By Anony Maker
To begin with, how do you know what “Her boyfriend Chad explained”? As far as I can tell, what you know is only based on what was written on fan sites and in the media, which you didn’t even follow closely. At least not enough to be aware of the details of Allison Mack’s relationship with her first boyfriend, Pete.
You seem to talk as if you have personal knowledge of her and her inner circle, but it appears you’re speculating just as much, if not more than anyone else, even if you might have had some peripheral real-life connection to her. Do you think you know her mind because the two of you have a psychic connection?
The major Forbes article that criticized Nxivm came out in 2003, followed by other stories around 2006 to 2010. The Vanity Fair piece, The Heiresses and the Cult – about the Bronfmans and Nxivm – came out in 2010, as did a McLean’s article, How to lose $100 million, which detailed the Bronfman’s financial losses, as well as publicizing Rick Ross’ evaluation of NXIVM as a cult.
If I recall correctly, when it has suited your defense of Mack, you’ve claimed that she didn’t really get deeply involved until about 2012. But James Odato for the Albany Times Union started exposing NXIVM around 2010, including publishing accounts from former participants. Then, in early 2012, the major Times Union series Secrets of NXIVM came out.
That was apparently enough to provide the catalyst for Kristin Kreuk’s departure. If Mack really “had an almost blind faith in Kristin Kreuk” as you claim, then she should have followed Kreuk out too, right?
And what about the departure of Barbara Bouchey, who she apparently looked up to, as well as Sarah Edmondson and all the others from Vancouver? Why did she stay when so many others around her left?
On top of that, as Actaeon pointed out –people on Mack’s blog warned her, and provided links to critical information about Nxivm. How was all that “no strong signal”?
And how do you know she “started to give WAY before the other DOS members”? Certainly that was at least well after 2012, right?
You have lots of excuses for her, but no real explanations, and nothing that really provides insight, other than into the mind of a diehard fan – which is not all that different from the mindset of a diehard cultist, by the way. Why, for instance, did Mack end up being not merely another member of DOS, but Raniere’s henchwoman?
I assume that the “Mack Was 100% Victim” is Frank’s interpolation. I don’t see that specifically in the commentary, though then again the point of view is not far from that. I do think it’s hard to tell exactly where Mack stands on the spectrum from victim to perpetrator. But she’s at best somewhere uncomfortably in the middle, possibly more of a victim than some of her detractors might think. I’m open to good evidence for that position, though we have yet to see it – and likely more of a perpetrator than the fans of her girl-next-door character on Smallville can confront.