In my last post, I considered why the conflicted experience of participating in a high control group leaves one in the dark about what is really going on. How is it that astute people miss what is happening right before their eyes? Hidden levers of influence are used, softly, gradually, to manipulate people. Cognitive dissonance arises and is resolved — most often through unconscious compliance with the group’s worldview.
​
Let’s examine a few more reasons the inner workings — and the nature — of a culty group may remain veiled.

Surprise Inside

High control groups promise to make a difference in the lives of their participants, and/or in the wider world. This is why they especially attract caring, idealistic people who are hungry for meaning and purpose.

Like most of us, such people tend to assume that others are like them (most people are). We assume people mean what they say (most often, people do). We give people the benefit of the doubt if something doesn’t add up. (Wouldn’t I want the other to do that for me?)

A sensitive, empathetic person will imagine others’ inner motives to be similar to our own, or to other people we know. It’s hard to perceive other possibilities, foreign to our own experience. Especially if everyone in the group lauds the person as special, enlightened, wise, the embodiment of love — whatever the persona of a particular cult’s leader happens to be.
​
Enter a leader from the Cookie-Cutter Messiah School. That’s what cult survivors sometimes call it tongue-in-cheek, upon discovering striking similarities among their different leaders (Take Back Your Time by Janja Lalich).
​

​The formal position of the leader varies — spiritual teacher, political leader, therapist, lover, esteemed pastor, college professor, workshop trainer, etc. — but he (or she) usually possesses these qualities:

• “a dramatic and convincing talent for self-expression”
• “an intuitive ability to sense their followers’ needs and draw them closer with seductive promises”
• an ideology with untestable claims that the leader indoctrinates his followers into (using the same, seemingly innocuous levers of influence noted in the previous post)
• “inescapable magnetism, winning style, and the self-assurance” to persuasively promote their chosen cause or worldview

Many (though not all) cult leaders are believed to have personality disorders — not that regular folks would be likely to discern that. On the contrary, “initially many persons with personality disorders appear quite normal. They present themselves to us as charming, interesting, even humble… their contact with reality appears solid” (neuropsychiatrist Richard Restak, quoted in TBYL).

​Trauma therapist Beth Matenaer describes narcissism, common in cult leaders, as characterized by “high need for control, admiration, and lack of maintainable empathy” (in TBYL). The narcissist tends toward paranoia, exploitation of others, grandiosity, lack of genuine concern for others’ needs, and charismatic allure.The narcissist wants attention and will weaponize it when they get it, along with using other forms of manipulation and coercion. They zero in on empathetic people and exploit them to meet their own needs.

Some cult leaders may further have antisocial personality disorder, which is viewed as a subgroup of narcissistic personality. (TBYL) The M.O. of a sociopath, as Robert Jay Lifton coined it, is manipulation from above, idealism from below.

​Other common characteristics of a sociopath include being captivating storytellers, appearing helpful and even ingratiating (while covertly domineering), presenting themselves as enlightened (but also the most humble), pathological lying, having shallow emotions, inability to give or receive love, engaging in thrill-seeking behaviors (publicly or privately) to stave off boredom, lacking personal boundaries or a sense of responsibility, and often scapegoating others.

Multiple marriages, sexual misconduct, and sexual control of followers are common for such a person. Their personal history is often erratic, involving many changes in location or occupation, and a parasitic lifestyle. They may have significant health problems and attribute them to “their so-called compassion in taking on their disciples’ karma” or their role in leading the group. (TBYL) (If “cash karma” is real — consequences rebound on one instantly, or within one’s lifetime — one might deduce, instead, that the leech’s own hurtful misbehavior is the actual root of their illness.)

If a cult leader doesn’t start out as a narcissist — and perhaps a sociopath — living in the authoritarian power seat for a while may well turn them into one. Cathleen Mann, cult expert and educator, commented in one interview on how this can happen:

“Something could be said for compensatory narcissism, which is narcissism that comes out of being put in a powerful position, for a long period of time. It causes you to become narcissistic… you learn the behavior and part of it is a function in order to survive in the system, but a lot of it is because they enjoy it.”
                                       ~ Cathleen Mann

Whatever the stated mission of a cult, its real purpose “is to serve the emotional, financial, sexual, and/or power needs of the leader.” (TBYL)
​

​I wager that most people are not going to recognize a narcissist, sociopath, or other charming con artist upon encountering them. Especially not if that person is already surrounded by admirers, who sing their praises and interpret all their behaviors in the most positive possible way. Once such a “trust bandit” has assembled his first cluster of followers, he can prey all the more easily on other kind souls. He will seem like a remarkable, intriguing figure.

