first place. “

Comment: None needed

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous …. and far too liberated to engage in archaic and irrelevant romanticism)

PS Thanks to our correspondent

Are you a “Catholic Gentleman”?

Our correspondent observes:

“Regarding the Vatican insignia on his [Wayne P] profile pic.

Apparently a number of people have that on his Facebook friends list. It indicates that the person concerned is a devout Catholic. Recently a lot of people on Facebook have been superimposing rainbow flags over their profile picture in order to indicate their support for the legalization of gay marriage by the supreme court in the USA. Superimposing the Vatican flag is a kind of (anti) response to that. You also find people superimposing the Confederate rebel flag and other flags to indicate their affiliations.

Also I did notice something interesting about Wayne's Facebook interests....... but he also has pictures from a Facebook community page called "The Catholic Gentleman" which has an interesting description of purpose I quote "A community for Catholic men that seeks to encourage virtue, the pursuit of holiness and the art of true masculinity."

The art of true masculinity ? What the hell is that, and why would anyone need to know what it might be anyway? Is hero worshipping your sponsor part of that I wonder? The community have a website.

http://www.catholicgentleman.net/

And guess what is in there ? A book of prayers and icons part written by David C.

http://www.catholicgentleman.net/2015/06/fraternitas-is-live/

How to create a Catholic oratory and altar in your own home and indoctrinate your kids in the correct version of Catholicism ( ie the most bigoted, fuddy-duddy and old fashioned) and keep Satan at bay!

I am not a psychiatrist, but I have listened to many Step 5's in my earlier AA days and I would guess that there is some kind of sexual neurosis going on here?

However that may be, Wayne's conduct hardly adds up to the Catholic ideal. Read the above description of the page again! What a chump!”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

PPS Plymouth Intergroup corruption

“The Things They Say” – or should it be “The Lies They Tell

Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“Think up your own conception of God, put it on a pedestal, kneel in front of it and ask it for a sober day"... Happy Dennis, Ealing.

This is the idiotic message the "happy one" of Ealing carries to all who have the stomach to listen to him.

Well folks, of course, real AA suggests we do no such thing. Kneeling in front of something that you have made up yourself is little short of narcissism. It is also idolatry.

It is well worth remembering that Happy Dennis (Dennis F.) has a long history of mental illness. I for one have no intention of following made up suggestions from such an individual, none of which are found anywhere in conference approved AA literature.

"You must get a sponsor who has a sponsor" - message carried by various cult groupies in the Ealing area.

Well, if that were the case, AA would never have got off the ground. Bill Wilson didn't have a sponsor who had a sponsor! Nowhere in the Big Book or any other AA book does it say that we must have a sponsor who has a sponsor.

It is interesting to note that the promoters of this non-AA message are descended from the David B line of sponsorship. David B didn't have a sponsor, so the whole house of sponsorship cards falls flat. This particular "sponsorship line" narrative ends in a lie.

What the Big Book and other AA books do suggest however, is that we acquire and develop a faith and trust in a Higher Power of our own understanding. That means of course that we have to reflect upon spiritual matters for ourselves and think about what we are doing, rather than constantly deferring to a human power.

"Don't think! Don't use your brain - it's defective!" - message heard in meetings in Richmond area, no doubt inspired by a sponsor who had a sponsor who was connected to David B who didn't have a sponsor!

AA says - THINK THINK THINK.  (official AA sign)

AA also says - "Just for today I will try to strengthen my mind I will study, I will learn something useful. I will not be a mental loafer. I will read something that requires effort, thought and concentration."

You can't strengthen your mind if you don't think!

Thinking is discouraged by the cult. Why? Knowledge is power and people who think cant be so easily manipulated and controlled by the cult sponsor. The Truth will set your free.

"My sponsor said he was sober 22 years and had never had a bad day because he always did everything his sponsor said"   - David C Icons.

Well now, when you sponsor yourself I guess you do everything your sponsor says! Lol

"David B tried to find a sponsor in the UK, but just couldn't find anyone who was sufficiently informed or on the program."  -  David C Icons circa 2000 sitting in McDonalds, Victoria, after a Vision meeting sucking on his strawberry milkshake.

