(2005, p. 134). Furthermore, within days Beck
recounted that her mother denied the
conversation (2005, p. 131). Beck seemed to
suggest that church gender norms dictated her
mother’s actions. Yet, this deviation
demonstrated her mother’s behavioral
inconsistencies and nonunitary subjectivity.
Noncompliance Through Religion
Noncompliance through religious mechanisms
involved complying with certain religious
demands in an effort to avoid complying with
others. Authors suggested that parents who did
not comply through the religion (with the
exception of Rix’s parents) found little relief.
These efforts ranged from finding ways to
accept a child’s sexual orientation to requesting
reassignment (divorce and remarriage to a man
whom the FLDS church authority determined).
Each of these cases demonstrated role conflict
and emotional strain for parents.
Jallen Rix wrote that he was raised in a
“stereotypical middle-class, tract-house family”
(2010, p. 17). He stated, “My childhood was
wonderful,” but provided examples of his
parents’ strict discipline and traditional gender
roles, which suppressed his sexual identity
(2010, pp. 24–26). When Rix informed his
parents that he was homosexual, he said his
mother responded, “This is worse than when
your sister died” (2010, p. 105). Church
members pressured Rix’s parents to
excommunicate him (2010, p. 206). Rix
understood the influence of his parents’ beliefs
on their interactions because he had once
attempted to become an ex-gay. The ex-gay
movement involved Christian organizations
attempting to convert homosexuals into either
heterosexual or sexually inactive beings.
Yet, Rix stated he always hoped his parents
could accommodate their beliefs in order to
accept and love him. His parents maintained
their religious beliefs, but over the years became
more accepting. When Rix’s 12-year
relationship fell apart, his mother was supportive
(Rix, 2010, p. 218). She said it would have been
easier if he had married a woman, but expressed
her love: “I was so shocked at what she said that
I wasn’t able to absorb the genuine love that she
was giving” (2010, p. 219). During one meeting
with his father, Rix said he voiced concern that
the conversation would become another
argument about his sexuality, but stated that his
father said those days were over (2010, p. 219).
Wall (2009) shared a dramatic example of
noncompliance. Wall’s mother, Sharon,
struggled to protect her children without shaking
her FLDS beliefs, which dictated that she “keep
sweet.” Keeping sweet was a common term
throughout FLDS memoirs it meant “submitting
to its rules and leader and through him, God, not
grudgingly but happily” (Jeffs, 2009, p. 17).
When Wall’s home became tumultuous after her
father took a third wife, Sharon refused to keep
sweet and talked to the prophet (Wall, 2009,
p. 19). As a result, church leadership reassigned
her to a new husband. Wall explained, “I didn’t
understand what Mom was trying to do, but I
realize now that she was just trying to do the
best for her kids” (2009, p. 88). The
reassignment, however, diminished Sharon’s
ability to protect Wall because her new husband
intended to force 14-year-old Wall into marriage
with Wall’s first cousin.
After attempting to coax Wall to follow through
with the wedding, Sharon again attempted to
protect her through religious structures:
Now finally she was trying to lobby on
my behalf, but as a woman, Mom had
no sway with Uncle Fred [her second-
husband] or the prophet. Still, it made
me love my mother even more to know
that she was listening to me when it
seemed no one else was. (Wall, 2009, p.
148)
Wall evaluated Sharon’s actions based on her
mother’s intentions. Wall narrated about
nonunitary subjectivity when she recognized that
Sharon’s love and protective attempts were
overshadowed by nearly unconscious
compliance: “Knowing the strength of my
mother’s belief, I guess it never crossed her
mind to question whether this church, this life,
was right if it forced her fourteen-year-old
daughter into marriage” (Wall, 2009, p. 154).
Sharon’s meek noncompliance, however,
demonstrated that she questioned Wall’s
marriage.
26 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 6, 2015

Noncompliant actions within the FLDS were
gendered. In the FLDS, mothers could not
comply in a similar manner to Wall’s mother,
but FLDS expectations for husbands to hold
power over their wives created different
circumstances for men. Thus, a wife’s
consultation with church officials was sufficient
evidence that her husband had lost control over
her (and their children), which could lead to
church officials reassigning the wife to a new
husband.
Like Wall’s mother, Brian Mackert’s mother
sought reassignment (2008). She had discovered
that Mackert’s father had sexually abused his
daughters. Mackert expressed love for his
mother:
You weren’t always there for us
growing up, but you have been there for
us as adults as we try to reconcile the
past.... I, for one, am grateful for the
things you’ve done and love you dearly.
(2008, p. 8)
The efforts of Mackert’s mother to help her
children long after they suffered failed to protect
them, but her efforts did encourage Mackert to
love her and to understand her conflicting
commitments.
Noncompliance attempts involved religious
adherence without the individuals protesting
power relations. In response to parents’
noncompliance through religious mechanisms,
authors expressed understanding. Authors
associated protective noncompliance with love,
especially if it deviated from their understanding
that absolute compliance to religious demands
was normal.
Attempts at Total Compliance
Some authors presented parents as
unquestioning, submissive, and compliant, but
loving. Total compliance to most religious
demands involved family sacrifice and appeared
to make possible (though not to determine)
abuse or neglect. Authors often implied that
totally compliant parents prioritized their
children’s needs above their own, but beneath
their religious community’s demands. Parents
placing children in priority beneath religious
demands generally conformed to authors’
understandings of normality.
The compliance of Janzen’s (2010) parents
impacted her upbringing primarily through
gender norms and isolation, which let her fear
the outside world. She witnessed her mother
assume traditionally feminine activities (i.e.,
cooking) while Janzen was banned from
activities that allegedly promoted sexuality (i.e.,
dancing). Janzen characterized her parents as
lovingly providing a home that deviated from
the standards of mainstream society, but not in
ways that she portrayed to be threatening or
harmful.
Erin Prophet (2009) argued that her mother,
Elizabeth Clare Prophet, cared deeply for her
children but allotted little time to family because
of the demands associated with her mother’s role
as prophet to CUT. Furthermore, Prophet’s
mother excommunicated two of Erin’s siblings
because of “the belief system that allowed us to
delete a member of our family in this manner”
(2009, p. 129). Erin Prophet demonstrated that
her mother’s abandonment of her sister Moira
and (temporarily) her brother Sean prevented
deviance within the church and helped her
mother maintain power. Although her mother
dismissed Sean from the church, Erin wrote that
she soon permitted his return because of his role
in maintaining the church and because “Mother
had worshipped Sean” (2009, p. 72). Yet, Erin
criticized her mother’s preferential treatment of
Sean: “...if the girls in our family acted as he
did, nobody would worship us. Mother was not
trying very hard to build bridges with Moira”
(2009, p. 72). With these contradictions between
loving children and religious leadership
obligations, Erin Prophet demonstrated that her
mother’s actions stemmed from nonunitary
subjectivity.
Likewise, some authors stated that FLDS parents
abandoned children at the church’s instruction to
“Let your children go who won’t follow” (Jeffs,
2009, p. 87). Both Carolyn Jessop and Wall
questioned whether their parents’ grief over their
children leaving the FLDS was, as Wall wrote,
“solely out of love and regret for her sons’ pain
or for the dual failure that the situation
represented” (2009. p. 67). Carolyn Jessop wrote
International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 6, 2015 27