Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 44
should not follow any instruction we did not understand or take on any idea we had not
personally verified to be true. Of course, professing lack of understanding or lack of
verification did not safeguard one from the consequences of violating exercises, or,
especially, tasks. And those who lagged in following the exercises were not given positions
of power and influence granted to those who did. Violating tasks deemed essential for the
well-being of the community was grounds for removal from the organization. Tasks revolved
around sex, money, drugs, and, of all things, gossip.
We have downplayed the sensational, and in the following have summarized those exercises
we can recall to give a flavor of how much it takes to finally remove the autonomy of
people. You can also see how far people will go when they trust a leader and believe his
directions will ultimately help them to gain psychological freedom, love, consciousness, or
contact with the divine. The limitations seem a small price to pay for the promised results.
Control of interactions with the leader. We want to point out again that destruction of
autonomy is not obvious. Verbal rather than physical abuse prevails, with passive rather
than active assaults. Your perception of reality is systematically questioned, your feelings
denied, your worth undermined. The invisible chains of psychological dominance are forged
slowly, gradually. The dominant person establishes the terms of the interaction and builds
dominance by many means. Some of those include the following: (1) he alternates kindness
and abuse --intermittent friendliness erases the memory of upsetting behavior (2) he
controls inter-personal communication and decides on acceptable subjects to discuss,
ignoring questions he does not care to address (3) he allows no validation of your
experience of doubt, fear, or anger with him (4) he manipulates feelings if confronted,
primarily by focusing on what‟s wrong with you (5) he displays indifference, disrespect, and
disregard toward you in the guise of being above such petty, mechanical concerns (6) he
disregards or discounts any hurt feelings you might have and (7) he maintains emotional
distance in the name of being a “higher” man.
After the first few years, the leader controlled virtually all interactions we had with him, and
he became more and more inaccessible. When he did invite you to be with him, he
determined when you would speak. You might ask him a question, such as “How do you
deal with anger?” or “Why don‟t you invite women to the symposiums?” And he would
answer with, “Look at the beautiful irises Joan has arranged for the table,” or “How is your
mother?” These diversions would be read as ways to bring you back to the present, away
from abstract intellectualizing. In fact, they effectively silenced doubts and concerns.
Control of speech. The first exercise anyone experienced was introduced at the
prospective student meetings and involved eliminating certain words from your vocabulary.
The words changed over time, but for many years included all contractions, and the word I.
The ability to speak while eliminating these words was supposedly a sign of consciousness,
or, at least, a kind of divided attention we attempted to cultivate. If, while speaking, you
uttered one of the words, another student would make a hand signal to alert you to your
“sleep.” This exercise threw prospective students off, minimized their ability to express
themselves, and at the same time showed them one method for awakening from the “sleep”
of ordinary awareness. Since “no gossip” was a task, the subjects of our conversations were
also limited. The formidable exercise of not expressing negative emotions was another
bulwark of the practices that curtailed our speech.
Control of dining. The leader selected the menus, often elaborate, for the group‟s dining
hall. He preferred fine dining with china, silver, flowers, and four-course meals. He gave
explicit instructions on how to eat, including the mechanics of holding the utensils, and he
put people on diets if he thought they needed to lose weight.
Control of clothing. Women were asked to stop wearing pants and wear only skirts or
dresses. He liked to purchase clothing for both men and women as part of the intermittent

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 45
showering of attention. This was particularly appreciated by those who were being paid bare
sustenance wages working for the organization and could not afford their own new clothes.
At various times, we were asked not to wear clothes that were too casual in nature, such as
athletic shoes or shorts.
Control of names. He routinely assigned new names to people he favored Anglo names in
an attempt to minimize ethnicity in the group. This was especially hard on the men who
were not accustomed to having their identities messed with in such a fundamental way, as
are women who are trained to expect to change their names.
Control of sexuality, marriage, and children. The rule of no sex outside marriage was a
tough one to enforce, though many did adhere to it. There was also to be a waiting period
after leaving one sexual relationship and entering into another. There were no mass
assignments of marriage partners (too blatant a control measure), but he did use his
influence to encourage and discourage partnerships. He discouraged having children during
the early years of the group, and children were not welcome at any events. He abruptly
turned about (abrupt changes were common) on the subject of children and encouraged
members to raise families. This turnabout came around the time the number of new
members dropped off, at the predictable 10-to-15-year turning point in the age of the group
when the initial enthusiasm begins to wane in the face of failed promises, diffused identities,
and minimal enlightenment.
This may be one example where the leader‟s initial inclination (i.e., not to allow children
even to the extent of encouraging women to have abortions or give their children away)
was a better choice for maintaining his brand of coercive control than his later acceptance of
children as a necessary evil. For some women who bore children in this later phase, the
awakening of primal feminine instincts signaled a definitive break in the leader‟s veil of
control. Why? We believe that pregnancy opens the body, obliterating, for a while anyway,
our defensive structure. Did some light manage to seep in the aura of control during the
days of birth? Perhaps also because the leader‟s own needs became obvious for what they
were (he wanted the attention we were now directing toward babies). Or, maybe women
who could not protect themselves became fiercely protective with their children. Or,
perhaps, in moving into the role of parents, we were able, finally, to recognize the depen-
dence/dominance dynamic for what it was and begin to challenge the imbalanced nature of
such a relationship.
Isolation from outside support and information. Control and isolation go hand in hand.
By isolating his captive, the perpetrator guarantees his stranglehold on the person‟s
perceptions. In our community, we were discouraged from contacting our families or former
friends. Rather, we were encouraged to remain with our “real family” --other group
members --for any vacation or holiday. Attendance at significant family events, such as
christenings, marriages, or funerals, was characterized as a waste of time. We were also
advised not to discuss the group, the teacher, or the doctrines with anyone outside, as this
would be “casting pearls before swine.” In fact, in the early days, we soon discovered that
people were not at all interested or began to look curiously at us if we did share with them
our zeal and enthusiasm for the new-found set of ideas and community. We began to
develop split personalities. Some of us lived for decades without ever telling our families,
therapists (for the rare few who required this “life” intervention), or outside acquaintances
about our activities with the group. If you consider that many of us built our lives around
the group, perhaps you can imagine what a feat this was. Once the numbing and splitting of
chronic trauma set in, such inner contradictions can easily go on for years unnoticed.
We were also isolated from outside sources of information. For years we were admonished
to read books or poetry or listen to music only if approved by him. For nearly 10 years, we
also followed a “no media” exercise. We were completely out of touch with events in the