This is an anonymous critic’s response to common arguments made by Teal’s followers on social media. All arguments are paraphrased, not direct quotes. The writer recognises that neither Teal’s critics or her
followers are homogenous groups. This is intended as a general summary. The writer does not claim to speak on behalf of all of Teal’s critics. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.
“How can haters criticise Teal, an abuse victim who’s been through so much?”
Teal’s alleged ritual abuse story is full of inconsistencies and is highly improbable at best. Teal has said that her abuse story qualifies her to be a spiritual teacher, and that without it, people would have no reason to listen to her. So for the the sake of Teal’s career, if her alleged ritual abuse didn’t happen, it would’ve been necessary to invent it. Even if Teal did experience some form of abuse in childhood, that isn’t justification for the serious harm she has caused others. Many people who were abused as children do not go on to become abusers themselves. Teal’s alleged abuse story ensures she has the sympathy, defence and protection of her followers. She exploits the empathy and good intentions of her followers to shield herself from criticism and from taking responsibility for her actions. Followers who actively defend and protect Teal are unknowingly enabling her to commit further abuse.
“Teal has helped me and so many others.”
Teal mixes her own rehashed teachings with plagiarised material from more reputable sources, giving her content a veneer of validity. Teal is not sharing “universal knowledge”, she’s passing off other people’s work as her own and taking credit and payment for it. Teal’s own teachings are a distortion, and at times, a total reversal of spiritual and psychological concepts. Teal preaches that narcissism is a virtue, humility is toxic, love is selfish, greed is good, needing time alone is inauthentic and morality is dysfunctional. If Teal teaches anything beneficial, it isn’t original, and if she teaches anything original, it isn’t beneficial. Teal’s free content enables her to promote herself and her products, as well as recruit new followers to her “movement”. Followers might derive benefit from being a member of Teal Tribe, particularly if they’ve gained friendship and a sense of belonging there. Teal exploits the human need for connection for personal gain. She admits Teal Tribe exists to support her. Teal’s “career” as a spiritual teacher is for the purpose of serving herself, to the detriment of others. If Teal has helped people, it doesn’t alter or undo the fact that many others have been seriously harmed by her.
“Teal is taken out of context.”
The evidence regarding Teal has been carefully researched, documented and cited. If readers are concerned that Teal’s words or actions have been taken out of context, they should consult the original source material and investigate further. The more research that is undertaken, the clearer the situation becomes. “Lack of context” is a commonly used excuse by people seeking to deny, minimise or justify inappropriate comments. Critics have no need to misrepresent Teal, she frequently incriminates herself with her own words and behaviour. Teal’s stand-alone quotes, particularly those involving suicide, can not be redeemed by context. There is no context that would make Teal’s most harmful statements and behaviour acceptable.
“Teal is only human.”
Teal claims to be an extraterrestrial being. She defines herself as “other-than” human;
“I am non-physical energy that is projected forth into a Arcturian body, an extraterrestrial body.”
“Over on my planet, we Arcturians live in a 6th dimensional reality.”
“We don’t keep years, humans do.”
Teal can’t have it both ways. She can’t claim to be an extraterrestrial being with special powers when it suits her advancement, then claim to be a fallible human when she’s held to account. All humans have strengths and weaknesses, but Teal claims to have superhuman abilities and direct access to higher knowledge, so she should expect to be held to higher standards than most humans are.
“Teal prevented me from committing suicide.”
It is positive to hear that people have recovered from suicidal ideation. It is debatable if Teal should accept credit for this. Teal’s intentions for advising people experiencing suicidal ideation are suspect. Some followers say her YouTube video, “I Want To Kill Myself (What To Do If You’re Suicidal)” saved their life, others say it made them feel more suicidal. In the video, Teal seeks to persuade viewers that she understands how they are feeling, all while dispensing extremely inaccurate and dangerous advice. Teal uses the video to repeatedly advertise her products and other media, directly targeting suicidal viewers to sign up to her newsletter, purchase her book and watch more of her videos. Teal’s first client committed suicide after following her advice. There have been instances where Teal has tried to convince followers they were suicidal when they were not. Teal admits that the primary risks of her Completion Process are self-harm and suicide. Teal is not qualified to diagnose, advise or treat people with mental health issues, including suicidal ideation. She was issued with a Citation, Cease and Desist and fine by the State of Utah for practising mental health therapy without a licence. It is indisputable that Teal’s advice and methods present a significant risk to vulnerable people.
