Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 68
kingdom in 1914. Since that time the group has predicted the end of the world numerous
times (Franz, 1991), and has made its primary focus to convert as many people as it can
before this end-time occurrence. Jehovah‟s Witnesses believe that only they will survive
when God‟s great cataclysm arrives and that they will have the privilege of living on a
perfect earth throughout eternity. Despite numerous failed prophecies as to the date of
Armageddon, Jehovah‟s Witnesses continues to be a large and successful religious group,
numbering more than five million members in 233 countries in 1996 (Watchtower Society,
1997, p. 40).
Women in WTS occupy a position of decreased personal power relative to men in the group.
Women are commonly exhorted to “remain in submission” to their husbands, and are
banned from instructing baptized male members about spiritual matters and from
addressing the congregation from the pulpit. A woman is regarded as a “weaker vessel” who
should manage her household “under her husband‟s approval and direction,” owing to her
“duty of submission to her husband” (Watchtower Society, 1971, p. 1665). The seminal
WTS text just cited goes on to define a wife‟s role as “caring for the family --prepare
nutritious meals, keep the home clean and neat and share in instructing their children --
subjecting themselves to their own husbands” (p. 242).
In addition to a relative lack of power compared to their male compatriots in the
congregation and in relationship with their husbands in the home, women as well as men
must cope with a community gestalt that discourages “independent thinking” (“Fight
Against,” 1983), mistrusts higher education, controls access to information critical of the
group, restricts members from expressing doubts, discourages diversity, and severely
punishes nonconformists.
Not all groups exert this level of control on their members. In many groups, both religious
and otherwise, guidelines for living and doctrinal wisdom are provided, yet individuals may
retain a great deal of control over their lives on many levels. In a high-control group, the
individual relinquishes her control to the group‟s zeitgeist. Individuals are seen as incapable
of directing their own lives and are in constant need of direction and structure from those
who are more capable and wise or who are more in touch with “God‟s will.”
In speaking about the structure of fundamentalist families in general, which some might
consider to be a form of high-control group, one author relates her experience:
The primary goal of relationships in a rigidly religious family centers around
control, because it is believed that people cannot be trusted. Obedience is stressed
as a primary value. Using biblical support, fundamentalist families are usually
patriarchal. Women are subject to their husbands. I was told that there had to be a
hierarchy, otherwise how would decisions be made? The implication was that
without such a control system there would be conflict and chaos. (Winell, 1993, p.
119)
The first author of this article defines a high-control group by the following characteristics:
1. Members experience negative consequences for nonconformist behavior or attitudes
(such as questioning doctrine or disagreeing with the party line).
2. Information is controlled, especially if critical of the group.
3. Leadership is absolute and not bound by checks and balances.
4. Individual behavior is excessively limited by rules and regulations (legalism).
5. Outsiders are generally viewed as dangerous or evil, and associations with outsiders
are primarily in order to convert them.
6. Members are required to give up their own interests or make sacrifices in favor of
group activities.
7. Members leaving the group are punished or shunned.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1997, page 69
According to this definition, WTS qualifies as a high-control group on a number of levels.
Members‟ lives are bound by explicit and implicit rules governing their behavior in public as
well as in private. Rules range from the insignificant, such as dress code, to the life
threatening, such as the prohibition on blood transfusions. Association with outsiders
(“worldly people”) is discouraged, except to conduct necessary business or try to convert
them. Throughout its history, WTS has encouraged its members to dedicate themselves to
preaching work over other activities, “as the end is very near.” For this reason, preaching
work is paramount in a member‟s life, often to the exclusion of higher education,
professional careers, and pursuit of personal interests, at times, even marriage and
parenthood.
Members experience negative consequences for questioning doctrine or expressing doubts
and can be severely punished if they continue to have questions after being “corrected” by
the Elders. Access to information that could be construed as critical of the group is severely
restricted, and members are told to “loath” ex-members who publish and speak out about
why they left (“Search Through Me,” 1993). In addition, members who leave are almost
always subject to “disfellowshipping” or are “disassociated” (supposedly a less harsh
judgment, but with essentially the same results), which involves a ban being placed on the
disfellowshipped person that requires members to shun and avoid contact with that person
for the rest of his or her life, or until the ex-member submits to a process of
“reinstatement.”
Legalism in Daily Life
For Jehovah‟s Witnesses, life is constricted by innumerable spoken and unspoken rules and
regulations, that is, the locus of control for an individual‟s life lies almost entirely with the
organization. Members are not permitted or are highly discouraged from a number of
activities, including celebrating birthdays or holidays, attending other churches, working for
the government, smoking cigarettes, listening to many kinds of modern music, joining the
army, wearing beards, dating non-Witnesses, joining 4-H, and voting, to name just a few.
Some of these “sins” result in censure or “marking” and loss of status within the group
others can lead to the cruel shunning treatment of disfellowshipping. Recently, for example,
an elderly woman was disfellowshipped because she began smoking cigarettes. Instead of
being helped by the congregation with this issue, she was cut off from the community and
left on her own, depressed and suicidal at the age of 68 because of her “sin” (personal
communication, 1992). Franz (1991), a former member of the WTS governing body (now
disfellowshipped himself), cites an instance of a member who made a living installing
burglar and fire alarm systems and who was disfellowshipped for providing monitoring
services for a system he had installed in a local church (pp. 351-352). Doing work for a
church is seen as “supporting the work of the devil” who, in the eyes of WTS, is at the head
of all other religions. Franz also discusses the case of a 91-year-old man who, after 56 years
of active membership, was disfellowshipped for talking about the Bible to a disfellowshipped
friend (pp. 353-356). Since 1975, it is estimated that more than 40% of those who were
involved with WTS have left or were forced out, and that between 1975 and 1985 alone,
more than 880,000 people exited the group (Bergman, 1992, p. 308). This makes it entirely
possible that there are as many or more former Jehovah‟s Witnesses in the world as there
are current members.
The Watchtower Society puts forth innumerable “suggestions” as to what members should
wear, whom they should date and marry, what medical procedures they may not have, how
they should wear their hair, what kinds of jobs they should perform, how many hours a
month they should preach, how many meetings they must attend, what kind of people they
should spend their time with, how much and what kind of education is acceptable, what
material to read and not to read, and so on. Many of these edicts are put in the form of
suggestion, yet are actually disguised rules. For an example of how this is accomplished,