Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2006, Page 34
problematic connotations that many new researchers are extremely wary of using it, or of
even exploring the possibilities of using it. In conclusion, while this article does a good job
of addressing the concerns of the second generation, it does so in a way that fails to appeal
to those scholars who have overlooked this component of the movement‘s history. Given
the polemic surrounding the brainwashing concept23, alternative constructs might have been
prudent in this instance.
“Women After the Utopia: The Gendered Lives of Former Cult Members,” by Miriam
Williams Boeri. In Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 31(3) (2002)
Williams Boeri analyzes the daily lives of 15 female former members of COG/The Family.
Centralising the importance of gender, she examines how these women have responded to
the post-cult environment. Drawing from symbolic interactionism, feminist discourses, and
grounded theory, Williams analyzes the women‘s transitions from cult members to ―cult
survivors.‖ In this way, environmental context, socialization, and social relations are crucial
to understanding the identities of the women. Critically, Williams asserts that her study
marks a shift from psychological discussions to sociological analyses—she explores four
general topics: ―identities, roles, interactions, and contexts‖ (p. 331).
Framing her work within a detailed discussion of the methodologies that she employs (semi-
structured interviews and participant observation at ex-member reunions), Williams Boeri‘s
ethnographic study provides a comprehensive amount of background information. The
women‘s age ranges, time spent in the group, time lapsed since leaving the group, reasons
for leaving, whether each woman left with or without a partner, education levels, and so on
are all taken into consideration (pp. 332–335).
Williams Boeri identifies COG/The Family as an extremely patriarchal environment in which
males benefited more than females from the sexual freedom that the group embraced.
Furthermore, she argues that the insular nature of the group fostered ―male domination of
women through normative and persuasive controls [which] often leads to violence‖ (p.
331). She asserts that in COG/The Family, ―women were subordinate to their husbands ...
and were encouraged to bear as many babies as possible. The sexual exploitation of the
women became excessive when the economy of prostitution was adopted by the group‖ (p.
330). Despite these convincing analyses, Williams Boeri does not address Maria‘s role as a
woman in the movement who wielded considerable power. Moreover, in Heaven‟s Harlots,
she discussed several other women who made life particularly hard for her in various
homes.
The focus of the study is the lived experiences of the women because ―few studies have
focused on how the sexual environment of cults has influenced the everyday lives of
females while in the group, and little is known about the long term effects of a cult
experience on women who leave‖ (p. 326). Moreover, she notes that both COG/The Family
environment and the post-group environment are gendered settings that shape male and
female expectations in terms of roles (p. 326). Because the key focus was everyday life and
post-group adjustment to society, sexuality was not part of the interview question set (p.
354). Williams Boeri found, however, that the women brought this topic up of their own
volition. In this way, the women informed Williams Boeri of how the sexual nature of their
previous identities interfered with their struggles to negotiate new identities.
In addition to depression, ―extreme estrangement and isolation‖ (p. 339), and role
confusion, the interviewees spoke of their ―spiritual confusion.‖ The women missed the
intensity of communion with God that the group fostered, as well as the sense of purpose
that they gained. After leaving the group, many felt that somehow they had let God down
(p. 340). Some women endured further problems, as well: lack of education, lack of work
history, and poor access to healthcare—practical issues that influenced their adjustment to,
and negotiation of, new social roles.

Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2006, Page 35
Williams Boeri‘s study provides interesting insights into the daily problems as well as the
emotional, physical, and psychological legacies that the women faced when entering into a
new and confusing social domain. Her work yields data on yet another facet of this
movement—the transition from female disciple to member of mainstream society, and all
that this role transition entails. She acknowledges that the findings of this article are not
generalizable to all female ex-members of COG/The Family or to all ex-members of other
groups, but that some parallels are likely emerge (pp. 333, 353).
“Generational Revolt by the Adult Children of First Generation Members of the
Children of God/The Family,” by Stephen Kent. In Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 3
No. 2 (2004)
Kent returns to the experiences of the first wave of second-generation members in this
discussion. He posits that core COG/The Family doctrines, along with specific policies and
publications, had problematic implications for the children of the movement and hence
contributed to their rejection of the group and its teachings. Kent begins his article with a
reflection on the abuse that Ricky Rodriguez states that he and his half-sister Techi
experienced at the hands of Berg, Maria, and other men and women in the leader‘s home.
Ironically, Berg intended that his adopted son would replace him as the group‘s prophet and
leader. Instead, Ricky and other second-generation members rejected the group‘s belief
system, left the group, and subsequently voiced their criticisms of the movement (pp. 56–
57).
Kent identifies seven particularly problematic doctrines. First, he posits that the disciples‘
unwavering acceptance of Berg as God‘s prophet facilitated and legitimated the practice of
punishment for ―murmurings‖—that is, ―expressions of doubt[s]‖ about the reality of this
claim (p. 58). Second, Kent asserts that the group‘s conflation of love and sex shaped a
―highly eroticized‖ environment in which adults socialized children into a range of sexual
attitudes and behaviours. Third, because God‘s words (as apparently mediated through
Berg) were sacrosanct, they superseded all other responsibilities. Thus, parents frequently
had to put the group‘s work first, before their children. Moreover, many of the women had
―Jesus babies‖ (that is, babies fathered by men that they had FFed). Because of this
separation, ―emotional bonds between children and their parents were severely strained,
and many children did not know their biological fathers‖ (pp. 58–59). Fourth, because the
group conceptualized society as the evil playground of the devil, disciples did not contact
official channels when known or suspected abuses and crimes occurred. Fifth, to prevent
members, including children, from being enticed into the outside world, leaders enacted
harsh punishments for deviation from Berg and the group. Sixth, COG/The Family formed its
own educational system—one that did not always meet with general standards, due to the
lack of qualified teachers and a biased and inadequate curriculum. Moreover, children often
were engaged in other COG/The Family activities that took them away from schooling.
Finally, Kent notes that the itinerant nature of the group disturbed the children‘s education
(although it facilitated a global network of contacts among them).
Berg‘s policies and publications reinforced the seven core doctrines. For example, Kent
notes that when children became ill or were born with defects, Berg blamed the parents for
poor disciplinary measures. He remarks that Berg believed that inadequate discipline made
children vulnerable ―to evil spirits or demonic possession‖ hence, he advocated physical
discipline, including ―spankings and beatings ...to drive out the evil‖ (p. 61). These abuses
have fostered a deep resentment in the second-generation members who endured them
toward the parents and leaders who initiated them.
When Berg‘s own daughter, Deborah, left the movement in 1978, he did not, however,
blame himself for her defection. Indeed, Kent notes that in a 1983 publication, Berg asserts
that he had not fallen short in his parental duties. In this same publication, Berg encourages