OK lets get this straight - he couldn't find a sponsor good enough for him, but he did everything his sponsor said??  That just doesn't add up. Later on David B claimed to be sponsored by a guy named "Frank" in USA. However when this was investigated, the "Frank" in question was drinking and had no idea he was sponsoring anyone. Clearly David B could not be trusted to tell the truth!

David C Icons, however, swallowed David B's porky pies, hook line and sinker.

Dial D for Dumb... or D or Denial... or D for Dishonest. .. take your pick. All three apply.

"People call me God and I think they are afraid of me" - David B (founder of the cult movement in AA in the UK) talking to a Catholic clergyman (and AA member) outside an AA convention in Eastbourne circa the early 1990's.

No comment is needed.”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

To kneel or not to kneel, that is the question?

Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“Hello ….....,

Thank you for your delightful response. You are clearly an intelligent person. So I will be fearless and thorough in my response :)

I would be interested to know what Higher Power requires you to kneel twice per day? Did this "suggestion" come as a direct communication from your Higher Power, or did it come from a sponsor (a human power)?

Although the Big Book mentions "humbly" and "humility", please can you also tell me where in the Big Book it specifically tells us to kneel twice per day, every day. Or is this yet another sponsor-invented "suggestion"??.

As kneeling is a religious practice connected with worship and adoration, I would be interested in the origin of this "suggested" practice.

Would you also please tell me how kneeling equates with being "humble"? I have encountered a number of kneeling fetishists in AA and they seem to me to be very far from being humble. Both in their attitude and behaviour. For example. a man in Ealing - Happy Dennis - talks incessantly about kneeling and being "humble" and coerces others to do likewise. Yet he produces his own literature contradicting AA, breaks the traditions, misquotes AA literature, and doesn't listen to anyone except the voice of his own deluded self-will, which has been running riot in Ealing for some time now causing a lot of disruption to the local fellowship and confusion among newcomers.

Another self-procaimed "humble" and kneeling fetishist is David C Icons, who has set up a website that lies about and distorts the AA program, knowing that it is causing division and conflict within AA, and offering dangerous and potentially fatal advice on medical and psychological matters which he is certainly not qualified to give. Please can you tell me how this is being "humble".

It seems to me that kneeling as an alleged expression of "humility" lacks both depth and weight, and, given the examples above, is nothing more than fakery and posturing.  As the program, according to the Big Book, is about connecting with and doing the will of a Higher Power, I would really like to know what Higher Power requires this daily charade. It certainly isn't my Higher Power!

I can assure you that I do have a conscious contact with my own Higher Power who requires humility to take place in my heart, in my attitudes and behaviour, and not as a mere pose on the floor, easily feigned.  Would I be able to share that in your Hampton Wick [Friday] meeting without being "cross-shared" or "blanked" by the assembled company of ever so "humble" cult-sponsors ? Somehow I doubt it. As has been said elsewhere in the aacultwatch site, and is my experience, - "the more they kneel, the more arrogant they become". It is a sad, but true irony.

I will deal with your other points later when I have more time. Please bear with me, I will address them.  Look forward to your reply.

….....”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Only ANGRY people 'CROSS-share'!

Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old): 

“Hi ….....,

Thanks for that. I have never encountered any Primary Purpose goons. I guess I just dont get to enough meetings! Hmmmm, well, at least not in the Essex area anyway. 

So you were in your first year, made a mistake in a quotation and some smart ass from out of town thought he would humiliate you in front of 60 people, and more or less hold you personally responsible for the alleged decline of AA. And this joker reckoned he was sober and had been restored to sanity ??  lol.  It is good that in spite of him, you persevered and stayed in AA, and that you were able to put it to the back of your mind. 