Indeed, as Margaret Singer and Janja Lalich put it, “What you first see is not what’s inside” the cultic group. Instead, cults — and their enthralling leaders — are “reminiscent of a jack-in-the-box — a pretty, innocuous-looking container that, when opened, surprises you with a pop-out-figure,.. Similarly, surprising and frightening things pop out over the course of membership in a cult.” (Cults In Our Midst: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace)

Given all of the above, it must be a rare person indeed who can meet a cult leader in their element — and recognize the emptiness beneath the luminous exterior of these emotional vampires.

Need Trumps Logic

Humans are quite capable of deceiving ourselves when it helps to meet important needs. Psychologist Robert Cialdini tells the story of going to an intro lecture on Transcendental Meditation (TM), as part of his observational research into professional persuaders (Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, 2021 edition). He brought along a curious colleague who specialized in statistics and logic.

During the Q&A, the logic professor “pointed out precisely where and why the lecturers’ complex argument [for the uniqueness and boatload of diverse benefits] of TM was contradictory, illogical and unsupportable.” The facilitators sat in stunned silence before acknowledging that the points merited closer examination.

But what fascinated Cialdini was how the other attendees responded. “After what appeared to have been an embarrassingly clear collapse of [the] presentation, the meeting had somehow turned into a success,” with audience members making down payments on TM training at dramatically high rates.

​Cialdini and his colleague spoke with several such individuals, curious to understand their rationale. People had come with a variety of aims: to develop discipline to succeed in one’s profession, to overcome insomnia, to sleep less so one could study more and do better in school. (Yes, those last two are opposites.)

All had their hopes pinned on the solution that the presenters had offered them in TM. The logician’s counter-arguments were so compelling, one attendee admitted, that he did not want to give himself time to go home and mull on that before acting. If he didn’t commit now, he knew, logic would win over. Then he’d be stuck still lacking a way to resolve his problem.

Once people had invested in TM as the solution, it was easier to banish that pesky logic from memory and stay focused on their goals. Humans are more secure in our self-image when we perceive ourselves as sticking to our commitments and behaving in ways consistent with our own past action. Hence, eliciting a commitment, and inviting follow-through later, is an oft-used tactic by influencers.

High Stakes and Big Blinders

If a person can so easily delude themselves simply for an as-yet-unrealized hope, one might surmise that blindness to the truth is even more common when the stakes are high. And for social creatures like humans, who need one another to develop and to survive, the stakes are never higher than in our most important relationships.
​
Consider betrayal blindness. Psychologists and researchers Jennifer Freyd and Pamela Birrell write about this subject, with examples as wide-ranging as children abused by parents or other adults on whom they are dependent, cheated-upon spouses who are the last to see it, date rape victims, and sexual abuse in the Catholic Church (Blind to Betrayal: Why We Fool Ourselves We Aren’t Being Fooled). Betrayal blindness is the term they coined to describe the “observable, ubiquitous psychological phenomenon” of “systematically not seeing important instances of treachery and injustice.”
​

​Betrayal blindness is most likely to come into play when someone must rely on others for their survival or well-being. This dependence may be emotional and/or financial. For children, it involves their most essential attachment bonds to caregivers. In the case of a high control group, it may involve the entire worldview on which the person has built their life.
​
Always, there is broken trust. That is the root of the betrayal — someone who was supposed to care about me and support me instead used me.
“Betrayal blindness is almost always a survival strategy,” explain Freyd and Birrell.

Betrayal blindness allows the victim to maintain the status quo, and continue to meet the needs that this relationship is meeting. A housewife caring for small children, lacking her own income, is dependent on the husband to provide for them all — incentive to “forgive and forget” his belitting behaviors (or worse), or not see the signs of infidelity. And what choice does a child have if a parent is the abuser — or doesn’t believe them about another’s abuse? Even bystanders may favor unawareness, so they don’t have to take action or risk their own status and comfort.
​
A variety of cognitive, emotional, and social processes can play a role in keeping a person blind to betrayal by one they trusted — someone they should have been able to trust. The information is there the whole time, and bits and pieces may be accessible in memory in isolation, minus accurate interpretation. Sometimes awareness may come and go in flashes, especially with a family member or other close relation — this is called rotating betrayal blindness. But the person will not connect the dots, look directly at the whole picture, and remain consistently aware of the truth.

