Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1992, Page 21
experience with some form of substance abuse, primarily alcoholism --either in their families
or personally. This characteristic, then, was an essential thread in the cultic evolution of the
group. In a sense, the WDU became a large dysfunctional family, with Baxter as the abusive
alcoholic parent and her second-in-command Sandra as the more rational but equally abusive
other parent. For many members, this was perhaps unconscious but familiar territory.
Yet another factor is the intensity of the members’ faith in the political model and the fact that
unquestioning belief in that model led each member to accept and contribute to a stern
discipline and a harsh fate. Fervent political commitment and a devotion to Marxism-Leninism
as a political theory engendered the seeming willingness of the participants to join in and go
along with what very early on many outsiders recognized as cultic behavior. Baxter, who was
self-trained in group psychology and an avid student of thought-reform techniques, found
communist training literature to be a useful and effective tool in the process of exploiting the
members’ readiness to make a commitment.
Always couched in feminist or Marxist lingo, the dynamic of abuse, manipulation, and
dysfunctional behavior flourished in every aspect of the organization’s internal life:
--in the type of training that went on, manifest in the extreme control and rigid
discipline necessary to achieve the “remolding” or transformation of each member to
“submit” to cadre life
--in the style of criticism/self-criticism used, tantamount to extreme moralism,
humiliation, degradation, and guilt-tripping, embedded in the worst of Maoist rigidity
and simplicity (i.e., everything is black or white, good or evil everyone is either
friend or enemy)
--in the kind of political work done, in effect a lazy-Susan of Baxter’s seemingly
arbitrary and very personal obsessions with the Left, intellectuals, politicians, and
policymakers
--in the harshness of the daily life, the abusive criticism sessions, the trials and
purges, the punishments, the shunning, the violence, essentially the
institutionalization of a cruel and exclusionary life style and
--in the bizarre rituals of the inner circle, which included forced confessions, targeted
humiliations and accusations, excessive drinking bouts replete with intimacy, sex, and
violence, all of this never spoken about and intently guarded as the leadership secret.
The next section describes in greater detail exactly how the WDU came to dominate its
membership, beginning with recruitment on through to 24-hour control over a member’s life.
II. A Little Carrot and a Lot of Stick
By the summer of 1975, Baxter and her cohorts were deeply committed to building a strong
organization. Aside from their own study and collective criticism sessions, they knew that
their other main task was to expand the membership. Baxter impressed upon them over and
over that as an organization they had to grow and therefore each one of them had to think
about people to recruit.
The Use of Study Groups
Recruitment began within friendship and co-worker networks, using the classic communist
technique of study groups as a way to draw people in. Given that most of the founders were
lesbians, they quite naturally looked for new members within the local women’s community,
one obvious source of potential recruits. Like most actions, this one was strongly suggested
by Baxter, who expressed the opinion that lesbians active in the Left or in the women’s
community would be very open to a new organization founded by women and other lesbians.
experience with some form of substance abuse, primarily alcoholism --either in their families
or personally. This characteristic, then, was an essential thread in the cultic evolution of the
group. In a sense, the WDU became a large dysfunctional family, with Baxter as the abusive
alcoholic parent and her second-in-command Sandra as the more rational but equally abusive
other parent. For many members, this was perhaps unconscious but familiar territory.
Yet another factor is the intensity of the members’ faith in the political model and the fact that
unquestioning belief in that model led each member to accept and contribute to a stern
discipline and a harsh fate. Fervent political commitment and a devotion to Marxism-Leninism
as a political theory engendered the seeming willingness of the participants to join in and go
along with what very early on many outsiders recognized as cultic behavior. Baxter, who was
self-trained in group psychology and an avid student of thought-reform techniques, found
communist training literature to be a useful and effective tool in the process of exploiting the
members’ readiness to make a commitment.
Always couched in feminist or Marxist lingo, the dynamic of abuse, manipulation, and
dysfunctional behavior flourished in every aspect of the organization’s internal life:
--in the type of training that went on, manifest in the extreme control and rigid
discipline necessary to achieve the “remolding” or transformation of each member to
“submit” to cadre life
--in the style of criticism/self-criticism used, tantamount to extreme moralism,
humiliation, degradation, and guilt-tripping, embedded in the worst of Maoist rigidity
and simplicity (i.e., everything is black or white, good or evil everyone is either
friend or enemy)
--in the kind of political work done, in effect a lazy-Susan of Baxter’s seemingly
arbitrary and very personal obsessions with the Left, intellectuals, politicians, and
policymakers
--in the harshness of the daily life, the abusive criticism sessions, the trials and
purges, the punishments, the shunning, the violence, essentially the
institutionalization of a cruel and exclusionary life style and
--in the bizarre rituals of the inner circle, which included forced confessions, targeted
humiliations and accusations, excessive drinking bouts replete with intimacy, sex, and
violence, all of this never spoken about and intently guarded as the leadership secret.
The next section describes in greater detail exactly how the WDU came to dominate its
membership, beginning with recruitment on through to 24-hour control over a member’s life.
II. A Little Carrot and a Lot of Stick
By the summer of 1975, Baxter and her cohorts were deeply committed to building a strong
organization. Aside from their own study and collective criticism sessions, they knew that
their other main task was to expand the membership. Baxter impressed upon them over and
over that as an organization they had to grow and therefore each one of them had to think
about people to recruit.
The Use of Study Groups
Recruitment began within friendship and co-worker networks, using the classic communist
technique of study groups as a way to draw people in. Given that most of the founders were
lesbians, they quite naturally looked for new members within the local women’s community,
one obvious source of potential recruits. Like most actions, this one was strongly suggested
by Baxter, who expressed the opinion that lesbians active in the Left or in the women’s
community would be very open to a new organization founded by women and other lesbians.