I can remember being cross-shared in my first year by someone. I can't remember now what exactly I said to merit the honour (probably some nonsense) but, as  I was sharing an American guy shouted at me and said "Keep it simple stupid" . That stopped me in my tracks and I just wilted inside completely. I felt humiliated, and furious at the violation of my "sharing space"  in the meeting. However I now consider I got off lightly. A few years ago a sponsee/friend of mine visited Alaska, USA. He attended a meeting in a remote town on the Northern Slope and what he experienced there chilled me as he was telling me about it. He was asked to speak at the podium during a large late Saturday night meeting. While he was sharing he was both applauded, cheered, ignored, cat-whistled, booed, laughed at, insulted and heckled. He said the meeting was like an AA version of the Jerry Springer show. The experience really shocked him at first. Luckily he was sober a good while and generally good humoured too, and he was able to see the funny side of it all. But I do feel sorry for any newcomers in THAT part of the world. I guess you need to have really thick skin to survive there, as well as a bear skin to keep warm! 

I, of course, have been guilty of cross-sharing others myself.  This happened  mainly when I was part of the Vision cult. After I left the wretched cult, I have fortunately been able to make amends to (some) of my victims. Cross-sharing was a particularly nasty way of abusing and humiliating others who dissented from Vision cult dogma. I witnessed much cross-sharing of "outsiders" or "heretics" who worked the program in a slightly different way to the Vision. The sponsorless  David B, founder of Vision/Joys cult (now deceased),  would openly cross-share people AS THEY WERE ACTUALLY SHARING, interrupting them to put them down. I remember him doing a chair in Sunday Joys of Recovery Step meeting (then held at Lilly Road nr Earls Court), and after he finished he said that if anyone didn't share the message correctly (as he saw it) he would stop them! Sober behaviour?? I think not.

Another thing I experienced at Vision was if anyone in the group openly started to question the ludicrous cult dogmas of the sponsorless David B or his chief henchman David C Icons, the response would be a torrent of cross-sharing from the sponsorless David B, David C Icons and their little gang of mindless robots (sponsees). This cross-sharing was often planned and orchestrated.  For example I recall someone who was somewhat "out of favour" sharing that he did voluntary work outside of AA. David C Icons then came in immediately after saying that  voluntary work outside AA is "not allowed" if you're "working the program correctly" - his sponsor (David B) had told him, so it must be true. (Yes, David C Icons really is as childish as that.)

Well,  evidently David B had not read the AA literature  which clearly states that voluntary work outside AA is suggested, even recommended, in the AA book Living Sober.  But the twisted message of David B always trumped AA's message as far as David C Icons was concerned. Sure enough, the following week David C Icon's sponsees all shared about how not doing voluntary work outside of AA was "against the program". David C Icons had clearly lobbied them into a virtual lynch mob. Thus, the out of favour "heretic" was further humiliated and isolated. Needless to say the guy left the group.  Then, to add insult to injury, David C Icons gleefully seized on the fact that the poor chap had stopped attending the group to further justify his (false) dogma that doing voluntary work outside of AA was "off the program" and instil in others a (false)  fear that doing so could lead to drinking. He even laughed about it. "He has gone. Rejoice!" he told one of his followers. So a picture developed in my mind of a good fellow AA member, trying his best to work the AA program and help others, yet being hurt, isolated, humiliated and rejected by Vision, while David C Icons was laughing away merrily in self-righteous satisfaction. Horrible. Horrible. Horrible. Certainly not the "will" of my Higher Power, or any other Higher Power that represents goodness, justice and love.”

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Adopt the position!

Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old):

“.........

I have found the advice given on page 95 of our basic text Alcoholics Anonymous to be most sound and helpful in the matter of sponsorship. It also runs counter to the actions and attitudes of the Cult in its various forms. Here it is (with my emphases underlined):

..Never talk down to an alcoholic from any moral or spiritual hilltop; simply lay out the kit of spiritual tools for his inspection. Show him how they worked with you. Offer him friendship and fellowship. Tell him that if he wants to get well you will do anything to help.

If he is not interested in your solution, if he expects you to act only as a banker for his financial difficulties or a nurse for his sprees, you may have to drop him until he changes his mind. This he may do after he gets hurts some more.

If he is sincerely interested and wants to see you again, ask him to read this book in the interval. After doing that, he must decide for himself whether he wants to go on. He should not be pushed or prodded by you, his wife, or his friends. If he is to find God, the desire must come from within.