The repertoire of ways people remain in the dark includes:

• forgetting events or details (the hippocampus, which is key to the formation of memories, has been found to be shrunken in many trauma survivors)
• compartmentalizing or isolation of knowledge, which occurs more frequently when betrayal is by someone we are close to
• suppressing “odd” or “weird” feelings that arise when confronted with evidence of betrayal

• cognitive dissociation that helps keep threatening information out of awareness
• use of distraction or divided attention to keep dangerous knowledge from seeping into consciousness (hmmm… spiritual practices could be used this way — focus the mind somewhere else)
• development of alexithymia; that’s the “inability to know or state one’s own emotional feelings and experiences,” which is correlated with childhood abuse
• pressures from other people to remain ignorant and quiet
• avoiding putting one’s experiences into words — which makes them more concrete and inescapable — whereas unverbalized knowledge is more amorphous
• groupthink and self-censorship

That’s a long and sophisticated list of ways to obscure the truth from oneself.

Facing the Truth

Aside from practical concerns of emotional, financial, and spiritual dependence upon those who have betrayed one — and the need to secure other ways to meet those needs if not through the betrayer — facing a betrayal requires enormous personal strength.

For the knowledge of betrayal brings with it many other challenges:

• a sense of free fall as one’s overall sense of the solidity and safety of the world dissolves

• a loss of trust not only in the particular individual who betrayed one, but in any bystanders or institutions who looked the other way (sadly, institutional collusion in betrayal is both common and particularly toxic)
• the risk of being disbelieved or blamed upon disclosure — which constitutes an additional betrayal, often experienced as even more painful than the original betrayal
• an intensification of mental and physical health symptoms, if a supportive response is not forthcoming

Is it any wonder that victims do not always recognize or confront ill treatment? Freyd and Birrell report, “Numerous studies have discovered that nondisclosure, recanting, and delayed disclosure are common reactions to sexual assault.” The sad fact is that disclosure can make things worse for the victim.

(The researchers also speculate that differences in mental health symptoms between men and women — women suffer disproportionately from depression, anxiety, and PTSD — may trace, at least in part, to women’s higher rate of exposure to betrayal traumas like incest, domestic violence and rape. Betrayal trauma is also associated with chronic health problems and physical illness symptoms.)

As I consider my old meditation group — having recently read/heard disclosures of sexual and spiritual abuse by the founder that I absolutely believe to be true — I feel deep anger and enormous sadness at the scale of betrayal. Most of all, for the teens and young women who were used by the founder — and if they had the strength to confront it, were subsequently disbelieved by members of the community. Even their own family members.
​

​At my best, I can also muster compassion for others in the community, who froze because they were unable (or unwilling, but let’s say unable) to metabolize the life-shattering new knowledge of their beloved teacher, to whom they had devoted their lives.
​
As long as victims/survivors are still alive, there is still the possibility of offering the healing balm of witness, belief, apology, reconciliation. Indeed, disclosure followed by “respectful reception is so healing” (BtB). If the remaining adherents are going to continue the organization’s work, there are new people who deserve the whole truth, too.

It’s not too late for former bystanders, for the institution, to make different choices. Those who continue to affiliate with the ashram still have open to them a positive pathway forward: seeking support, grappling with these harsh truths, reconciling with victims and all those deceived, and in the process healing themselves as well.

As Desmond Tutu said, writing on the Truth and Reconciliation process in South Africa (quoted in BtB, as all in this section):

“If we do not deal with the past it will haunt and may indeed jeopardise the future.” ~ Desmond Tutu

I mention support because, to face difficult truths, the leaders and members of my old group must be willing to go through their own free fall experience. Do they have it in them? Will they choose to try?

Perhaps this advice from psychologist Belle Liang could help, on learning “to notice when I’m having a long argument with someone else in my head. That’s a data point … I know that I need to pay attention to how I’m silencing myself in the relationship and move toward unsilencing” (emphasis mine).

