Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2006, Page 40
analysis than any other academic. (Of course, journal articles and book chapters by their
very nature typically focus on narrower topics.) Researchers of COG/The Family need to
accept that the voices of the abused are just as important as the voices of those who
experienced no abuse (or were abused, but managed to work through their pain to find new
meaning in the group). Academics should consider that each person‘s experience is
different, that not all disciples were abusers, and not all children were abused. The group‘s
future, however, is not completely discrete from its past—and the movement‘s past was at
times highly abusive, leaving a legacy of pain and emotional turmoil for some former (and
perhaps some current) members. The structural conditions of the group have at times
encouraged and facilitated these abuses but as some researchers have shown, these
conditions have changed and continue to change. How the movement responds to the
problems that Shepherd and Shepherd outline remains to be seen. The Family‘s future likely
shall continue to engage the interest of those scholars who have already dedicated much of
their time to studying it. For new researchers to the field of NRMs generally, and to
COG/The Family specifically, I hope this article helps to bring together some of the central
themes of study thus far.
Notes
1. For example, most of the major news networks carried the story. In addition, magazines such as
Rolling Stone published lengthy accounts of the group‘s history in relation to Rodriguez‘s death (see
Wilkinson, 2005).
2. Flirty Fishing (FFing) was a practice whereby female members engaged in varying degrees of sexual
contact with potential male recruits as a method of proselytization.
3. Academic research on the movement began in the 1970s thus, a large body of literature precedes
the works that this article discusses. See, for example, Davis and Richardson (1976), Enroth, Ericson,
and Breckinridge (1972), Kent (1994a), Kent (1994b), Lewis and Melton Eds (1994), Melton (1991),
Wallis (1981), Wallis (1983), Van Zandt (1991), and Wangerin (1993).
4. Williams Boeri (2005) discusses the sexual socialization process in detail.
5. Of course, one might agree with Melton that FFing simply was a form of ―evangelicalistic outreach‖
(Melton 1994b:74, 2004:13), or with Millikan, who frames his discussion of FFing in terms of ―Women
as Heroes‖ (Millikan, 1994:215–217). Note that Williams also did not initially find problem with the
practice (Williams, 1998:96) until the effects of FFing began to take a toll on her both psychologically
and physically.
6. Berg termed contemporary society and the institutions that are a part of it the ―System.‖ He named
people who were a part of the System ―Systemites.‖
7. See Bromley (1998) for a discussion of apostasy.
8. Band homes housed the group‘s musicians and dancers. Berg placed fewer restrictions on these
homes because the members brought significant funds and positive attention to the movement.
Williams provides a good account of one such home in France.
9. Note that Williams does apply a critical feminist perspective in her 2002 article.
10. The GSS is a data-gathering tool designed to garner American public opinion on a variety of
domains of social life.
11. For example, Bainbridge starts the book with an account of the raids on COG/The Family homes in
Argentina, Australia, France, Spain, and Mexico. He raises some very important concerns about police
brutality, criminal negligence, and the inappropriate separation of parents from their children. He does
not discuss, however, COG/The Family‘s abuses against children and adults in the movement thus,
we are left with a very unbalanced picture. A discussion of the events and circumstances that led up to
the raids would have provided the uninformed reader with much-needed background information.
Mishandling and mistreatment of adults and children are certainly not acceptable under any
circumstances, but readers need to know the context of the raids, and that COG/The Family also has
directed abuses at its own members. I return to a discussion of the raids in my review of J. Gordon
Melton‘s (2004) book. For Chancellor‘s (2000) discussion of the raids, see pp. 195–204.
12. The book is most likely designed to be an introductory text to the group. The publication is one of
many brief texts that the Centre for Studies on New Religions (CESNUR) has published in conjunction
with Signature Books. It appears from the publication information that the book was first published in
Italian. Melton (2000) has also produced a text on Scientology as part of this series.
