Love bombing, is it a legit way to carry out the ministry of reconciliation?

[Rocky]

We who were young in the 1970s and 1980s in TWI know what love bombing is, don't we?

We know/knew it as a sales technique for a religious multi-level marketing enterprise. But with the advent of the #MeToo movement, observant scholars and essayists started recognizing it as an insidious scheme to win the loyalty and affection of the object of one's sexual attraction.

“Love bombing, unlike real love, is a self-centered, anxious pursuit, with the singular goal of acquiring someone because it boosts the bomber’s ego,” Craig Malkin, clinical psychologist and author of Rethinking Narcissism, told HuffPost. “It’s not about care or compassion or tenderness..."

Quote

Love bombing is a form of manipulation, which narcissists and other toxic people often use. It involves using extravagant gestures and displays of affection very early in the relationship to gain power and control. 

“Things like saying, ‘I think I might be falling in love with you,’ or ‘I want to take you to Paris this weekend’ or ‘Here’s a $200 bottle of perfume’ on the first date,” Virginia Gilbert, a marriage and family therapist who specializes in high-conflict divorce, told HuffPost. “The gestures imply a level of commitment that’s out of proportion to the length of time two people have known each other.”

And make no mistake: there is nothing “loving” about these calculated acts. 

The term “love bombing” was reportedly coined in the 1970s by the controversial Unification Church of the United States. Cult leaders, like Jim Jones and David Koresh, used the tactic as way to control their followers. The psychology community later adopted the term as a way to describe a type of toxic, manipulative affection. (continued)

Edited March 17, 2018 by Rocky

[T-Bone]

Rocky, good article and that book looks interesting too...Your post brought to mind wierwille’s phrase of how we can “love the unloveable “ - which for me now looking back often meant do whatever it takes to get that person to sign up for the class... and if they’re not interested in taking PFAL then drop them like a hot potato....that’s where I draw the line on how much to love the unloveable  

 

ha ! “Love the unloveable “ seems like a rather silly naive notion to me now - if someone is truly unloveable then why am I focusing my “affections” on them? To have answered that question honestly back in the day might have been painfully revealing .

 

 I guess back then I was so naive and idealistic...and overly simplistic and shallow to think the cure-all for everyone is PFAL...as the pep talks often used to go for motivating us to get someone signed up for the class  - - sort of along the lines of “if you really care about someone you want to help them - and there’s nothing better than PFAL that can really help them.”

 

I agree with the article that “love bombing” is a way to manipulate someone - to get them to do what you want, like sign up for the class...it was NOT a genuine unselfish love - but rather self-serving...I could be a real azzhole to my family all day long but boy could I turn on the charm if there was a new person at fellowship! Maybe folks will see me getting them to sign up for the class !....What hypocrisy! 

Edited March 17, 2018 by T-Bone
Emoticon revision

[skyrider]

Love-bombing........to get you to twig.

Need to take pfal........before he/she could "date" you.

Must be corps.............before he/she would marry you.

[Twinky]

Quote

Love bombing, is it a legit way to carry out the ministry of reconciliation?

No.

Edited March 17, 2018 by Twinky

[waysider]

2 hours ago, skyrider said:

Love-bombing........to get you to twig.

Need to take pfal........before he/she could "date" you.

Must be corps.............before he/she would marry you.

I'll give this a bit of a twist... Dating someone to get them to take PFAL.

[chockfull]

“The gestures imply a level of commitment that’s out of proportion to the length of time two people have known each other.”

I think that sums up most of my relationships in the Way.  Forced hierarchies with forced friends and sick expectations.

[Grace Valerie Claire]

8 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Rocky, good article and that book looks interesting too...Your post brought to mind wierwille’s phrase of how we can “love the unloveable “ - which for me now looking back often meant do whatever it takes to get that person to sign up for the class... and if they’re not interested in taking PFAL then drop them like a hot potato....that’s where I draw the line on how much to love the unloveable  

 

ha ! “Love the unloveable “ seems like a rather silly naive notion to me now - if someone is truly unloveable then why am I focusing my “affections” on them? To have answered that question honestly back in the day might have been painfully revealing .

 

 I guess back then I was so naive and idealistic...and overly simplistic and shallow to think the cure-all for everyone is PFAL...as the pep talks often used to go for motivating us to get someone signed up for the class  - - sort of along the lines of “if you really care about someone you want to help them - and there’s nothing better than PFAL that can really help them.”

 

I agree with the article that “love bombing” is a way to manipulate someone - to get them to do what you want, like sign up for the class...it was NOT a genuine unselfish love - but rather self-serving...I could be a real azzhole to my family all day long but boy could I turn on the charm if there was a new person at fellowship! Maybe folks will see me getting them to sign up for the class !....What hypocrisy! 

T-Bone, bingo!!  In the Twigs I attended, we were told to do what worked, to sign people up for the class.  If you signed up a lot of people for "the class," you were a "hot believer."  If you didn't sign up a lot of people, for PFAL, you were considered a mediocre believer, and not taken very seriously.  Yes, now that I am out of that atmosphere, I see where many of us were hypocrites.  We could be azzholes in our private lives, but if we signed people up for "the class," we were great people, no matter what we did in our private lives.  Hypocrites and Dirt Bags, to say the least.

[spectrum49]

Not exactly on topic, but it relates:

While reading the posts here, I couldn't help thinking of an old friend named Molly Petch. (It was about '75 or so, when some of the believers were still "getting high".) She got lots of people to come to twig merely by asking them: "Hey --- wanna get high?" And even the twig leader didn't seem to mind that, supposing "the ends might justify the means": For who knows? --- Maybe they'll take THE CLASS! (LOL)

I do remember a particular incident though: She came with a couple of "hippies". When we were all seated (and ready to begin the fellowship) one of them pulled out a bag of pot and a pipe, etc. TOO FUNNY! (They left pretty quick when they found out Molly was only alluding to "getting high on the Word".) 

[penworks]

Short answer to Rocky's original question in my opinion is NO. Toxic manipulation called love bombing is not good ... understatement of the universe. 

[johniam]

I was never "love bombed". Just loved. First by God. Then by some of his people. btw You don't have to be in twi for someone to try to take advantage of you.

[Rocky]

1 hour ago, johniam said:

You don't have to be in twi for someone to try to take advantage of you.

Really?

[Grace Valerie Claire]

1 hour ago, johniam said:

I was never "love bombed". Just loved. First by God. Then by some of his people. btw You don't have to be in twi for someone to try to take advantage of you.

John, bingo!