General Category > Family and Friends of FDR members

DeFOOed Brother

(1/3) > >>

DeFOOed Brother:
My brother was my best friend for a long time and now I don't even know him anymore. I found out he is deeply into FDR. The last email communication I had with him was just bizarre. I don't know who he is anymore.

He chewed out our mother over the phone and told her not to attempt to contact him because he would just ignore it. She admitted to me several times that she made mistakes as a mother and has regrets. If he had given her a chance to get past feeling hurt, he might have given her a chance to apologize, but as Stef says, forgiveness is impossible.

He also told her that our older sister was a horrible mother, which is TOTALLY insane! He told me that my girlfriend's daughter was having trouble because of bad parenting. He lived in the same house prior to saying that. I tore him a new asshole for that comment. Needless to say, I disagree with him.

Funny he never made a comment (at least that got to me anyway) about our father who has made a lot more mistakes that our mother. It makes me wonder if not directly implicating the men in our family, as opposed to directly implicating the women, is at all connected to his new attitude toward feminists, or as Stef refers to them, socialists with panties.

By the way, you can look up that video. He explains how "The grand majority of feminists are socialists with panties." If you contradict him, he will make sure to point out that he said not all of them are, just the grand majority. When you listen to him recite quotes from feminists, he gives examples of women who (appear in the quotes given) to be anti-family without a hint of socialism. I guess what he is suggesting is that socialists are anti-family. But if that's the case, Stephan himself would be a socialist... in denial. I happen to be a socialist myself and I can tell you, I am not at all anti-family. Pardon me that I cut him short but I couldn't stomach any more of that nastiness.

I think I went on a rant. Sorry for not being more cohesive and deliberate. I find the whole experience so bizarre and non-sensical. I'm angry, I'm confused, I'm sad and depressed, frustrated, and somewhat sympathetic. I'll end it there. If anyone wants to talk, I'll be back eventually. I'll not much of an Internet hound.

Damn, John. I am really sorry that you and your family got dragged into this hell.  :-[

I really hope that your brother snaps out of it sooner than later. The fact that your mother is willing to own up to some of the hurt, and that you mention feeling compassion, I think will work for you, as I'm sure your brother knows deep down that you're not the uncaring, rigid people he's been convinced you are. 

You and your family members might find some understanding and help from Steven Hassan's book, Freedom of Mind. I wish I could offer more advice or help. Again, best of luck with your brother.

eternal bias:
I think you need some context to understand your brother's current change of heart.  Molyneux has a specific set of beliefs that he has most likely influenced your brother into believing.  These would account for his recent actions, I'll try to go over them here.

--- Quote ---he chewed out our mother over the phone and told her not to attempt to contact him
--- End quote ---

Molyneux teaches that parents are abusive and sadistic for enforcing rules on their children.  Anything that goes wrong in a child's life is the parents fault and the parent is therefore 100% liable.  This doesn't apply only to physical assault (hitting a child for instance) or sexual assault.  This applies to literally every thing that a parent has done in the past ever.  Every action, no matter what, can be criticized and deconstructed to make a parent look like the devil.

Did your parent buy your candy?  Then they were trying to make you unhealthy because it gave them a sadistic pleasure to ruin your body.  Did they refuse to buy you candy?  Then they were abusing you by not letting you enjoy yourself in life.  Either way your parents are evil.

--- Quote ---She admitted to me several times that she made mistakes as a mother and has regrets.
--- End quote ---

According to Molyneux any admission of past mistakes by a parent CAN be accepted.  However this will only be the case if the parent continues down this road and accepts all of Molyneux's philosophy and parenting beliefs.  If the parent fails to do this  or tries to critically analyze Molyneux's beliefs then they are still viewed as abusive and evil.  In addition any sort of admission of guilt can also be interpreted as a manipulation tactic used by parents to extract sympathy or empathy from their offspring.  In such a case these parents are toxic and must be abandoned immediately. 

--- Quote ---I tore him a new asshole for that comment.
--- End quote ---

This will be interpreted by Molyneux as a "viscous toxic assault by the false self of your brother"
It will also be resounding irrefutable proof that not only do you not love your brother you have in fact always hated him and used him for your own sadistic pleasures, torturing him either physically, mentally or emotionally.

For reference the false self is a construction based on the idea that all people are innately good.  This innate good is called the "true self"  However because people live in a bad environment they must construct a tough, cruel, "false self" in order to survive.  This false self in inherently self destructive, evil, illogical, etc, while the true self is kind, logical, and pure.  To attain true happiness Molyneux believes we must cleanse ourselves of the evil "false self" so that the innate "True self" can once more take over our minds.  THe "true self" is existent in all young children however as they grow older they construct this "false self".  As such Molyneux worships children and childhood because they are they only true good people on earth (besides himself)

--- Quote ---feminists, or as Stef refers to them, socialists with panties.
--- End quote ---

Stef hates feminists mainly because they support a state.  Molyneux is an "anarcho-capitalist" meaning he desires a political order where there is no government, but money and property rights still exist.  Most feminists, except the anarchist ones of course, need the state to correct their perceived wrongs of sexism, the glass ceiling, abortion, etc

[baseless speculation]
Any general dislike for women Stef may have might be driven by his mother.  According to Stefan he was frequently physically and verbally abused by his mother.  However on this forum it has been proposed that it's possible he never was abused and that he is merely making this up.  Safe to say he does blame all his problems in his life on one woman, his mother, and may by extension have a grudge against all women
[/baseless speculation]

--- Quote ---I find the whole experience so bizarre and non-sensical.
--- End quote ---

From the outside of the cult Molyneux's view may appear odd, but from inside the cult he is viewed as the pinnacle of rationality and the ideal towards which all humanity should strive.  It is possible, that your brother has "drank the koolaid" at this point and believes Molyneux's philosophy is the one true correct philosophy.  At this point he possibly has the same fervent belief in "UPB"(universally preferable behavior, Molyneux's objective secular proof of ethics) as any religious fundamentalist.

If so he could be entirely absorbed into the Freedomain Radio belief system.  However I think this is unlikely.  Freedomain Radio has a high turn over rate.  Many people, except a handful of true believers, realize that Molyneux is speaking gibberish, and promptly abandon his website and philosophy. 

DeFOOed Brother:
Thanks guys. It's been a couple of years now since he deFOOed. I read every word you both wrote. Thanks for the insight. It brings clarity to the issue. Really.

I'm curious, has anybody heard from Stephan or Christina's parents or other family?

Great post, eternal bias!

johnbeal, we have only heard from an ex of Christina so far.

As far as what Stef said...

Yeah, he does blame his mother for loads of things, and rarely talks about his deadbeat father. In one podcast, Stef spoke nostalgically about his father, going against his own warning that nostalgia is a trap.

Saying that feminists are largely pro-state is no more remarkable than saying that any other group of people is largely pro-state. Simply because the majority of everyone are pro-state. Anarcha-feminism is alive and well. Stef clearly doesn't talk about that. He has no good reason to bash feminists.

Stef also conflates socialism with statism. I'll bet that no one had any idea, nor have they bothered to check. Just look at Wikipedia:

--- Quote ---Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[1] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]
--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---I tore him a new asshole for that comment.
--- End quote ---

Some advice: However angry you were, that was a really bad idea. Violence is never the answer.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version