The governing body's emphasis on control is counterproductive

Does anyone remember the metaphor that many speeches use in reference to children being like springs? Not too sure how often it's used now, but growing up I feel like I would hear it in a talk at least a couple times a year. For those who aren't familiar, the metaphor is basically saying that parents need to trust their children and slowly relax their absolute control as they get older. When they're young, they're like little springs that you might find in a toy or hair clip, very easy to suppress, but as they get older and more independent they are more like springs that you'll find in industrial machinery, impossible to suppress with your hand. So if you've never loosened your grip on them as they were getting older, the pressure in the "spring" will be so great they will explode out of control in any direction.

It's just kind of funny to me that the concept of allowing people to be independent is, or at least was, often spoken about, but it is a lesson the governing body never applied themselves. In fact, even as they make cosmetic changes on the outside, they're often looking for ways to tighten control on the inside. For example, they made a big deal about saying brothers don't need jackets at meeting, but then in the US elderbook adding an addendum saying that any duty, from holding a microphone,standining at the door, or counting how many people attended requires a full suit and tie. This applies to sisters too, sisters can wear pants but only if they're not on stage and they must wear a dress or skirt if they are visiting the holy kingdom of bethel. They give the illusion of freedom, or loosening restrictions, but actually they haven't eased up at all.

I think the metaphor really fits because they definitely view normal people as children that need their guidance. In the "clinking glasses" update, Stephen Lett's whole metaphor compares him and the rest of the governing body to a mother who set rules for children so that they could be "safe" but always expected that the "children" would grow up and realize that at 30 they don't need "her" to hold their hand as they cross the street. Demeaning metaphor aside, it's certainly shows that they're unwilling to apply their own metaphors in their lives.

They demand total control over every aspect of the lives of their members. However, they want more than just control over the body, they want total control over your thoughts as well. Did you have sex with your spouse outside of missionary position? They expect you to cry and feel terror that Jehovah will kill you unless you go to the elders and confess your sin (even though the Bible never says there are inappropriate positions).

Yet, this strict control isn't really working. People are running from them. Even within the organization, it can be surmised that hey feel like their grip is slipping. Many pimis have a strong aversion to the "shepherds". Many have reported here how few want to do door-to-door or even when engaging in "life saving work" they try to do as little as possible. Anecdotal to be sure, but the messaging has even changed. As a kid, I remember parts about expanding your ministry to other "avenues". That if you loved people you'd do letters, telephone witnessing, and then later cart witnessing on top of door-to-door to make sure you're reaching people. Now they have parts demanding people get back to door-to-door and it just doen't seem to be as effective anymore.

Now, this isn't a "the borg is going to fail in 5 years" post. I don't think there will be a total collapse. I just feel that their policies are often what is harming them. Their biggest enemy isn't us, it's the men in the mirror. Sure, we're all doing our part here by exposing many of their disgusting or hypocritical behaviors, or the things that they've knowingly changed about the Bible, but ultimately I think their refusal to see us all as equals, as people worthy of respect, and creating policies that reflect that have hurt them more than I ever will.