Author Topic: Vance Woodward’s Book Addicted to Scientology Is An Amazing High  (Read 2062 times)

Offline mefree

  • High Value Target
  • Posts: 4,369
This is a very interesting read.

Vance Woodward’s Book Addicted to Scientology Is An Amazing High - The Underground Bunker (blog)
By Tony Ortega

How does yet another self-published book revealing the “secrets” of Scientology stand out with so many others appearing in the last few years?

Well, we guarantee you haven’t read one like this.

Vance Woodward is a Bay Area lawyer who fell into Scientology at only 14, spent 22 years struggling through the church’s auditing, and handed over about $600,000 along the way.

And now, he’s gone deep into his own personal story in order to give the rest of us one of the most entertaining and penetrating descriptions of what it’s like to fall under L. Ron Hubbard’s spell in Addicted to Scientology: Overcoming the Ups & Downs of Scientoloholism....

.....After finishing his book, we sent Woodward some questions and then talked to him on the phone. Here’s how our e-mail exchange went…

You describe so many problems advancing up the Bridge and getting training — and in general we do hear complaints that this is a widespread issue as the focus has shifted to donations for things like IAS and library campaigns. Auditors are just not being created like they once were, we hear all the time. But on the other hand, there are stories like Brian Culkin’s. In only a year (2009-2010), he went Clear, and did quite a bit of training (and also got drained of $350,000). So the question is, do you have any sense for how typical your experience was, and how many others are having a hard time getting up the Bridge?

I’d say my experience is pretty typical in terms of Bridge progress over time…but atypical in terms of Bridge progress per dollar spent. I mean, most Scientologists don’t go up the Bridge, period. Most Scientologists aren’t particularly into studying Scientology. And most Scientologists are broke…or profess to be so. So those things all go together intuitively.

That said, most well-heeled Scientologists — say, dentists or whatever — do tend to make it up to the OT levels if they stick around long enough. Basically, everybody has a very difficult time getting up the Bridge, but nobody talks about the difficulties. So, when you look at others who have made it to Clear or beyond, it always just sort of seems like they must have had an easy time of it…even though with a little reflection one has to assume such was not the case. When you’re inside, it’s tough to gauge anything based on what people say because everything always has a positive spin on it. It would — no joke — be out-ethics to say anything that would discourage others from trying to go up the Bridge. Certainly, talking about difficulties or giving the impression that it’s difficult to get up the Bridge would be good for a trip to the Ethics Officer.

Anyhow, from 1989 to 2007, I’d say my progress was typical: on and off, redoing stuff, getting mostly nowhere in terms of Bridge progress. But, certainly in the 2007-2010 period, I was way beyond anybody else in SF as far as I know in terms of amount of auditing received and in terms of donating to the IAS (in SF).

In the case of Brian Culkin, it’s probably easier for a brand-new Scientologist to just fly up the Bridge. Once you’ve been in for a while and have rolled up some Ethics trouble and auditing upsets, they seem to keep coming back over and over to haunt one. Old timers spend a lot of time just being upset about having to have their upsets handled, which upsets them, which needs to be handled, which…It’s like a sick relationship that way.

I have another theory…even more speculative. Very social, normal people have an easier time going up the Bridge, period. You can think of going up the Bridge as more of a filtering process than a road of improvement. Culkin seems pretty social/normal/empathic. I’ve grown to suspect that I’m an aspy, or at least I’m like an aspy in many ways. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that aspies and autistics in general might react differently on the e-meter…uh-oh. Either way, they’re different from normal people, which will indeed cause trouble in auditing, especially when you consider that auditing benefits depend on open communication between the PC and auditor…not an aspy strong suit.

more at
The ultimate authority must always rest with the individual's own reason and critical analysis.
-Dalai Lama