If he thinks he can do the job in some other way, or prefers some other spiritual approach, encourage him to follow his own conscience. We have no monopoly on God; we merely have an approach that worked with us. But point out that we alcoholics have much in common and that you would like, in any case, to be friendly. Let it go at that.

(From Big Book page 95 - working with others.)

The exact opposite is practised by the Cults!

For example - people in the Vision cult are told they MUST get on their knees and pray to a God they may not really believe in. This, it seems to me, goes against freedom of conscience and may also be a denial of human rights. To coerce people into a religious act is a denial of basic human rights I would say.

I used to be involved in the Vision cult and I remember a sponsee  I had at the time who asked me what was the point of going through the steps to stay sober - if all you had to do was pray on your knees for a sober day. God either gave you a sober day or he did not. If he did, then any further steps were irrelevant.  And if God didnt give you a sober day, then kneeling and praying for a sober day was a waste of time. I can remember thinking at the time that he had a very good point. When I asked my Cult sponsor why exactly we had to pray on our knees for a sober day - he said that it was an act of "humility". This didn't make sense to me either. It reduced humility to being a mere "pose" easily feigned.

Indeed it is easily faked for it also struck me that the leading members of the Vision cult - David B and David C (Icons) and others, were VERY FAR from being humble in their interactions and attitudes within AA. Also it struck me as somewhat a contradiction to be kneeling in the morning and then jumping around AA telling everyone all about it and coercing others to do likewise.

"True humility doesn't make a presentation of itself" was what one real AA oldtimer told me later. And its true.

Today in the west london area of AA, we have a deranged individual - "Happy Dennis" (sponsored and directed by David C Icons - Happy Dennis is one of his "successes" by the way LOL !!) - who has set up over 20 meetings in one area which he controls with no democratic mandate. His performance/sharing usually involves a overly long lecture about how many times a day he kneels and how humble he is, (he even writes "poetry" about it! ). Meanwhile this same man ignores the decisions of the local intergroup, publishes his own literature which is a total distortion and travesty of AA , and indeed contradicts it in many respects. Recently he told a sponsee that he couldn't have a relationship because " relationships were only for the production of children in marriage". He dictates, bullies and coerces newcomers on matters of life-style, work, sex, relationships, morals and medication etc - matters on which he has absolutely no legal authority or warrant to direct others.

It would seem to me that Cult "humility" is really nothing more than an ego-inflating pose, a charade - a self-satisfied self-righteous posturing, closely followed up by arrogance, attention-seeking, lies, fraud, boasting and bullying.

…....”

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Sponsorship? We think not

Extract from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“There is much more emphasis on sponsorship in AA today than used to be in the past. I can remember in my early days hardly ever hearing the word. It wasn’t until I heard David B. (founder of the cult movement within AA in the UK) do a chair on Step 4 around 1986 that I heard sponsorship being promoted so avidly. From then on sponsorship was promoted more and more. Incessant indeed. It has almost become a religion in its own right. The dangers of this are obvious. Unregulated, unmonitored, unaccountable individuals setting themselves up as gurus, teachers, lecturers and therapists. The damage has been done and is still being done. Vulnerable new members of the fellowship are pounced upon and subjected to bullying, psychological blackmail and other kinds of coercion and abuse, by certain well-known sponsors and self-appointed group "leaders". Websites, like David C Icon's effort, have been concocted which carry a message that is all about putting sponsorship on a level that was clearly never originally intended when the sponsorship idea was first introduced within the fellowship. We now have cults of sponsorship, sponsor-worship, sponsorship "lines", a riot of self-willed individuals who have invested themselves with infallibility and godlike powers over others.

