Continuing conversations with Anne Peterson, where is the exit? 

What a great conversation! I love how Anne gets that the person themselves is creating their experience and dopamine hit and NOT Landmark. Thanks, Dale and Anne!

Welcome to the hotel California, you can checkout but you can never leave…

19:55 wow not sure I’m ready to hear the co dependant convo yet! Most I’ve heard you share about your personal life Anne

There's an awesome scene in Succession (Season 2 or 3) where Logan the narcissistic patriarch talks about how he will install a figurehead and run everything from behind the scenes. I couldn't help thinking about Werner.

@31:17 I love this story, Dale 😂 That the word is worse than "@$$hole," plays out in the fact that you repeatedly say "@$$hole," outright, but spell out the other. 🤣

@9:32 100% Not only did they break those policies, but they depended on my recruiter to make her own, unqualified observations about my mental state, and report back to staff and seminar leaders, etc. She was not qualified to report about my mental state. She could only report her PERCEPTION of my mental state, and she did not have my consent, even for that. Not only was she grossly unqualified, but she and i had no therapist/client relationship, (we couldn't have, as she was not a mental health professional). I laid into her verbally, over the phone one day, and she said, "They told me that anything i say to you will just feed into it, and make it worse..." Who were "they"? Who was she consulting about me behind my back? What were their qualifications? In reality, it doesn't matter, because i had no therapeutic relationship with "them," either, and had not given my consent to any evaluation or "treatment," by them. On top of that, even if they had some degree in psychology, they were making assessments based on whatever she reported to them, and the woman really wasn't all that bright to begin with. They also publicly advised us, over and over, to follow the advice of our doctors and therapists. I had my own therapist, at the time. She and i had agreed that it was best if i ended my participation in Landmark, but that it was okay if i finished my assisting agreement, and the seminar that i was in at the time. I spoke about this to the assistant seminar leader, and his response was to advise me to ignore the advice of my therapist, and try to enroll me into the next seminar. The whole thing has "malpractice" written all over it.

@52:57 "To produce a result, you have to foment a crisis." Yes, i believe that that's what they were trying to do to me, but i did not consent to that. And in fact, that's a pretty well-known element of mind control. Margaret Singer, among others, wrote about that. In my case, it seemed that one of the tactics that they used pretty much constituted "flooding," which is something that even a licensed therapist would not do, without signed, informed consent. As an acquaintace of mine put it, "Landmark can no more use that technology legitimately than they can legitimately perform a tonsillectomy." These people are not mental health professionals - as stated in the waiver form that they had us all sign. From their consent form: "7. ... It is not therapeutic in design, intent or methodology and is not to be used as a substitute for medical treatment, psychotherapy or health program of any nature, regardless of what you may believe or have heard from anyone. We advise you that the Program Leaders, staff and people who assist at the Program are not mental health professionals and there will not be any mental health professionals in attendance." One would assume, from reading this, that they would not use any technology that would only be used by a mental health professional after careful evaluation and in a carefully controlled setting. Flooding would fit into that category. Under these circumstances, the signing of this waiver seems, to me, to be more a NEGATION of consent (for such "treatment") than it is consent, because you will have signed a form that says that they are not qualified therapists, and would assume that they WON'T do these things.

I'm sure that Anne. Brian, and anyone else who has recently left Landmark, or any high-control group, must have a lot of cognitive dissonance to unravel. Even someone exiting an abusive relationship has to deal with that. This is NOT a criticism of Anne, Brian, or anyone else. My heart goes out to everyone dealing with this. I can see their heartbreak, and also their hopefulness that it can be "fixed." I left Landmark in the Autumn of 2009, but i STILL catch myself remembering the good times with my recruiter, and missing that, though i have not spoken to her in 14 years. The organization involves PEOPLE, and people are not black and white. Like a wife who has left, (or needs to leave) an abuser, when i long for the good times, i have to remind myself of the worst things they did, and ask myself if there's any way back from that. Is there any way that i could ever trust that person again? I have to look at the actual damage they've done, and weigh whether or not it is worth the risk. For me, the answer is "No." [Edit] I'm not trying to exclude you, Dale. I'm under the impression that you might have been out a little longer. I'm sure it was painful. I just get the impression that you are standing on some pretty solid ground, right now. ❤ Things still seem to be shifting a lot for Anne and Brian. It takes time to settle.