​It is my hope that those in the ashram community who may have long been silencing themselves will pay attention to that — and start having those crucial dialogues with each other, out loud.

Outright Deception

A few words about outright deception, which can also play a role in high control groups — as I now believe it has in my former group.

The leader(s) of such a group may carefully manage their own image, or they may have consummate professionals who manage it for them — from clothes, sets, photos and videos, smiling followers, articles and books that tell the story of the leader(s) just so… to omitting inconvenient truths about the founder or group (how many marriages did he have? under what circumstances did he leave X institution? what happened in those years you glossed over?)… to outright lies (did he really complete that prestigious program?).

These facts, too, could be sought and freely acknowledged. It’s never too late to set the record straight.

Embracing Truth

Truth is a universal moral and spiritual value. I conclude here with some quotes that speak to me of the guiding light of Truth.
​
Make me always ready to come to you
with clean hands and straight eyes,
So when life fades as the fading sunset,
my spirit may come to you without shame…
Let me remember always that you give the gift of a new day.
Never let me be burdened with sorrow by not starting over.
~ Native American tradition

The Self desires only what is real, thinks nothing
but what is true. Here people do what they are told,
becoming dependent on their country, or their piece of land,
or the desires of another, so their desires are not fulfilled
and their works come to nothing, both in this world and in the next.
~ The City of Brahman

What is meant by wholehearted devotion to God alone?
It means that in every act, public and private,
the aim and purpose should be purely work for God’s sake,
to please him only, without winning the approval
of other people.
~ Rabbi Bahya ibn Pakuda

In your word, speak the truth.
In the world, seek peace.
In personal affairs, do what is right.
~ Tao te Ching

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”
~ John 8:32 of the Christian Bible

Thanks for reading. You can subscribe to get every new post sent directly to your inbox.

Here are some other articles you may enjoy 👇
A Spiral Season …….. What I Found — At the Inscrutable Ashram

Please read this disclaimer carefully before relying on any of the content in my articles online for your own life.

Here I explore the first two of five reasons a person involved in a high control group (aka cult) does not comprehend who the leader/group really is — and what is happening to them — as they are pulled in.
But first, let’s set the scene.

A Conflicted Experience

“A cultic experience is almost always a conflicted experience.” So says Janja Lalich, sociologist, cult survivor, and my favorite general writer on high control groups (in Take Back Your Life). She writes this in reference to all the reasons it is hard for someone to leave a group in which they have become deeply involved — even when they have negative experiences.
​
The benefits of involvement with one’s group are crystal clear. One is constantly sold on those benefits, and experiences them (the real ones, anyway) directly.
The difficulties encountered with a high control group, at least in my experience, emerge more slowly — and are much more slippery.

It is tough to recognize and name what is happening, while in the midst of a subtly coercive group. Most people leave controlling groups on their own. They often find it hard to put their finger on what they were involved in and why they needed to leave. (TBYL)

It is only now, nearly twenty years after I left a high control group — prompted by new (to me) and shattering stories emerging about the founder — that I have pieced together a clearer picture.

A keen intellect does not protect one. On the contrary, intelligent, educated people are more likely to be drawn into high control groups. I have two graduate degrees. I once learned that based on test scores, I qualify for Mensa membership. I have the cognitive functions (INFJ) that give me all the advantages a person can have in understanding people in all their complexity (and am a 5w4 to boot). Yet, after four years of increasing involvement, when I decided to move cross-country to work for my group, I had little understanding of what I had gotten myself into.
​
Perhaps the above helped me, eventually, to pull on the thread and find my way to the truth, more easily than I otherwise would have. But it didn’t keep me from being taken in in the first place. And the same goes for so many bright, caring, idealistic people who were drawn to the same community as I was, and to other groups with soaring ideals and a glow of deep meaning.

​Why is it so hard to see what’s really going on? Why is the most important information the last to be discovered? Why does the gestalt reality of the group not “pop” early on — if it ever does? Let’s get into those dynamics.

Unseen Levers of Influence

The process of recruitment and indoctrination into a high control group typically draws upon some or all of the techniques of persuasion to which humans are almost inevitably vulnerable. I draw here from Robert Cialdini’s Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (new and expanded, 2021).