“Haters are just projecting their own issues onto Teal.”
If all criticism is merely psychological projection, then that must also apply to what Teal and her followers say about Teal’s critics. The difference is that criticism of Teal is not just opinion or groundless assumption, it is based on observation and evidence. Valid criticism provides feedback, and is an opportunity for growth and self-awareness. This opportunity is lost if criticism is immediately and defensively diverted back to the critic and explained away as projection. The projection argument has been seized upon by abusers such as Teal, to avoid culpability and shift blame on to victims. This argument simplifies and misuses the concept of psychological projection to the point where it becomes little more than the playground taunt of – “I know you are, but what am I?”
“Haters aren’t spiritually evolved enough or on a high enough frequency to understand or benefit from Teal’s teachings.”
It isn’t that critics aren’t spiritually evolved enough to “get” Teal’s teachings, it’s that Teal’s teachings aren’t “evolved” enough to be considered spiritual. Teal admits she has a big ego, and this is readily apparent in her teachings. Teal seems to operate, not from a “higher vibration”, but from a place of fear. Many of Teal’s critics are on a spiritual path themselves. Some critics practice, work, study or are otherwise involved in the fields of spirituality, philosophy, healing and psychology. Critics are often able to easily identify Teal’s false or plagiarised teachings because of their knowledge and experience in these fields. False spiritual teachers such as Teal undermine genuine spirituality and hinder spiritual evolution.
“Haters are just jealous of Teal.”
Teal is criticised because she harms people, not because people are jealous of her. Teal and her followers know very little about those who are critical of Teal, yet they assume critics lack the attributes they believe Teal to possess. They also wrongly assume that critics must all aspire to be like Teal. Regardless of any superficialities, living a lie and habitually hurting others is not an enviable position. Any “success” Teal has achieved is built on a foundation of deceit, self-interest, exploitation and abuse. Teal frequently accuses women of being jealous of her, and followers using this argument aim it predominantly at female critics. The idea being that anytime a woman criticises another woman, it is always because of jealously. This relies on the false and sexist assumption that women are unable to think critically and rationally, and are motivated solely by negative emotions. Labeling someone as jealous is an easy way to instantly dismiss legitimate criticism without having to examine it.
“Haters are part of the establishment and seek to suppress truth and spiritual evolution.”
Teal is a pathological liar and plagiarist, not a truth-teller. Teal has co-opted spirituality and the New Age movement for her own self-serving agenda. She corrupts spiritual and therapeutic concepts intended for the benefit of others, and distorts them into something that harms people. Teal is an authoritarian figure and shares many establishment values, such as greed, selfishness and a desire for power over others. Teal claims to be a revolutionary, yet her ideology revolves entirely around herself. She seeks world domination, not social reform or the advancement of humanity. Many of Teal’s critics are motivated to speak out because they deeply value spirituality, truth and healing and strongly object to it being corrupted for malevolent purposes.
“Haters don’t believe that abuse exists. Haters are abuse deniers.”
It is disingenuous to suggest that because critics question Teal’s alleged abuse, that they question or deny all abuse. Abuse certainly does exist, as do abuse cover-ups. Teal’s abuse story is questioned because of the many unlikely occurrences and the inconsistencies regarding dates and other details. Teal has a clear motive for lying, given that she has based her career on her alleged abuse story. While it is important that those who report abuse are listened to and supported, false allegations do occur. Nobody has been questioned, charged or convicted in relation to Teal’s allegations. There is no evidence for the numerous serious crimes she claims to have endured and witnessed. Teal brands her critics abuse deniers in an attempt to denigrate their characters, and thereby invalidate their arguments. Teal sets it up so that anybody questioning her alleged abuse automatically becomes an abuse denier. Followers understandably don’t want to be seen as abuse deniers, so they accept her story despite the lack of evidence that it ever happened.
