Daily Notifications
Sign up for free emails to receive the feature story every morning in your inbox at


Ugh. We just found a troubling L. Ron Hubbard Scientology lecture about little boys and sex.

You have to understand something, dear reader. L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology, used to give lectures on practically a daily basis — and sometimes more than one a day — for decades. This character could talk and talk about anything for hours and hours, and his followers giggled and applauded their way through whatever he threw at them.

The sheer volume of Hubbard’s output is staggering. So forgive us if we’re only now running into a very troubling set of statements that Hubbard gave which were buried inside a lecture that was itself buried in an obscure series of talks he gave during a brief trip to London in September 1952.

Why did we stumble on this lecture now? Thanks to Leah Remini’s second season of Scientology and the Aftermath, there’s a much greater awareness and public interest in Scientology’s treatment — and mistreatment — of children. For some time now, we’ve been telling you how shocking it was to find what appears to be an outright statement endorsing pedophilia in Scientology’s most important book, Hubbard’s 1950 breakout bestseller, Dianetics. And so we’ve been on the lookout for other material about children and sex that we might have overlooked before.

That search led us to a little-discussed set of talks referred to as the “Technique 88 Supplementary Lectures” which were delivered by Hubbard to students on the “London Professional Course” over a period of four days. And the particular talk we’re focusing on was titled “The Resolution of the Second Dynamic,” the first of two lectures that he gave on Tuesday, September 23, 1952.

We’ve taken three paragraphs from that lecture in the name of Fair Use, and for help with Hubbard’s Scientology jargon — some of which is obsolete in today’s church — we turned to tech expert Sunny Pereira for help. (Sunny was one of three women featured in a stunning 2010 story by Tampa Bay Times writer Tom Tobin on forced abortion in the Sea Org, and she regularly helps us out with technical matters here at the Bunker.)

This is going to get pretty unsettling, so we’ve broken Hubbard’s three paragraphs into three short videos — it’s important, we think, for you to hear the inflections of his voice in these passages.


Here’s the first paragraph, with a transcript, and then we’ll talk to Sunny about what’s going on.


If you were to put your preclear on an E-meter and just start naming the categories and ages of human beings, that is to say, let’s name the categories and ages,”Uh, babies, young boys, boys from 3 to 5. In other words, which would you most like to help? Boys from 3 to 5, boys from 5 to 8, boys from 8 to 12, boys from 17, up to 17, boys to 21? Young men 21 to 30?” And so on. And then you would take it on the girl line. You’re going to get a harder drop theoretically, you’re going to get a harder drop on one or the other of these. And you’ll find that is the DED. That’s the original blanketing which you need. You can actually trace it that mechanically. You don’t have to trace it that mechanically really, you just ask him for a little while and he’ll start springing tears out of him if you just start processing him on the subject of poor little boys. He really wants to help little boys. Little boys, they’re, they’re the stuff, they’re the stuff.

Sunny explains that in auditing, the auditor asks questions of the subject, a person who is known as a “preclear” because they haven’t “gone Clear” yet in their Scientology progress. The preclear holds the electrodes of an E-meter while the auditor asks questions about a series of words or phrases, watching to see which of the words the device’s needle reacts to.

In this scenario that Hubbard is laying out, the auditor is asking about age categories of boys and girls, waiting to see which one gets a reaction — a “harder drop” — on the needle.

That reaction, Hubbard says, is the DED. “That word is no longer used,” Sunny says. “It’s one of the terms LRH later tossed out and replaced because it was confusing for auditors. It was replaced by the word ‘overts.’ And another way to say it is a sin.”

Hubbard is saying that when the preclear’s needle reacts to a question about little boys it identifies the area of the preclear’s “sin,” the DED.

“It was like an early form of sec-checking,” Sunny says, referring to the intense interrogation techniques that Scientologists are put through today. “If he reacts on one of those items, there are overts — sins — connected with it.”

Hubbard then says that the auditor has found the “original blanketing” which he needs in order to uncover what that sin was. “Blanketing is a term that comes from A History of Man,” Sunny says, referring to a 1952 book by Hubbard which is one of the most bizarre in Scientology’s history. “Blanketing refers to a relationship between two people, an adult and a child in this situation. It can be a punch, a sexual advance, something that brings a return of the same reaction.” (The term was later dropped out of use by Hubbard and is not commonly known and used in Scientology today.)

However, even as the auditor is beginning to uncover some troubling sin against a child, the preclear will talk about “poor little boys” and it may result in tears.

But as we will see, that’s just a cover for what the auditor is about to discover in his subject.