Consider the fixed-action patterns used by animals. A mother turkey will nurture and protect an animal that goes “cheep cheep” just like a turkey chick, for example — even if it’s not a turkey chick. Like when a researcher substitutes, for an actual chick, a stuffed polecat emitting a turkey-like cheep cheep noise. The turkey’s mothering program, and similar automatic behaviors exhibited by a variety of animals, serve their survival most of the time.
​
People display such shortcut behaviors too. In the hundreds of judgments and decisions we make each day, we can often save time and energy by following unconscious rules of thumb. If certain “trigger features” are present, we move into automatic mode.

​Humans can acquire fixed action patterns through social learning, as well as instinct. In fact, life today makes it likely we will use these shortcuts more often. There is so much stimulation, so many decisions, so much information overload, that we would suffer analysis paralysis otherwise.

“The form and pace of modern life is not allowing us to make fully thoughtful decisions, even on many personally relevant topics,” writes Cialdini. Thus “we depend increasingly on our shortcuts to handle them all.”

Cialdini drew from experimental research, and supplemented that with his own direct experience as a participant observer among what he calls “compliance professionals”: people who sell things, raise money, market products or services, recruit people, or otherwise influence people’s behavior in a particular direction.
​
Cialdini describes seven of the shortcuts that are common in human social life. When a persuader is in relationship-building mode, the favored strategies include reciprocation, liking, and unity. When the persuader needs to reduce uncertainty in a prospect, social proof and authority are highly effective. And when it comes to motivating their prospect to action, a compliance professional most often leans on the principles of consistency and scarcity.

​Hayley Lewis’ sketchnote, above, nicely summarizes Cialdini’s original six levers of influence. The more recently added one is unity. It refers to the experience of shared identity with others, which ties in with feelings of mutual belonging, regard for one another’s welfare, and increased likelihood of shared endeavors.

If we do not understand how such automatic behavior patterns work, we will be more vulnerable to those who do.

Cialdini draws upon the martial art of jujitsu to illustrate how this works. A practitioner of jujitsu can make the most of gravity, inertia, leverage and momentum to conserve her own energy. These invisible forces can enable the martial artist to defeat even a physically stronger rival. Likewise, a compliance professional — or a savvy con artist — can quietly, systematically use the ordinary levers of influence that people usually respond to unthinkingly.

As Cialdini observes, this gives the persuader “the ability to manipulate without the appearance of manipulation. Even the victims themselves tend to see their compliance as a result of the action of natural forces” — and their own free choice — “rather than the designs of the person who profits from the compliance.”

These principles help me understand why my experience in a high control group felt similar to other experiences with groups of people — largely positive experiences — and why I did not recognize that such social principles were being used in cumulatively coercive ways.

Cialdini regards high control groups as a long-term influence situation. When the levers of influence are used over time in a cultic setting, the social pressures exerted are extreme.

It helps me to be reminded that it is human nature to be vulnerable to such pressures. Cialdini told cult survivors and experts (as quoted in Lalich, Take Back Your Life): “We can be fooled, but we are not fools. We can be duped, but we are not dupes.”

Dissonance Dissolved

Another category of proscribed awareness relates to what we may initially see, but sooner or later suppress or settle.

Lalich observes that a “high level of cognitive dissonance … may be present in a cult.” For someone who sticks around long-term, this is most often resolved through “a dramatic change of identity.” (Take Back Your Time)

Like the dissonance in music — where two or more adjacent notes rub against each other — dissonance within a person occurs when the ideas they hold in their mind do not hang together harmoniously. Or, the ideas may be at odds with the person’s emotions or actions.
​
It is natural to want to fix that discord. Consider how satisfying it is to the ear and emotions when a musical suspension or dissonant chord resolves into major harmony. Ah, that’s better. Cognitive dissonance similarly nags at a person until it ceases.
​

​I remember that nagging experience, viscerally. When I wrote about my journey seven years after I left the ashram vicinity, I put it this way:

“All along with [the spiritual disciplines], with retreats, I found I had an inner tussle between what ‘they’ taught and hearing my own inner voice. I felt a reaction to certain teachings and authority role and always had to go back home and let things settle out to feel what was right for me and trust that.”

I can recall some of the things that bothered me in my early years of affiliation, when I was just a retreat-goer. Some examples follow.

