Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 38
Sex, Lies, and Grand Schemes of Thought
in Closed Groups
A Collective of Women
Abstract
This article explores the invisible dynamics of control and submission in a closed
group with which the authors were affiliated for many years. Relying on Herman‟s
(1992) model of psychological captivity, the article illustrates the psychological
dynamics of the “courtship” of recruits and the covert coercive control through
which individual identity is dismantled and the worldview of the group‟s leader
introduced. Three methods of control are discussed: fear induction, destruction of
autonomy, and breaking of personality. The last part of the article explores how
cultural issues related to sexism enhance the power of high-demand groups.
We write as women who spent an average of 20 years involved in a philosophically oriented,
religious community based on the teachings of George Gurdjieff and Peter Ouspensky. All of
us have now left the group, most within the past 5 years. Yet, we are still dealing with the
aftereffects of what we have come to see was a destructive world permeated with the
dynamics of hidden control.
Some of us are still wondering what happened to our lives. How were we willingly entrapped
in a destructive world for so long? No one forced us to join the group or to stay, or so it
would appear. Rather, we were attracted to the group and its leader. We became
passionately involved, even zealous in our apparent commitment, loyal and dedicated to our
own undoing. Over time, we undermined our capacities for free thought, for hearing our
own conscience, for mutuality in relationship, and for finding our own way in the world. How
did this happen to us?
We write anonymously and disguise the identity of the group because we fear that
harassment may follow exposure. We acknowledge that our perspective on how our group
functioned is personal and that others may disagree with part or all of what we say,
although we are confident that many would agree. Our goal is not to “expose” a particular
group, or to “define” it through the articulation of our personal experience. Our goal is to
alert others to the elements of influence that can unwittingly bind people to what ultimately
harms them, and, especially, to the dangers of involvement with seemingly benevolent,
self-appointed leaders. In addition to mastering our own legacy of confusion, betrayal,
anger, and fear, we hope to shed light on the largely invisible dynamics of control and
submission that sustain such groups and the culture at large. Also we want to offer a view
of what it was like --how silent and unobtrusive the soul-killing can be.
Cults and Auras of Authenticity
Closed, doctrinaire groups with self-appointed leaders are commonly called cults. We prefer
not to use the label cultic, which is so loaded with negative connotations and lack of
understanding that the word itself stops further inquiry. No one ever believes that he or she
is in a cult (or a cultic relationship). Just as battered women rarely recognize themselves as
battered, few followers would ever acknowledge cult membership. Ask anyone you know
who is deeply involved with whatever group, and most likely that person will tell you that
the group is a legitimate organization with a leader, if there is one, who furthers the
members‟ interests (be they philosophical, religious, political). Yet, some of those groups
are probably high-demand, closed environments breeding the psychological chains that
enable manipulation by the leader. Mention “cultic” and the person may walk away,
unwilling to talk further.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 39
The word cult immediately erects a barrier for those outside the group as well because no
one ever thinks they would join a cult. Information describing such a bizarre organization
then does not apply to or interest us as average citizens. Thus, the knowledge level in the
general public about this captivating form of influence is appallingly low. This lack of
knowledge about closed-group influences makes people even easier prey. Just as a young
girl needs to learn how to spot the Don Juan who is out to seduce her, betray her, and add
her to his list of conquests, so everyone needs to learn how to spot the would-be god who
would capture your soul for his own purposes. The concept of a cult often stops further
inquiry in that we tend to think we know what it refers to --that is, something that has
nothing to do with us.
Legitimate groups do exist where individual autonomy, independent thought, and creative
action are sacrificed for a time. These limitations are instituted to effect some goal the
participant freely chooses. As a matter of course in our society, don‟t schools, the military,
and traditional religious organizations expect the suspension of autonomy? This temporary
sacrifice may actually improve the lives of the members and the community. The desired
traits develop, and individuals move on to tap their own creative sources of action, thought,
and feeling. The existence of such legitimate groups presents a problem for those who
would look for direction from a high-demand group, especially one with a self-appointed
leader. For the most striking quality of a destructive, enslaving group is its seeming
authenticity as a provider of wisdom, love, understanding, organized action, whatever you
are looking for.
Without the cover of the authentic, the nature and purposes of the control being exercised--
to fulfill the leader‟s need to bind others to him --could no longer remain hidden. The
temporary use of control for the good of those involved, as those of us who are parents
know, requires effort and self-sacrifice. We are relieved when our guidance is no longer
necessary, when the child, at last, has the judgment to govern his or her own behavior. But
when control is exercised out of a need to dominate, there is no easy escape, no
graduation, from the relationship.
Recognizing Prisons Without Walls
In the now-classic Trauma and Recovery, Judith Herman (1992) discusses the gradually
traumatizing effects of conditions of long-term captivity. Captivity in closed groups is not
physical, but is psychological. Herman found striking similarities between the dynamics of
high-demand religious groups, battering couple relationships, and child abuse. In each
situation, participation looks voluntary --that is, the victims look as though they choose to
stay with their oppressors --but is actually maintained through the dynamics of covert
control. Initially enthralled by the charm, intelligence, or perceptiveness of the perpetrator,
captives gradually become prisoners bound by the invisible chains of dominance and
submission. Such relationships or groups are prisons without walls. The leader captivates
members through a combination of enticement and intimidation, but primarily, at least in
the beginning, through a process akin to courtship.
In closed groups where covert control is exercised, strange, trancelike dynamics operate
that prevent those participating from seeing the most obvious things. For instance,
members are immune to damning information about the leader or the group, believing
themselves to be in a state of “grace” or of deep love and understanding, an understanding
that transcends everyday reality. Members don‟t realize to what extent their perceptions
have been engineered or if they do, they think it is for their own good. One can no longer
see what appears obvious to other people. Now that we are no longer so completely in the
grip of the mesmerizing group environment, we find it remarkable that techniques and
practices that we felt were uniquely our own --thought-stopping exercises, information
control, and so on --are found consistently in many closed, authoritarian groups.