“Haters haven’t experienced abuse so they can’t understand or relate to Teal.”
Teal and her followers don’t know the personal history of Teal’s critics, so it would be best not to make assumptions. Some of Teal’s critics are in fact abuse survivors. Many feel strongly that Teal’s unsubstantiated abuse claims could dissuade genuine survivors from coming forward and could discredit their testimonies. It is reprehensible to many people, not only abuse survivors, that Teal has used the story of her alleged abuse to further her career and make money. Critics are quite capable of understanding and relating to abuse victims, but they have valid reasons for doubting Teal’s unsubstantiated accusations.
“Haters can’t handle a powerful woman in a leadership position.”
The criticism Teal receives has nothing to do with gender. Teal’s unethical conduct is the issue, not that she is a woman. Any person exhibiting the same behaviour as Teal should expect to be questioned in exactly the same way. The issue is not with a women being a spiritual teacher or in leadership role, the issue is with Teal being a spiritual teacher and in a leadership role. This is another example of Teal and her followers attempting to discredit critics by falsely accusing them of sexism. Many of Teal’s critics are women, some are in leadership positions themselves, or have been in the past. Most critics actively support equality for women within society and the workplace, but they do not support the abuse of power committed by Teal, or any other person in a position of leadership.
“I don’t care if Teal lies, her content is valuable. I don’t need to hear what critics say about Teal because I trust her.”
This argument seems to condone Teal’s dishonesty. Teal claims to be leading an “authenticity” movement. She refers to herself as spiritual leader, teacher and healer, all of which are positions of trust. If some followers don’t believe integrity to be a prerequisite for a spiritual leader, it is likely they will be led astray and have their trust betrayed. For Teal, a good follower is one who doesn’t question their leader. Some followers have picked up on this, and are keen to inform Teal on social media that they’re not even aware of the criticism and have no intention of ever seeking it out. Ignorance isn’t bliss. Teal’s followers are prepared to go on the record defending her, without knowing her true character. This argument also suggests an element of denial. Followers might be aware on some level that Teal isn’t who she claims to be, but don’t want to spoil the illusion by looking at the facts.
“Haters should focus on themselves, not Teal.”
It is possible to be both self-reflective and to speak out about the abuse committed by other people. It’s possible to be both an activist concerned with issues affecting the wider world and be focused on personal development. Critics haven’t devoted their entire lives to criticising Teal, they have jobs, families and lives to lead. Most critics regard Teal’s misconduct to be so serious, and the harm she’s causing so severe, that they believe the situation warrants intervention. Critics are willing to dedicate their time and energy to observing and reporting on Teal’s harmful behaviour, and making that information available to any interested party. It is right to speak out about abuse and deception when it is witnessed. Remaining apathetic when aware of the harm that a person is causing others, is not a virtue.
“Haters gonna hate. Haters have no valid points. They are hateful people who happen to have picked Teal as a target. It’s about their hatred, not about Teal.”
“Haters” is a label created by Teal to demonise her critics and anybody who questions her. Teal teaches “oneness”, yet divides people into “fans” and “haters”, promoting an unhealthy “us versus them” mentality. Those who question Teal are automatically classed as the enemy. Teal has described her followers as her army, and says she enjoys it when people defend her. “Haters” misrepresents critics as non-rational, but criticism of Teal is based on evidence, not hatred. Teal has accused critics of slander and of making deaths threats, yet provides no evidence for this. Tellingly, she has never pursued legal action. Empathy and compassion for Teal’s followers is often what motivates critics to speak out. Teal convinces her followers that critics are hateful, yet followers are unaware of the contempt Teal has for her followers. Critics have watched Teal bully, humiliate and mislead people who have approached her for help. Critics have witnessed Teal duping and manipulating her followers, acting superior to them, and callously exploiting them for financial and personal gain. Many critics also have compassion for Teal, but that doesn’t mean they will condone her wrongdoing or remain silent about it.
“Haters disrespect Teal’s followers by denying them agency to make up their own mind about Teal. Haters patronise followers by trying to save them from Teal.”
