Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2005, Page 26
Imposed Anorexia: A Model of Dietary Restriction in Four
Ideological Groups
Jessie Meikle
Department of Sociology
University of Alberta
Abstract
This article develops a model of ‗imposed anorexia‘ within new religious
movements. In particular, I argue for a three-fold model of imposed
anorexia: directly imposed, mediated, and doctrinally accepted. I develop
this model of imposed anorexia by analyzing the dietary habits and
restrictions in four NRMs: Church Universal and Triumphant, The Disciples of
the Lord Jesus Christ, Breatharianism, and the Family of Anne Hamilton-
Byrne (The Great White Brotherhood). Specifically, I conceptualize imposed
anorexia as a form of control that ideological leaders hold over their
‗surrogate bodies,‘ which are those of their followers.
Few scholarly works exist that discuss dietary restrictions in a religious context, and most of
the work written on this subject concentrates on major world religions.1 Of particular
interest are studies of ‗holy anorexia‘ among medieval Catholic woman whose severe self-
deprivation sometimes gained them religious status (see Bell, 1985 Walker-Bynum, 1987).
Even fewer works on alternative religions discuss the relationship between diet and social
control. For example, Bradley Whitsel‘s recent study of Church Universal and Triumphant
overlooks the group‘s diet and eating habits, despite the importance that the group placed
on food. Likewise, an earlier controversial study (Lewis and Melton, 1993) also neglected to
discuss how group leadership used food to control members (perhaps because the editors
seemed to overlook aspects of the group that might cast it in a negative light).2
In this article, I argue that selected leaders of ideological groups and new religious
movements (NRMs) use dietary restrictions to regulate members‘ bodies and minds in much
the same manner as anorectics use dietary restrictions to govern their lives. I call this
regulation ‗imposed anorexia,‘3 and I present a three- fold model of it. First, directly
imposed anorexia occurs when the group leader gives orders or commands that restrict
members‘ diets. Second, doctrinally accepted anorexia occurs when a person adopts the
dietary rules and regulations of group leaders on their own, with few if any direct orders of
their inter-mediators. This kind of adoption takes place in what Stark and Bainbridge (1985)
call ‗audience cults,‘ which involve members receiving doctrine through mass media outlets
(Stark and Bainbridge, 1985: 26). Third, mediated anorexia occurs when the group leader
gives instructions or orders through another person or down a chain of command through
his or her followers. The three categories of imposed anorexia are not mutually exclusive,
but form an outline for a model of member control through the use of food restrictions. I
draw examples from four ideological groups: Church Universal and Triumphant,
Breatharianism, Rama Behera‘s Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, and The Family of Anne
Hamilton-Byrne from Australia (sometimes referred to as The Great White Brotherhood).4
By studying an aspect of new religions that focuses on potential harm, I nevertheless do not
wish to entangle myself in the academic polarization that Susan Palmer refers to as ―the cult
wars‖ (Palmer, 2001).5 Nor do I wish to pass judgment on ideological groups, especially
since the so-called mainstream American diet is also harmful, as evidenced by the plethora
Imposed Anorexia: A Model of Dietary Restriction in Four
Ideological Groups
Jessie Meikle
Department of Sociology
University of Alberta
Abstract
This article develops a model of ‗imposed anorexia‘ within new religious
movements. In particular, I argue for a three-fold model of imposed
anorexia: directly imposed, mediated, and doctrinally accepted. I develop
this model of imposed anorexia by analyzing the dietary habits and
restrictions in four NRMs: Church Universal and Triumphant, The Disciples of
the Lord Jesus Christ, Breatharianism, and the Family of Anne Hamilton-
Byrne (The Great White Brotherhood). Specifically, I conceptualize imposed
anorexia as a form of control that ideological leaders hold over their
‗surrogate bodies,‘ which are those of their followers.
Few scholarly works exist that discuss dietary restrictions in a religious context, and most of
the work written on this subject concentrates on major world religions.1 Of particular
interest are studies of ‗holy anorexia‘ among medieval Catholic woman whose severe self-
deprivation sometimes gained them religious status (see Bell, 1985 Walker-Bynum, 1987).
Even fewer works on alternative religions discuss the relationship between diet and social
control. For example, Bradley Whitsel‘s recent study of Church Universal and Triumphant
overlooks the group‘s diet and eating habits, despite the importance that the group placed
on food. Likewise, an earlier controversial study (Lewis and Melton, 1993) also neglected to
discuss how group leadership used food to control members (perhaps because the editors
seemed to overlook aspects of the group that might cast it in a negative light).2
In this article, I argue that selected leaders of ideological groups and new religious
movements (NRMs) use dietary restrictions to regulate members‘ bodies and minds in much
the same manner as anorectics use dietary restrictions to govern their lives. I call this
regulation ‗imposed anorexia,‘3 and I present a three- fold model of it. First, directly
imposed anorexia occurs when the group leader gives orders or commands that restrict
members‘ diets. Second, doctrinally accepted anorexia occurs when a person adopts the
dietary rules and regulations of group leaders on their own, with few if any direct orders of
their inter-mediators. This kind of adoption takes place in what Stark and Bainbridge (1985)
call ‗audience cults,‘ which involve members receiving doctrine through mass media outlets
(Stark and Bainbridge, 1985: 26). Third, mediated anorexia occurs when the group leader
gives instructions or orders through another person or down a chain of command through
his or her followers. The three categories of imposed anorexia are not mutually exclusive,
but form an outline for a model of member control through the use of food restrictions. I
draw examples from four ideological groups: Church Universal and Triumphant,
Breatharianism, Rama Behera‘s Disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, and The Family of Anne
Hamilton-Byrne from Australia (sometimes referred to as The Great White Brotherhood).4
By studying an aspect of new religions that focuses on potential harm, I nevertheless do not
wish to entangle myself in the academic polarization that Susan Palmer refers to as ―the cult
wars‖ (Palmer, 2001).5 Nor do I wish to pass judgment on ideological groups, especially
since the so-called mainstream American diet is also harmful, as evidenced by the plethora
