Talk:Steven Hassan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rick Alan Ross (talk | contribs) at 13:30, 2 December 2023 (→‎Was Hassan thrown out of the "Moonies" or dramatically "deprogrammed"?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Cult scale" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Cult scale has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 20 § Cult scale until a consensus is reached. Pichpich (talk) 19:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

His positions on trans people

Can we add something about this? https://twitter.com/CultExpert/status/1279890726885695488 Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 02:43, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter is not a reliable source, nor is that blog website you tried to add. Since you're not a new editor here, I'm not sure why you've ignored the usual WP:RS and WP:OR. Perhaps WP:PODIUM is at play?   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have not been able to find digitally any reliable secondary sources reporting on his position on trans people, so at the moment it might be too soon to put here. --Jacquesparker0 (talk) 17:34, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

POV issues

Many recent edits to this article have added generalized anti-deprogramming and pro-NRM rhetoric that is not specific to this BLP subject. The purpose seems to frame the voice in this article by attributing another subject (e.g., anti-deprogramming) to this person. The particular over-reaching sections are "Deprogramming and exit counseling" and "Criticism". See WP:PODIUM.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 03:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is nonsense. All of the recently added material is derived from academic sources that are specifically referring to the article subject. I'll provide full quotes if you insist. Harold the Sheep (talk) 04:00, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like that so I can verify. You can send them to me by email, if you prefer.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 04:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deprogramming and exit counseling section

If this is specifically about the 2006 book by Anson Shupe and Susan Darnell (Agents of Discord), then I'll point out that that book makes a larger argument about the American anti-cult movement, of which Steven Hassan was/is a part (whether he agrees with the term or not). I don't have the book on hand so I am not able to verify the exact page numbers, but the book does address him at points.
That being said, the subsection for Deprogramming and exit counseling does have a bit of primary sourcing, which may constitute original research (WP:NOR). --Jacquesparker0 (talk) 17:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only primary sources in the Deprogramming and exit counseling section are Hassan's statement from his website and his book. The first refers to his own clearly stated anti-deprogramming views ("Never did I ever abduct, restrain, hit or threaten anybody. I did not and do not like the deprogramming method and stopped doing them in 1977! I have spoken out publicly against forcible deprogrammings since 1980. Read my two books...") and the second is a quote from the book in which he seems to put a caveat on that in certain circumstances. How is it original research to use Hassan's own published words to communicate his views on the subject?
Agents of Discord certainly makes a larger argument about the American anti-cult movement, but a number of sections in the book focus specifically on Hassan, partly because he is someone for whom the authors seem to have a qualified respect. In the cited section, however, they are drawing attention to the fact that certain of his claims are explicitly contradicted by affidavits from victims and indeed by his own account of one of his deprogrammings. One of the affidavits is quoted at length, as is Hassan's account of the same events. The book is to a significant extent a documented critique of the practice of deprogramming, and as such it could be described, like Hassan himself, as "anti-deprogramming". But a critical perspective on practices like abduction and detention, backed up with documents, analysis and reasoned arguments from academic sources, should not be dismissed as "anti-deprogramming and pro-NRM rhetoric". For one thing, the NRMs are not discussed, pro or contra, in any way in the book. The pages cited in this section (pp 149-152) are specifically about Steven Hassan, indeed the subtitle of the discussion is "Steven A. Hassan". Harold the Sheep (talk) 21:55, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
These are all fair points. I suppose I should have read more carefully what the article actually says, my bad. And I agree with your assessment of Agents of Discord. Certainly there is anti-deprogramming rhetoric and bias in the book, but that doesn't mean that everything in the book is wrong, invalid, and so on. Biased sources don't make the WP article biased necessarily. --Jacquesparker0 (talk) 21:13, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

(clarification: these 2 subsections have been started in response to Grorp's claim at the start of this section, that Many recent edits to this article have added generalized anti-deprogramming and pro-NRM rhetoric that is not specific to this BLP subject. The purpose seems to frame the voice in this article by attributing another subject (e.g., anti-deprogramming) to this person. The particular over-reaching sections are "Deprogramming and exit counseling" and "Criticism". The block quote also addresses Grorp's concern expressed below in his "Some notes" section about not being able to access this particular source.

