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
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