What is to be done about this? In my opinion AA needs not only to take its own inventory regarding this dangerous out-of-control sponsor juggernaught, but we need to enlist the help of outsiders too. As our fellowship was founded with the help of outsiders in the medical and religious professions, we also need to enlist persons in the medical, legal, political, religious and media domains.  The scandals that have engulfed the Catholic church in recent years would not have come to light had the victims of clerical abuse relied solely on the mechanism of church hierarchy and procedure. Indeed the ecclesiastical hierarchy concerned tried their best to cover it up and sweep it under the carpet. No. It took a concerted media campaign and the help of medical, legal and other professionals to make change happen, and to stop the abuse.  And to develop and put in place procedures to prevent abuse happening again.

I remember a time many years ago in the fellowship when there was constant controversy about smoking in meetings. There would be hard effort to get a meeting to be non-smoking for those who suffered from serious lung problems (like me!), only to have Traditions quoted, and group consciences turn and overturn previous decisions. This controversy went on for years, and generated much heated debate, with little satisfactory outcome for those who felt excluded from many meetings because of choking cigarette smoke. The fellowship was largely incapable of solving this problem unaided. Then the law of the land intervened. All meetings are now non-smoking because it is now illegal to smoke in public buildings. People who want to smoke can still do so, outside.

Likewise I think it will require a change in the law to stop sponsor/cult abuse within AA. In my opinion the sort of sponsorship practiced by the likes of Wayne P, David C Icons, Happy Dennis et al, should be illegal. No unaccountable person should have that kind of power and control over a sick and vulnerable person. Sponsorship, if it is to exist at all, should be carefully monitored, possibly even licensed. An outside agency should be involved if possible. Clear boundaries should be set, and those breaking them prevented from sponsoring ever again at the very least.  Let them practice Step 12 in another and harmless way.

Prior to his death in 1997, the sponsorless David B did not have any AA service commitment for over 10 years. His excuse was that he was "ill". However he wasn’t so "ill" that he could not establish and command an empire of sponsees, and control meetings and group consciences through a "steering committee". The man was a fraud. It would have been better for him, and for AA as a whole,  had he washed up a few cups at the end of a meeting, rather than play at being God in other people's lives. So, as I said earlier, let these deluded and self-appointed avatars of "God's will", do some other less harmful and truly more humble service if they want to practice Step 12.

It is vitally important to expose the abusive behaviour of individuals such as those mentioned above, and others like them. We must have more stories of victims of sponsorship and cult abuse within AA. These must be sensitively publicized as much as possible, with of course, the approval of the victims.  We must enlist the help of as many allies and professionals as possible, and get them on our side.

10 years ago there was nothing about the abuse taking place daily within AA. Now there are websites, magazine articles, and forums. I feel optimistic that history is on our side and this problem will be eradicated one day. But, like the 12 step Program itself, we must keep working at it !”

And check this out:

http://www.thefix.com/content/sponsorship-levels6010

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS For new aacultwatch forum see here. Have your say!