People have the right to religious freedom. They have the right to follow spiritual teachers, join spiritual groups and pursue a spiritual path. However, religious freedom does not protect abuse. The evidence shows that Teal is abusive and deceptive, and her teachings and methods harm people. If followers believe Teal to be a genuine spiritual leader who is helping people and bringing about positive world change, it’s understandable they might resent critics trying to “save them”. Followers have the right to make their own decisions, but examining the evidence about Teal allows them to make an informed decision. Many of Teal’s followers are particularly at risk, because they experience mental health issues and suicidal ideation. Criticism of Teal is not about denying civil liberties, it is a safeguarding issue.
“Haters have unrealistic expectations of a spiritual teachers. They expect perfection.”
As a self-proclaimed spiritual leader, healer and teacher, Teal works individually with vulnerable people and influences many others with her videos, writings and social media. Those in positions of trust and responsibility are rightly held to specific standards and will be subject to greater scrutiny and accountability. Teal has put herself forward as a spiritual teacher without the requisite knowledge, experience or personal qualities. Teal shouldn’t presume she can take all the authority, but none of the responsibility. Nobody expects perfection, what they do expect is honesty, integrity, accountability and ethical conduct. Teal claims to speak from “universal perspective” and “source consciousness”. She claims to be able to access the Akashic record, see people’s thoughts and emotions, travel between dimensions, and see the future. By Teal’s own account she is an above-average person, therefore it is entirely reasonable that she is held to above-average standards.
“Haters are ignorant about Teal and don’t know the facts about her. Haters know nothing about Teal’s personal history or teachings. Haters are uniformed.”
Teal’s critics are well researched about Teal’s background and conduct. If Teal’s followers were to examine the evidence that is available for themselves, they would understand the reasons that Teal is criticised. Some of Teal’s critics have known her personally, and others have attended or participated in her events. Some are former followers who are very familiar with Teal’s background, behaviour and teachings. Criticism of Teal comes from an informed perspective. Critics are confident in their appraisal of Teal’s character and conduct, and are willing and able to back up their claims with evidence.
“If a person is controversial and attracts criticism, they must be doing something right. It doesn’t discredit them, it lends them more legitimacy.”
When a lot of people voice the same concerns about the same person, very often it is because their concerns are well-founded. There are countless examples currently, and throughout history that demonstrate this. Teal frequently turns the criticism made about her and tries to turn it her advantage. In this case, legitimate criticism of her is being used as “proof” that she must be right. Teal prides herself on being controversial, presenting it as a virtue, when in fact, she uses it to permit and glorify her abusive behaviour and disturbing statements. Teal believes herself to be on a par with Martin Luther King Jr., Jesus and Gandhi. However, Teal is harming people, not helping them. She is not acting to serve humanity, she is acting to serve herself.
“If Teal doesn’t resonate with you, find a teacher who does. Take what resonates and leave the rest.”
Criticism isn’t about Teal’s teachings not resonating, it’s about them being dangerous, deceptive and unethical. If Teal and her teachings simply didn’t resonate, but weren’t harming anyone, she would not be criticised to the degree that she is, if at all. If Teal’s advice and teachings were harmless, it would be very easy to simply dismiss her and her teachings and move on. Teal has abused her position as a self-proclaimed spiritual leader, teacher and healer and she will be held to account for that.
“Haters shouldn’t judge Teal or her followers.”
Judgement sometimes has negative connotations, but it is useful for assessing a person or situation in order to take the appropriate action. Judgement in this case, is about observation and drawing conclusions from those observations. For example, judging a person who has committed a violent crime, is necessary for determining the risk that individual poses, thereby allowing for the necessary steps to be taken to ensure public safety. Teal’s critics are recognising and naming the deception and abuse that they witness, and there is a sense of responsibility to report on that. Failing to call out wrongdoing because of a fear of being called judgemental doesn’t help anybody. Critics don’t tend to judge Teal’s followers. Some critics are former followers and they understand the dynamics involved. Teal is the one who is being criticised. It is possible to condemn the behaviour, without condemning the person.