Here’s the second paragraph, and things really get disturbing now, we will warn you…


And by the way, anybody who had sexual relationships with a little boy ought to be killed! The idea! Horrible! Why that’s the most disgusting thought he’s ever heard. What? Sexual relationships with a little boy? Oh, no. Except in the DED you find him taking a little boy and driving the little boy up to sexual enthusiasm, up, up, up, up, up and the little boy just can’t give any more, and so forth, and on the last jolt of demand on the part of the thetan, the little boy who actually did have a thetan in him anyhow, goes PANG. And it goes straight down to 0.0. BzzzUm. And that’s why being a body is death of a body, is thetan into the body. That’s 0.0. Death of the body is being the body. And you’ll find him having his most enjoyable times thereafter as a little boy. He, he’s doing a super life continuum for this little boy. And this little boy bit the dust and was chewed up and spat out maybe 70, 60, 30 trillion years ago.

The preclear continues to object to the very notion of sinning against a child, and suggests that anyone who has sex with a child should be killed. However, the auditor disregards what the preclear is saying now, and instead goes into the DED — the sin — using the E-meter to get the preclear to admit to what has really happened in the past.

“This is how Hubbard sees that. If someone is denouncing sex with a child today, Hubbard advises the auditor to find what makes a person say that by learning what happened to them in the past, maybe trillions of years ago. And that’s actually a pretty normal instruction for Scientology auditors up to the current day,” Sunny says.

And what is the DED, the overt, the sin, that Hubbard commands you to locate? You will find the preclear, far in the past, “driving the little boy up to sexual enthusiasm, up, up up up.”

“That means continuously using a little boy for sex, yeah. It’s pretty gross,” Sunny says.

That continues until the little boy “can’t give any more” and with a PANG, goes to 0.0 on the Tone Scale, which is “body death.”

L. Ron Hubbard, in other words, is suggesting that someone who denounces sex with children today is covering for the fact that sometime in their distant past, they sexually abused a child to death.

“Yes, that’s how I’m reading it,” Sunny says.

Hubbard then suggests that the offending preclear, as a thetan, then “becomes” the body he has killed. (In Scientology, we are each immortal beings, thetans, who temporarily inhabit physical bodies as we go through countless lifetimes over trillions of years. Scientists say the universe is only some 13.8 billion years old, but in Scientology, time is measured in quadrillions of years.)

“He’s taken over the boy’s life in his own mind, lifetime after lifetime. He’s taken on the memories of that child or children that he’s done that to,” Sunny adds.

And those are his most enjoyable memories, of being used sexually?

“Yeah. Basically, it’s a a common belief in Scientology, if you sin enough on a particular thing, you become it.”

So, after sexually abusing and killing a child or numerous children between 30 and 70 trillion years ago, the preclear somehow becomes those children through his sin, and it becomes his most “enjoyable times.”

And at this point, we must apologize to those of you who can’t believe how sick this shit is. You’re absolutely right about that. Now, on to the final paragraph…


And how many little boys are there on this line? Well, slap-happy and stupid, he goes on the next spiral. He says, “Ah.” As the thetan you see, he says, “Ah, a little boy. Ahhh, ha, ha.” Blanket, zap, pow! Stupid, you see? I mean he just goes through this same cycle and he keeps going through the same cycle. And right afterwards for the rest of the spiral he says, “Little boys, uuugh. The idea of sexual relationships with a little boy, how disgusting!” Now, he’ll get into the current lifetime, this fellow, with this same service facsimile. This might be the second dynamic aspect of the service facsimile, and is the heaviest one. He gets into the current lifetime, what do you find? The same drama being played off. Little boy, sexual relationships very early, key in, and here we go all over again. What? Sexual relationships with a little boy? Oh no. Yet you can find it right in this lifetime, if you look. Same way for a girl.

Still “slap-happy” over his sin, the predator then finds another little boy in a new “spiral” of time, and once again, “blankets” — commits the sin against another thetan — zaps another boy, and continues on, continuing on the next cycle, until eventually he begins to see his acts as disgusting. Still, into his current lifetime, he brings with him the “service facsimile” from that previous era.

“‘Service facsimile’ is really hard to define for outsiders. It’s an idea that a person has in their mind and they compute everything through that idea, and it doesn’t compute properly,” Sunny says.

Carrying around that idea of being a sexual predator, it can be brought to the surface again. “If he starts to have sex early (especially a childhood abuse), that spiral will ‘key in.’ Hubbard explains that even if he managed to get himself out of this trap he is in, it can start all over again,” Sunny says. And one way it manifests itself, paradoxically, is the person reacting violently against the idea of sex with children.

“He’s saying that anyone who reacts negatively to people molesting children today is going to have all of this stuff in their track [their long distant past lives] that you can find. That’s what makes them feel that way,” she says.

“Now, the indies [independent Scientologists, who have left the church but still uphold Hubbard] will say all of this is reactive, and that Hubbard describing these acts doesn’t allow anyone to sexually molest children. Indies will say that people should be able to rationally deal with these kinds of reactions from their past.”

But Hubbard is accusing anyone who denounces sex with children as having some dark secret in their past lives about killing kids sexually?