Pyramid sponsorship

An extract from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“'Pyramid sponsorship' is simply a way of describing the way in which the cult groups operate their so-called “group consciences” or “steering committees”.  These groups are based on a hierarchy of sponsors with the local guru at the top, and then a descending “cascade” of his sponsees who in turn have their own sponsees and so on with  newcomers forming the base of the structure (by the way it is not unusual for a cult sponsor to have sponsees in double figures). Furthermore based on the central cult principle of “do exactly what your sponsor says” this means that when it comes to conscience meetings the group is run essentially by the guru (or perhaps a very small clique of sponsors) with any decisions made finally by them and then simply rubber-stamped by their “clones”. In this way the Joys of Recovery was effectively controlled by David B and his inner circle, the Road to Recovery in Plymouth by Wayne P and his little gang (that is before his fall from grace) and so on. Similarly the cult tactic of encouraging people to have two or more home groups means that this “pyramid” or “cascade” system can run across a number of groups e.g. some members of the Strood cult group (West Kent) also name the Tankerton group (cult – East Kent) as their home group.  By these means the cult have developed a network (and hierarchy) of groups not only in Kent and London but right across the country.  These groups also spread when dissent occurs within their ranks  (which happens quite frequently).  Control freaks can't really abide each others' company for too long and eventually there is a “break out” and the formation of “splinter groups” (these sometimes being more extreme than the original), and each with their own respective gurus.  This certainly happened with the Joys of Recovery (London), Eaton Square (London), Strood (West Kent) and so on.  (I even heard with the Tankerton cult group that a guy was refused sponsorship because he smoked (ie. ordinary cigarettes – not “wacky baccy”) and this rendered him “unsponsorable”).  After David B bit the dust David “The Icon” C (a sponsee) took over the helm and carried on with the system.  The whole thing is “rationalised” under the guise of “trusted leadership” which is supposed to ensure that the group is “guided” by its wiser, more experienced and “trusted” heads.  In fact there is little to be found here that falls under any of these categories and certainly even less that might be be trusted (witness again Wayne P in Plymouth, David B (Joys), David C (Joys), Mark M (Strood),  Tooting Dave (Tankerton), Blonde Dave (ex- of Kearsney – East Kent)  all of whom have been caught out lying to or misleading their groups, or whose private life is (how shall I put it?) is seriously at odds with their public “image”; their “walk” rarely if ever matches their “talk”.  A more alarming characteristic of this particular system is the practice of discussing a sponsee's Step Five within the hierarchy.  So for example it is by no means uncommon for someone's very private disclosures to be subsequently circulated within the “cascade” (again under the guise of seeking wiser counsel) and not necessarily with their full consent  (such sponsors as these hardly fall within the category of a “close-mouthed acquaintance” – as it's put in the Big Book).  A friend of mine (who used to be a cult member) even reported that his sponsor attempted to blackmail him by threatening to disclose some of the events he had revealed in his Step Five.  My friend was made of somewhat sturdier stuff perhaps than the average newcomer and told him to f*** off! Be warned!”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

Ealing: Insights into some of the cult 'personalities'

“There are actually 2 brands or strains of the cult here. One is led by a man called Patrick who is sponsored by a Scottish old timer called Don who was a sponsee of David B and attended the Joys of Recovery in the old days before Vision[s] was established. The groups Patrick influences are much more toned down. They preach the 6 [suggestions] things and 14 defects version of step 4 etc, but it is not as "cult like" as the Vision[s]. However having said that, Patrick is getting worse and more extreme. He is mesmerized by Dennis and has swallowed the yarn about AA being less successful than it was because of the mainstream of AA adopting treatment centre ideas and not doing the steps properly.”

“Then we have our "Happy Dennis", who is, I think, still sponsored by David [Icons] C. His groups are off the Richter scale in happy talk. People are expected to jump up and down for joy after they say the serenity prayer. Also the last time I attended one of his groups, on Saturday morning at Bayham Road, Dennis was sharing that he was "supercalifragilisticexpialidociously happy" (!!!!) He also "jumps" every time he speaks to you, to show you how happy he is. From a distance it looks like he has a permanent bad case of hiccoughs. (!!!!)

Finally to Denis' execrable sponsor - the Icon. You mentioned his so-called "way of beauty" (a fascist concept if ever there was) . Have you seen his TV series [web show] ?? ...

He rubbishes modern art in a most ignorant way. And in the program about the art of other cultures he successfully insults Buddhism and Hindu art saying that he wouldn't have it in his house or even his garden, but would (mercifully!!) stop short or smashing it with a hammer!! Wow, how good of him! You really couldn't make up this level of arrogance. It reflects everything ….. regarding his prejudice against "eastern" art and philosophy and his obsession with extreme Catholicism. So sad he also pushes this puke-inducing garbage into the domain of AA !!”

An Ealing cult meeting:

“There were about 30 people present. On each chair there was a copy of a little yellow booklet (A6 size) of about 28 pages entitled " BIG BOOK QUOTES" and containing selected quotations from the Big Book taken from every chapter of the first 164 pages (main text) plus a few pages from the stories section of the book.....

 

The format of the meeting was that a passage from the Big Book was read out (on this occasion it was a few pages from Bill's Story) However I did notice that at least half of the meeting (which largely consisted of young men in their early days/years), were looking at and reading from the yellow BIG BOOK QUOTES rather than from a copy of our AA Big Book.

