Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 26
Conclusion
In the long-standing and somewhat covert debate about the meaning of cult involvement,
people tend to see cult affiliation in one of two ways. Cult members are seen either as
“pathological,” “vulnerable,” “in need of a crutch,” or “going through a phase” --all terms
that suggest weakness, or fragility. Or cults are seen as so all-powerful that anyone can be
sucked up and brainwashed if they are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
My own view, elucidated here, is that women today become involved in cultic groups
because they are interested in the promise that these groups advertise, are drawn to
elements of cultic life that appeal to wishes that might be unconscious, and lack skill in
understanding the complexities of certain social communications. In essence, I believe that
women who join cults do so because they are strong, hopeful, and saddled by cultural
dilemmas. Because women, like most of us, are unable to tease out a particular set of
complicated, manipulative communications, they are at risk of being seduced by cultic
groups. For a woman to become more competent in discerning the deception and control,
and then to leave a cult, puts her at odds with the dominant social values defining her as a
successful woman.
Notes
1 When referring to women and their relationships to men or the dominant culture, I am
addressing women‟s gender role not their sex per se nor their sexual preference. I
define gender role as the category assigned to a person at birth based on his or her
genitalia. Once given this category, a person is socialized to behave in particular ways in
relation to members of the opposite sex and to the culture at large (including in relation
to the self).
2 All case studies are composites, and all names are pseudonyms.
References
Benjamin, J. (1988). The bonds of love: Psychoanalysis, feminism and the problem of
domination. New York: Pantheon.
Carli, L. (1990). Gender, language and influence. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 59(5), 941-951.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Horner, M. (1972). Toward an understanding of achievement-related conflicts in women.
Journal of Social Issues, 28, 157-175.
Kaschak, E. (1992). Engendered lives: A new psychology of women’s experience. New York:
Basic Books.
Kinney, J., &Leaton, G. (1978). Loosening the grip. St. Louis, MO: Mosley.
Levenson, E. (1983). The ambiguity of change: An inquiry into the nature of psychoanalytic
reality. New York: Basic Books.
Miller, J.B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Pipher, M. (1994). Reviving Ophelia: Saving the selves of adolescent girls. New York:
Ballantine Books.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York:
Ballantine Books.
Conclusion
In the long-standing and somewhat covert debate about the meaning of cult involvement,
people tend to see cult affiliation in one of two ways. Cult members are seen either as
“pathological,” “vulnerable,” “in need of a crutch,” or “going through a phase” --all terms
that suggest weakness, or fragility. Or cults are seen as so all-powerful that anyone can be
sucked up and brainwashed if they are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
My own view, elucidated here, is that women today become involved in cultic groups
because they are interested in the promise that these groups advertise, are drawn to
elements of cultic life that appeal to wishes that might be unconscious, and lack skill in
understanding the complexities of certain social communications. In essence, I believe that
women who join cults do so because they are strong, hopeful, and saddled by cultural
dilemmas. Because women, like most of us, are unable to tease out a particular set of
complicated, manipulative communications, they are at risk of being seduced by cultic
groups. For a woman to become more competent in discerning the deception and control,
and then to leave a cult, puts her at odds with the dominant social values defining her as a
successful woman.
Notes
1 When referring to women and their relationships to men or the dominant culture, I am
addressing women‟s gender role not their sex per se nor their sexual preference. I
define gender role as the category assigned to a person at birth based on his or her
genitalia. Once given this category, a person is socialized to behave in particular ways in
relation to members of the opposite sex and to the culture at large (including in relation
to the self).
2 All case studies are composites, and all names are pseudonyms.
References
Benjamin, J. (1988). The bonds of love: Psychoanalysis, feminism and the problem of
domination. New York: Pantheon.
Carli, L. (1990). Gender, language and influence. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 59(5), 941-951.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Horner, M. (1972). Toward an understanding of achievement-related conflicts in women.
Journal of Social Issues, 28, 157-175.
Kaschak, E. (1992). Engendered lives: A new psychology of women’s experience. New York:
Basic Books.
Kinney, J., &Leaton, G. (1978). Loosening the grip. St. Louis, MO: Mosley.
Levenson, E. (1983). The ambiguity of change: An inquiry into the nature of psychoanalytic
reality. New York: Basic Books.
Miller, J.B. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Pipher, M. (1994). Reviving Ophelia: Saving the selves of adolescent girls. New York:
Ballantine Books.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York:
Ballantine Books.
