Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 50
prayer, but without a genuine opening of the heart and body, these partial openings to
other dimensions of consciousness can lead to dangerous delusions, especially in an
environment of moral relativity. Not inherently destructive, these states of mind constitute
an essential part of our humanity, but they can be misused terribly in such conditions of
psychological captivity when our capacities for independent thought have been crippled or
dismantled. Unfortunately, because of their misuse in the group we tend now to distrust our
connection to these prayerful spaces even though we are out of the grip of the group.
In such a state of mind, the leader‟s sexual activities were “dreamstuff,” not real. The
emotion and shock that came with discovering his sexual involvement with many of his
followers led first to denial, then gradually to reverting to these altered states of mind to
deal with the doubts. As for those who were not able to handle the doubts, we assumed
they had failed this particular “test” of the strength of their vision.
Anger. Western culture teaches repression of anger as a virtue for all, but as an imperative
for women, unless they care to be categorized as difficult bitches. Women are taught from
early days to be nice, to adapt to others‟ needs, and to stifle their own anger. In the best of
circumstances, it takes a long time to come to know anger as a legitimate bodily signal, a
safeguard against hurt, boundary violation, and disregard of what we value. Once the
functioning of this critical signal has been stifled, its radar effectively dismantled, the
woman (or man) is vulnerable to being used and abused without even registering what has
happened. Instead, a dull sense of flatness, a depression, chronic fatigue or hypoglycemia,
rigidness or fear sets in --all more adaptable, and acceptable, forms of the surging animal
rage response to mistreatment. These veiled reactions won‟t provoke the perpetrator to
inflict even greater harm.
Anger was well regulated in our group, perhaps even more than sexuality. Not expressing
negative emotions (mainly by suppression) and non-identification (for us, a form of splitting
from the body) formed the two pillars of the prevailing system of thought. To be told you
were negative was the ultimate behavior control, disguised as helping you to work on
yourself. This ploy could be used to prevent certain conversations and to stifle questions,
doubts, concerns --or simply to put you in your place, to get a power hit. If you allowed
yourself to get upset, that was a sure sign you were not advancing satisfactorily. A placid
stoicism became the acceptable modus operandi. Outrage at abortions recommended,
children deserted, triangles condoned, the terminally ill threatened for late payments,
insinuations that a member dying of AIDS got what he deserved (for violating the no sex
task), the celibate guru unmasked as sexually active, the money spent on the paramours,
the snubs, the evasions, the control --the legitimate outrage at all of that behavior was
successfully stifled by the central idea that negative emotion implies weakness.
Meanwhile, few noticed that anger was virtually the only negative emotion that was being
controlled. Other clearly negative feelings, such as fear, disappointment, and sadness, were
tolerated, as were most forms of passive aggression (lateness, condescension, ignoring,
forgetting). Passive aggression was raised to a high art it was, in fact, a major tool in the
arsenal of covert, crazy-making control devices that played on the self-doubt instilled
through the many assaults on identity. As we look back, it seems so obvious that all these
violations against human dignity were going on in the name of work on ourselves. We were
having normal, healthy reactions to them yet, gradually, we learned to doubt and discount
those reactions as pathological indications of a lower state of consciousness until we no
longer had a reliable inner monitor to guide us. Having given up our own capacity for
thought, we became more and more dependent on the worldview of the leader to determine
our outlook.
We also had a wealth of teaching stories from the patriarchal traditions of the world to draw
on for explanation of the silencing of our own perceptions. We read or heard stories such as
prayer, but without a genuine opening of the heart and body, these partial openings to
other dimensions of consciousness can lead to dangerous delusions, especially in an
environment of moral relativity. Not inherently destructive, these states of mind constitute
an essential part of our humanity, but they can be misused terribly in such conditions of
psychological captivity when our capacities for independent thought have been crippled or
dismantled. Unfortunately, because of their misuse in the group we tend now to distrust our
connection to these prayerful spaces even though we are out of the grip of the group.
In such a state of mind, the leader‟s sexual activities were “dreamstuff,” not real. The
emotion and shock that came with discovering his sexual involvement with many of his
followers led first to denial, then gradually to reverting to these altered states of mind to
deal with the doubts. As for those who were not able to handle the doubts, we assumed
they had failed this particular “test” of the strength of their vision.
Anger. Western culture teaches repression of anger as a virtue for all, but as an imperative
for women, unless they care to be categorized as difficult bitches. Women are taught from
early days to be nice, to adapt to others‟ needs, and to stifle their own anger. In the best of
circumstances, it takes a long time to come to know anger as a legitimate bodily signal, a
safeguard against hurt, boundary violation, and disregard of what we value. Once the
functioning of this critical signal has been stifled, its radar effectively dismantled, the
woman (or man) is vulnerable to being used and abused without even registering what has
happened. Instead, a dull sense of flatness, a depression, chronic fatigue or hypoglycemia,
rigidness or fear sets in --all more adaptable, and acceptable, forms of the surging animal
rage response to mistreatment. These veiled reactions won‟t provoke the perpetrator to
inflict even greater harm.
Anger was well regulated in our group, perhaps even more than sexuality. Not expressing
negative emotions (mainly by suppression) and non-identification (for us, a form of splitting
from the body) formed the two pillars of the prevailing system of thought. To be told you
were negative was the ultimate behavior control, disguised as helping you to work on
yourself. This ploy could be used to prevent certain conversations and to stifle questions,
doubts, concerns --or simply to put you in your place, to get a power hit. If you allowed
yourself to get upset, that was a sure sign you were not advancing satisfactorily. A placid
stoicism became the acceptable modus operandi. Outrage at abortions recommended,
children deserted, triangles condoned, the terminally ill threatened for late payments,
insinuations that a member dying of AIDS got what he deserved (for violating the no sex
task), the celibate guru unmasked as sexually active, the money spent on the paramours,
the snubs, the evasions, the control --the legitimate outrage at all of that behavior was
successfully stifled by the central idea that negative emotion implies weakness.
Meanwhile, few noticed that anger was virtually the only negative emotion that was being
controlled. Other clearly negative feelings, such as fear, disappointment, and sadness, were
tolerated, as were most forms of passive aggression (lateness, condescension, ignoring,
forgetting). Passive aggression was raised to a high art it was, in fact, a major tool in the
arsenal of covert, crazy-making control devices that played on the self-doubt instilled
through the many assaults on identity. As we look back, it seems so obvious that all these
violations against human dignity were going on in the name of work on ourselves. We were
having normal, healthy reactions to them yet, gradually, we learned to doubt and discount
those reactions as pathological indications of a lower state of consciousness until we no
longer had a reliable inner monitor to guide us. Having given up our own capacity for
thought, we became more and more dependent on the worldview of the leader to determine
our outlook.
We also had a wealth of teaching stories from the patriarchal traditions of the world to draw
on for explanation of the silencing of our own perceptions. We read or heard stories such as