“That’s right. And like with the awful Dianetics passage about kissing 7-year-old girls, he could have used any example to make his point about covering up sin. So why is he using sex with children to make his point? It’s his own insanity that he’s talking about in this stuff.”

Sunny, thank you for wallowing through this stuff with us. We know it wasn’t easy.

And now, we expect that Hubbard’s defenders will tell us that this 1952 lecture is no longer on the “Bridge to Total Freedom,” or that we have, like with the Dianetics passage, misunderstood Hubbard’s intent.

But we ask you to listen to his words. Listen to how he describes sexually molesting and killing a child. We think you will find it as disturbing as we do.


Scientology disconnection, a reminder

Bernie Headley has not seen his daughter Stephanie in 4,947 days.
Brian Sheen has not seen his grandson Leo in 93 days.
Clarissa Adams has not seen her parents Walter and Irmin Huber in 1,156 days.
Carol Nyburg has not seen her daughter Nancy in 1,930 days.
Jamie Sorrentini Lugli has not seen her father Irving in 2,704 days.
Quailynn McDaniel has not seen her brother Sean in 2,050 days.
Claudio and Renata Lugli have not seen their son Flavio in 2,544 days.
Sara Goldberg has not seen her daughter Ashley in 1,584 days.
Lori Hodgson has not seen her son Jeremy and daughter Jessica in 1,296 days.
Marie Bilheimer has not seen her mother June in 822 days.
Joe Reaiche has not seen his daughter Alanna Masterson in 4,911 days
Derek Bloch has not seen his father Darren in 2,051 days.
Cindy Plahuta has not seen her daughter Kara in 2,371 days.
Claire Headley has not seen her mother Gen in 2,346 days.
Ramana Dienes-Browning has not seen her mother Jancis in 702 days.
Mike Rinder has not seen his son Benjamin and daughter Taryn in 5,004 days.
Brian Sheen has not seen his daughter Spring in 1,110 days.
Skip Young has not seen his daughters Megan and Alexis in 1,513 days.
Mary Kahn has not seen her son Sammy in 1,386 days.
Lois Reisdorf has not seen her son Craig in 967 days.
Phil and Willie Jones have not seen their son Mike and daughter Emily in 1,472 days.
Mary Jane Sterne has not seen her daughter Samantha in 1,716 days.
Kate Bornstein has not seen her daughter Jessica in 12,825 days.


3D-UnbreakablePosted by Tony Ortega on November 28, 2017 at 07:00

E-mail tips and story ideas to tonyo94 AT gmail DOT com or follow us on Twitter. We post behind-the-scenes updates at our Facebook author page. After every new story we send out an alert to our e-mail list and our FB page.

Our book, The Unbreakable Miss Lovely: How the Church of Scientology tried to destroy Paulette Cooper, is on sale at Amazon in paperback, Kindle, and audiobook versions. We’ve posted photographs of Paulette and scenes from her life at a separate location. Reader Sookie put together a complete index. More information can also be found at the book’s dedicated page.

The Best of the Underground Bunker, 1995-2016 Just starting out here? We’ve picked out the most important stories we’ve covered here at the Undergound Bunker (2012-2016), The Village Voice (2008-2012), New Times Los Angeles (1999-2002) and the Phoenix New Times (1995-1999)

Learn about Scientology with our numerous series with experts…

BLOGGING DIANETICS: We read Scientology’s founding text cover to cover with the help of L.A. attorney and former church member Vance Woodward
UP THE BRIDGE: Claire Headley and Bruce Hines train us as Scientologists
GETTING OUR ETHICS IN: Jefferson Hawkins explains Scientology’s system of justice
SCIENTOLOGY MYTHBUSTING: Historian Jon Atack discusses key Scientology concepts

Other links: Shelly Miscavige, ten years gone | The Lisa McPherson story told in real time | The Cathriona White stories | The Leah Remini ‘Knowledge Reports’ | Hear audio of a Scientology excommunication | Scientology’s little day care of horrors | Whatever happened to Steve Fishman? | Felony charges for Scientology’s drug rehab scam | Why Scientology digs bomb-proof vaults in the desert | PZ Myers reads L. Ron Hubbard’s “A History of Man” | Scientology’s Master Spies | Scientology’s Private Dancer | The mystery of the richest Scientologist and his wayward sons | Scientology’s shocking mistreatment of the mentally ill | Scientology boasts about assistance from Google | The Underground Bunker’s Official Theme Song | The Underground Bunker FAQ

Our Guide to Alex Gibney’s film ‘Going Clear,’ and our pages about its principal figures…
Jason Beghe | Tom DeVocht | Sara Goldberg | Paul Haggis | Mark “Marty” Rathbun | Mike Rinder | Spanky Taylor | Hana Whitfield


Share Button
Print Friendly, PDF & Email