Here is the passage from p. 401 of Violence and New Religious Movements used in the Criticism section. It is clearly specific to the article subject:

For another example, see the writings of Steven Hassan (1988, 1994), an ex-Unificationist who underwent coercive deprogramming and later became a bona fide degreed counselor and who describes himself as once a proponent and practitioner of the coercive type. Later Hassan publically repudiated the coercive variety and turned to a "gentler" form, which he calls "strategic intervention therapy," though he still maintains that the targeted groups are inherently "destructive." With Hassan's nonviolent intervention technique, however, one wonders how many members of NRMs would willingly enter into such "discussions" with the foreknowledge that the "counselor's" entire purpose is not to ascertain their religious sincerity or their full understanding of the extent of their spiritual decisions but rather is to convince them to abandon their faith. (Recall that the "counselor's" client is not the NRM member but rather someone else who hired the "counselor.")

Harold the Sheep (talk) 02:08, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some notes

(in no particular order)

  • I found a PDF of Introduction to New and Alternative Religions in America which includes the Gallagher and Bromley chapters. Don't know if it's okay to link to it in the article's citations or not. But here's the link (https://bahai-library.com/pdf/g/gallagher_ashcraft_new_religions.pdf) if anyone wants to verify content which cites this source. No page numbers available.
  • I cannot obtain page 401 of Shupe (google books won't cough it up). Harold the Sheep: Do you have an image/scan/photo of page 401?
  • I oppose the inclusion of so much Shupe information because Shupe is rabid pro-NRM and anti-ACM (anti-cult movement) that he can't think straight anymore. Shupe scoffs at the terms/ideas of "cults" and "brainwashing". As someone who has seen the effects of brainwashing by high-control groups (that Shupe has defended), and has read some of Shupe's apologism about such groups, I think Shupe is extremist. Shupe also hates Hassan and denigrates him personally, not just his techniques ("Shupe often calls Hassan a “professional ex-Moonie,” questioning the livelihood he has built around his past. “Way down deep, it’s like he’s been wrestling with a demon about his own involvement in the Moonies”. [1]) Remote diagnosing. And taking every opportunity to criticize.
  • The article quotes much by Bromley about why Hassan's approach is bad, but omits lines from the same source such as "The academics [Shupe & Bromley] turned to Hassan because they consider him to be perhaps the best in his business—and yet they remain critical of his approach." Such a line would help present better POV balance in the article.
I've added something along these lines. Harold the Sheep (talk) 03:35, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Harold the Sheep's "Criticism" section presents the viewpoints of 5 authors, however he emphasizes the authors' opinions of the field (of deprogramming and/or exit counseling); whereas those sources present just a mention of Hassan, much in the way of an example, perhaps because Hassan is one of the more visible/outspoken/published individuals in those fields.
  • The date of Cult Mind Control (1988) was omitted, yet following right on the heels of Langone's "Hassan's preferred approach", which is present tense, leaves the reader to think that it is Hassan's current viewpoint. Placement of these two matters side-by-side is SYNTH (also framing). I thought I read previously that those that continued in the field after the fall of CAN (Ross and Hassan?), either modified their methods with the dawn of the anti-anti-cult-movement, or were not one of the hardcore deprogrammers. Not sure which. But CAN has been gone now 27 years and yet this article's criticism speaks like these things are happening currently. One needs to put them in the context of their time (e.g. state the date).

I could probably dig (and say) more, but that's all the time I allocated to this project today.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 06:55, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use the talk page as a dumping ground for your "in no particular order" notes and opinions. Let's keep it in order and address issues one by one. Harold the Sheep (talk) 20:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Harold the Sheep: Dumping ground? I started this thread and you responded This is nonsense, so I went through and gave you some examples. And you say you want order but put your response above mine, contrary to best practices in WP:Talk page guidelines. Insulting other editors will get you nowhere fast. Try again.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