One concern was about the teaching that all people need to reduce their own egos and focus on meeting others’ needs; this seemed like a problematic over-generalization to me, especially given my past training and work at a domestic violence shelter and rape crisis center. Doesn’t this vary from person to person, I asked? Women, for example, are socialized to accommodate others and often need to learn to value their own needs and to set healthy boundaries.

I was told this teaching did not mean we should all be doormats. Stories of tender firmness, when called for, were shared to underscore the point. In time I stopped pressing on this, accepting that the group’s message was a corrective for the average me-centered American; I could interpret it appropriately for myself, or so I supposed.

I was intrigued by many Hindu concepts, and found value in some. But I felt I had been misled as, over time, it became clear that the teacher and his program were not just inter-spiritual or syncretic, honoring wisdom from many sources. Rather, at root, the teachings remained firmly grounded in the founder’s native Hindu perspective.
​
While saints and scriptures from the West were liberally quoted too, the underlying worldview was Eastern. Reincarnation was assumed in the teacher’s talks and writings, for example. The issue came up only occasionally, abstractly. So I decided I could just remain agnostic about that question, and set it aside. In other words, this dissonance felt modest enough to tolerate.

​What was more emphasized in the teachings was the idea that the goal of life is Self-Realization or Illumination. Which means, dissolving the small-s self to merge with the large-S Self. I never bought into full-blown God-Realization as MY goal. It wasn’t what motivated me to start meditating, nor did I see it as my personal purpose in life, which was more about making a difference. (And anyway, wouldn’t focusing on MY illumination be self-focused? Which we weren’t supposed to be?)

But I did come to absorb, to some extent, the group’s beliefs about what illumination means — that this is an attainable state for any human determined enough to pursue it wholeheartedly (likely with some grace); that an illumined person has overcome the foibles and temptations that snag most of us mere mortals, and so is a model for others; that an illumined person will be a gift to the world, benefiting those around them and perhaps our human collective in some way. If other people felt drawn to that goal, I felt, fine for them. Different strokes and all that.

I also struggled intermittently with how the inner circle of the community related to the teacher. As my relationship with the group grew, the supposed benefits of us newbies doing likewise were subtly communicated. Experimentation was encouraged so that one might “discover for oneself” if those benefits accrued.

Whether or not one consciously adopted the founder as teacher in a personal way, like a traditional sadhak, the desired behaviors and attitudes were built into regular practices: reading the teacher’s writings before bed, watching his video talks in our local meditation group weekly, getting plenty of video darshan at retreats, and so on. If you continued to participate, you would do those things.

A few years after I came and went from working at the ashram, I tried to explain how continuous immersion in the group milieu shifted things for me. I wrote:

“[I] had experienced an inner dynamic of testing the boundary between others’ teaching and what I take as true for myself. Before I got close, this was fine; I could have my inner rebellions during a retreat, and scribble in my journal, challenge a point or raise a question and hear the facilitators’ response; and then go home to my safe space and listen for what my heart, mind and experience told me about whatever. The lessons were more explicit then — they were verbalized and discussed, were designed as curricula.

But when I was chronically close, the struggle was more ongoing, and confusing. Much teaching was then not so much consciously spoken and heard through the ear, as transmitted through ways of being and absorbed through culture. Not quite visible, but powerfully felt.”

​Either consciously or quietly, cognitive dissonance has a way of resolving. People “tend to reduce the uncomfortable feeling caused by the dissonance by bringing their attitude in line with their behavior rather than changing the behavior” (Bounded Choice by Janja Lalich).

And so, though I don’t remember choosing the teacher as My Guru, whom I trusted as a personal guide, as I continued the disciplines taught by the group — and absorbed their attitudes — gradually I did come to feel more grateful and reverential toward him. (There were artful ways of slipping that in, too. Including the surprise ritual I described here.)

By adopting the group’s program — practicing the behaviors that were taught and modeled — my thoughts and feelings gradually shifted to match those actions. That resolved the most significant of the internal inconsistencies. Even if I hadn’t intended that outcome. And even if I didn’t notice the changes in myself.

In the next installment, I unpack a few more factors that keep the workings of a culty group opaque: Surprises, Blinders and Lies.


You can subscribe here to receive future posts in your inbox (free). Meanwhile, here are some other articles you may enjoy 👇

Reading Between the Power Moves … What I Wanted … What I Found

Please read this disclaimer carefully before relying on any of the content in my articles online for your own life.