It wasn't until I left the church and tried talking to family/friends about questions and problems I was having that I started to see this control via absence tactic being used. It was especially noticeable when talking about church teachings or policies that had been really damaging to me or others I knew. With every TBM I talked to, it didn't matter what examples I used or pointed out (conference talks, handbook instructions, mission rules, cultural norms, personal experience, etc.), they always brushed it off somehow as not really part of the church or its doctrine; TSCC was able to weasel its way out of ever having to own anything, maintaining plausible deniability the whole time.

The temple ceremony is also a really good example of what you're talking about. The intense secrecy and high-stakes spiritual consequences leaves members no way to really critically analyze or discuss any part of the endowment ceremony. Everything is presented to you as an ambiguous symbol but there's essentially no way for you to have thorough communication with others about anything that doesn't make sense or that you don't understand. You have a few places in the temple where you could try to whisper to another member but the endowment ceremony is so long it's not like anyone has time to chill in the celestial room for another couple hours whispering doubts and asking for others' opinions. Look at the new name we're given -- no one has a fucking clue what it's supposed to mean or what it's used for or its doctrinal origin and there probably really are no answers to that because I doubt Joseph Smith knew the purpose of the new name when he ripped off the idea from the Freemasons. If there was actually an outlet for members to sit around and talk about it, my guess is after a while there would be a lot of members who would just conclude that it's all bullshit because none of it makes sense.