COI

@Harold the Sheep: Since you're the one who tagged the article as COI back in September, [2] please make some sort of note here on the talk page to elaborate (who, how much, which content, etc.).   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 06:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The user was Sh fom, who is mentioned at the top of the talk page. I'm guessing that the letters stand for Steven Hassan Freedom of Mind. Judging by their talk page and contributions this user both is and isn't Steven Hassan himself. I've removed the COI tag. Harold the Sheep (talk) 06:37, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, ok. I notice the mdl one on the COI list, too. Langone explains [3] that a paragraph was not accurate and tried to remove it, yet that content is still in the article. Can you look at that, please?   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That content is not still in the article, please get your facts straight before asking me to do your work for you, it's getting to be a habit. The edit you are talking about was made by someone claiming to be Langone back in 2020 and reverted 5 minutes later by an editor who pointed out that we don't know who they are but that if they are who they say then there is a COI. That content appears to have stayed in the article until I removed it a few weeks ago and replaced it with a more detailed and accurate summary of the source. Harold the Sheep (talk) 20:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Harold the Sheep: It is still in the article. I can research histories, too. I brought it up for discussion because if I tried to edit it out, you would just revert me (like you've done before). There is no reason NOT to believe the editor really was Langone. The content was originally added in 2017 by RexxS with this edit in response to a suggestion by Rick Alan Ross on this archived thread. It was removed by an IP editor saying they were Langone, reverted by Francis Schonken (now indef-blocked for disruption and edit warring), followed by the same paragraph removed by a newly-created account Mdl1946 saying they were Langone, followed by another revert by Francis Schonken—both times telling Langone to use the talk page (which as a new editor, why would they even know what that is).
Though the paragraph isn't word for word the same, the concept is still closely there.
The paragraph Langone twice tried to remove is this: In 1995, Michael Langone questioned Hassan's "humanistic counseling approach." Langone suggested that Hassan's intervention method "runs the risk of imposing clarity, however subtly" and "thereby manipulating the client." with the two edit summaries "I deleted the paragraph attributed to me, Michael Langone, because (a) the critique made 30 years ago is not valid today and (b) the summary of the critique was not accurate." and "I am MIchael Langone, the person quoted in this paragraph. I deleted the paragraph because (a) it is dated and no longer accurate and (b) the paragraph wasn't even an accurate summary of what I said 32 years ago.
Meanwhile, the current article says this: Michael Langone, an advocate for exit counseling, questions Hassan's humanistic counseling approach. According to Langone, Hassan's "Strategic Intervention Therapy" operates on the assumption that, deep down, all members of "mind control groups" want to get out of the group. In the context of family intervention, the "counselor knows best what the cultist really wants" approach contains the risk of the counselor "manipulating the cultist from point A ("I'll talk to you because my family requested it") to point B ("I want to leave the cult") while mistakenly believing that he is helping the cultist "grow"." [citation from 1995]
How is that not the same thing that Langone tried to remove because it was outdated and inaccurate?   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At a bare minimum, the information should have already been properly dated. If Langone said something in 1995, the article should have already clearly explain that he said it in 1995. The entire crit. section is sourced to old sources. While subtle, this is a BLP issue. Attribution requires context, and the age of a source does matter. Grayfell (talk) 03:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The book is "Recovery from Cults: help for victims of psychological and spiritual abuse" dated 1995.
See https://www.amazon.com/Recovery-Cults-Victims-Psychological-Spiritual/dp/0393313212 1995
Also see https://archive.org/details/recoveryfromcult00mich 1993
This would reflect a view of Hassan's approach through what he calls "Strategic Intervention Therapy.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Was Hassan thrown out of the "Moonies" or dramatically "deprogrammed"?

According to Steven Hassan's account of his departure from the Unification Church ("Moonies") he was "deserted," not quite so dramatically "deprogrammed."

In their book "Prison or Paradise: The New Religious Cults" (Fortress Press, Philadelphia 1980) authors James and Marcia Rudin relate the following account. "Steve is bitter when he remembers how quickly the church deserted him after his automobile accident. 'I deeply believed the group was a loving family that cared about its members. As soon as I was seriously injured and could no longer collect funds or recruit, The Family called my satanic real family. The Moonies couldn't get rid of me fast enough'" (page 38).

So this was not quite such a dramatic deprogramming as Hassan relates today. But rather after the church dumped him he was "bitter" and probably much more easily persuaded by former members that the church was bad.

Also, given this narrative it's hard to believe that Hassan was really a high ranking member, but rather simply a regular fund raiser and van driver. He hardly seems like a national leader working closely with Rev. Moon.

The book states, "Yet one midnight in the spring of 1976 the Family deserted Steve when he rammed his car into the back of a truck on the Baltimore Beltway after seventy-two continuous hours of fund raising" (page 38).

Hassan apparently was a regular member working long hours on a mobile fund raising team. A common job at that time within the Unification Church and not a lofty leadership position.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 13:27, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Steven_Hassan&oldid=1187948351"