After the passage was read out, they were instructed by Dennis (aka "happy Dennis" or "Mad Dennis" depending on your perspective) to share according to his numbered selected quotes from his compilation of BIG BOOK QUOTES. This was to be their reference for sharing in the meeting. The format is explained in the little yellow booklet. The yellow book of course has been compiled and concocted by Mad Dennis himself. …..... And on the back cover, the website of our modern-and-pagan-art-iconoclast extreme Catholic friend David C........, …..... is advertised - apparently "we" find it a very good website to look at!! Who "we" are is not fully explained.

In addition to the yellow book of quotations there was a PINK CARD [Ealing cult meeting list] on the literature table. The literature table was not very well supplied with the full range of AA literature by the way.”

“Dennis F is a VERY self-willed and somewhat childish, yet charismatic individual. He uses very flamboyant and exaggerated language. He says things like "I'm very very very very very very happy... and I'm even more happy than that" etc. Then he giggles in a childish way. Ken Dodd is a good comparison, but not so benign. Dennis has no humility whatsoever. For him, humility is just a morning pose (kneeling posture) and then he gets up and dedicates himself to control and domination ...”

“The best comparison I can make about Dennis is he talks fast like someone hypermanic. He is always "happy" but I would call it mania more than happiness. It isn’t a sober happy anyway. He is an attention seeker and a control freak and has been since day one. His idea of humility is that you get on your knees - in other words humility is a pose or a posture not a modus operandi or an attitude. He giggles childishly and makes up doggerel "poetry" about being happy etc. He constantly misquotes the literature to suit his own ends. He is overbearing and domineering. He is a narcissist - he wants everyone to agree with him and to be a reflection of himself. In other words he is a typical cult guru with a personality disorder.......”

Comment: It's nice to know that AA is in such safe and SANE hands!

Cheerio

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS We have received some complaints about the Monday Step 3 7 and 11 meeting held at Richmond Bridge at 6.15pm (?)

The Four Absolutes

Extract:

“I have no doubt that David C was the author of the sexual conduct section, and the recommended reading list, and indeed much of the rest of the document as well. It is in his distinctive cold mechanical style and has his "spiritual fingerprints" all over it. The entire document is called "Companion to the Big Book" and was given to me some years ago now by a young woman who was greatly distressed at having been given this document at the Kingston Hill meeting ( now Hampton Wick [Friday]). She shared at my home group and was in tears about it. I asked her to give me the document, which she did the following week. The entire document runs into nearly 60 pages, only 2 of which I scanned and posted to you. This young lady, who has since left AA, told me that John B was most annoyed at her when she threatened to send it to GSO in York. …..... Until I saw your website I really didn’t pay all that much attention to the document, I read through it briefly …..... and then put it away. It was sitting on my book shelf largely ignored for years!

Here is a quote from the AA beginners website discussing Step 12, It is also found word for word in the document "Companion to the Big Book"

“We have also come across other ways of testing whether our behaviour is right. Perhaps they might be helpful to you: If we are faced with a choice, it is often easier to say what is not God's will. For example, it cannot be God's will that we do anything dishonest, impure, selfish or unloving (these were the guides used by a lot of the early AAs).”

Now this idea is taken from a book by Wally P called Back to Basics........ It was supposedly the practice of the early Oxford Group members to "discern" the "will of God" by applying the Four Absolutes to any idea or inspiration one had "received" during morning meditation and "quiet time"

[Note: the Four Absolutes themselves are supposedly derived from a book by Dr R Speer: “The Principles of Jesus”. The Four Absolutes. See also: What did A.A. learn from the Oxford Group and why did they leave them?]

Of course, all this stuff about what the Oxford Group did, and applying the Four Absolutes etc, arrogantly assumes that you believe in the same Higher Power - the same God - as Bill W and the founders; and indeed the same God as David C and his collaborator. Unfortunately for them I don't. I have a Higher Power of my own understanding who doesn't send cryptic messages via "quiet time" which need to be tested by applying Four Absolutes, and then have to be further endorsed and verified by an approved sponsor …...... Real awkward customer I am!”

(our edits)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS Our usual thanks to this contributor