13. For an expansion of this discussion, see Melton (1994a).
analysis than any other academic. (Of course, journal articles and book chapters by their
very nature typically focus on narrower topics.) Researchers of COG/The Family need to
accept that the voices of the abused are just as important as the voices of those who
experienced no abuse (or were abused, but managed to work through their pain to find new
meaning in the group). Academics should consider that each person‘s experience is
different, that not all disciples were abusers, and not all children were abused. The group‘s
future, however, is not completely discrete from its past—and the movement‘s past was at
times highly abusive, leaving a legacy of pain and emotional turmoil for some former (and
perhaps some current) members. The structural conditions of the group have at times
encouraged and facilitated these abuses but as some researchers have shown, these
conditions have changed and continue to change. How the movement responds to the
problems that Shepherd and Shepherd outline remains to be seen. The Family‘s future likely
shall continue to engage the interest of those scholars who have already dedicated much of
their time to studying it. For new researchers to the field of NRMs generally, and to
COG/The Family specifically, I hope this article helps to bring together some of the central
themes of study thus far.
Notes
1. For example, most of the major news networks carried the story. In addition, magazines such as
Rolling Stone published lengthy accounts of the group‘s history in relation to Rodriguez‘s death (see
Wilkinson, 2005).
2. Flirty Fishing (FFing) was a practice whereby female members engaged in varying degrees of sexual
contact with potential male recruits as a method of proselytization.
3. Academic research on the movement began in the 1970s thus, a large body of literature precedes
the works that this article discusses. See, for example, Davis and Richardson (1976), Enroth, Ericson,
and Breckinridge (1972), Kent (1994a), Kent (1994b), Lewis and Melton Eds (1994), Melton (1991),
Wallis (1981), Wallis (1983), Van Zandt (1991), and Wangerin (1993).
4. Williams Boeri (2005) discusses the sexual socialization process in detail.
5. Of course, one might agree with Melton that FFing simply was a form of ―evangelicalistic outreach‖
(Melton 1994b:74, 2004:13), or with Millikan, who frames his discussion of FFing in terms of ―Women
as Heroes‖ (Millikan, 1994:215–217). Note that Williams also did not initially find problem with the
practice (Williams, 1998:96) until the effects of FFing began to take a toll on her both psychologically
and physically.
6. Berg termed contemporary society and the institutions that are a part of it the ―System.‖ He named
people who were a part of the System ―Systemites.‖
7. See Bromley (1998) for a discussion of apostasy.
8. Band homes housed the group‘s musicians and dancers. Berg placed fewer restrictions on these
homes because the members brought significant funds and positive attention to the movement.
Williams provides a good account of one such home in France.
9. Note that Williams does apply a critical feminist perspective in her 2002 article.
10. The GSS is a data-gathering tool designed to garner American public opinion on a variety of
domains of social life.
11. For example, Bainbridge starts the book with an account of the raids on COG/The Family homes in
Argentina, Australia, France, Spain, and Mexico. He raises some very important concerns about police
brutality, criminal negligence, and the inappropriate separation of parents from their children. He does
not discuss, however, COG/The Family‘s abuses against children and adults in the movement thus,
we are left with a very unbalanced picture. A discussion of the events and circumstances that led up to
the raids would have provided the uninformed reader with much-needed background information.
Mishandling and mistreatment of adults and children are certainly not acceptable under any
circumstances, but readers need to know the context of the raids, and that COG/The Family also has
directed abuses at its own members. I return to a discussion of the raids in my review of J. Gordon
Melton‘s (2004) book. For Chancellor‘s (2000) discussion of the raids, see pp. 195–204.
12. The book is most likely designed to be an introductory text to the group. The publication is one of
many brief texts that the Centre for Studies on New Religions (CESNUR) has published in conjunction
with Signature Books. It appears from the publication information that the book was first published in
Italian. Melton (2000) has also produced a text on Scientology as part of this series.
13. For an expansion of this discussion, see Melton (1994a).
