|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Mar 8, 2010 9:03:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Mar 8, 2010 10:30:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by janedoe on Mar 8, 2010 10:31:34 GMT -5
[note, CAPS for only stress-emphasis here, I know it's not 'fascist grammar internet 'elitist' kiss the boots of grammar Nazi rules--but I write in my OWN style, on the internet--I do NOT write academic style or go by 'conformist' Rules, I do not CARE to 'conform' to fit into some Patriarchal 'mold' and Especially a Class Mold--I talk street, actually I tame it down a lot, so not to offend, but I decided LONG time ago I would NOT betray my 'class' or pretend to be somebody I'm not just because Society, has a class hierarchy--and a Race hierarchy, it wreaks of Privilege snobbery to me and though I Could yes, write in proper grammar/academic as I do know how, I CHOOSE NOT TOO, just be glad I don't use WomYn anymore, or Wommin, though I am sometimes tempted..., again, CAPS here only for emphasis, this is who I am, if some don't like my writing style, then don't read it, it's that simple--Besides, I have found, experience, it's often just an Excuse, to ignore the "Content" of the message/writing and rather than debate the content its the pull out the 'attack her writing style', which if you Think about it, is a typical patriarchal slam to reduce Women's voice, and I simply won't play that game NOR Obey those 'norms'. IF it's not hurtful, harmful, I simply won't be emotionally blackmailed by Women, to do this, thought I'd say it...I believe women are Individual Human Beings, I'm Done conforming into a nice neat little box, thank you.] As a home-schooler/combo unschooler/eclectic I find it hilarious that I've not heard of this Bill Gothard, maybe that's a Good thing, actually, in a weird way, though my life is very different [though similar abuses, etc] from most of yours, where I did NOT live for God the way I believed I should, I was protected from so much... but This, this just Blew the Top off my head here, "Even breast feeding, which can be a barrier to conception is not to be prolonged for this reason." Like, OK NOW they are INTERFERING with what GOD HIMSELF designed AND is like the core, really, of Nurture, used in So many scriptures, symbolic of God's care/nurture, especially food for us [the earth, land, animals, the land of milk and honey] and setting themselves UP AS GOD/ABOVE GOD to DICTATE the TIME LIMITS on Breastfeeding, so they can Have more Children? How in the world is THAT TRUSTING God for children? Isn't that 'man's interference'? That right there, I mean, uh, like Duh, oh this just gets me, what about the OT laws [if they are going to GO BY THE OT LAW THEY ARE TO GO BY ALL OF THEM NOT JUST SELECT AND CHOOSE, arrrgh] that require Monthly Purification of women where Women are NOT to have Sexual relations, and that wasn't just a quick purification, there are rules in regards to the not a spot of menstrual blood, in Judaic law, not because she was unclean but because this was God's way of reassuring her that though there was the result [not curse, only the Serpent/Ground was cursed] of the law, she was NOT rejected as a result of--if you study/know how the blood atonement works and the release of 'guilt' as NOT to interfere with one's intimate relationship with God, purification is a type of reconciliation and cleansing of Consciousness of human--not a rejection, I believe also it was a time of rest, from the demands of 'husbands', and in Judaic Law [true Judaic law] there are strict Duties of Husbands towards wives in these matters. Another area is the days of festivals/especially the Holy Days in Judaic law where sex was to be abstained from, do they Usurp THAT too? This just infuriates me, how they have taken it upon themselves to USURP GOD, twisting one scripture of Quiverfull and making it some Doctrine, that is False Doctrine. Breastfeeding is a Gift, it is one of the most precious 'bonding' gifts that God gave to woman/child and a Compliment of the Highest, if you really think about it--how DARE they, interfere with that and usurp MAN ABOVE GOD? I am so livid right now I could spit, just thinking on this, it shows [the misuse] of scripture a complete Ignorance of who God really is, and it's really time that those who know Truth Speak it, we simply cannot let these mouthpieces of planting Death continue to blare out false doctrines that mislead and Blaspheme the nature of God. I feel very strongly about this. I breastfed all my children, for two years until THEY were ready to wean, and it doesn't always prevent pregnancy. I would not rely on breastfeeding alone to delay pregnancy, while this may work for three to six months Depending on how much one breastfeeds/if they supplement, their diet, etc., and I suppose individual octycen [spell?] level, but to interfere, when does MAN stop Interfering with Nature, Nature that God created? On one hand they claim they are totally dependent on God, on another, they are Usurping God, it's really mind boggling. But it shows to me anyhow, that it's not really about 'trusting God' as much as this is about MEN HAVING ABSOLUTE CONTROL AND SETTING THEMSELVES UP AS 'GODS'. It's interesting too because breastfeeding, the curve of a woman's stomach [if you pay attention it's like the curve of the Mother Earth] and the make up of a woman's body, is POWERFUL, very Powerful and God trusted HER with that POWER, and yes, it is very much like Goddess, it truly is, no wonder men and patriarchs [who do NOT FEAR GOD, the tribal Patriarchs of Abraham, Jacob and Isaac are in no way remotely Near these so called 'faux God fearing patriarchs today] do so much to interfere, control, women's birth, sexuality, breastfeeding and even interfere with her God Given INSTINCTS, that are yes, primitive and put there BY GOD, in WOMAN, they do all in their power to destroy and to kill HER. Satan, seriously Satan-- in fact, in Judaism the breastfeeding and the Empowerment/Respect women received Due to her ability to Nurture, to give LIFE in her Body, just as the Mother Earth gives life and food to each one of us, in that era especially [because without the breast milk or wetnurse CHILDREN DIED], a woman told Jesus, blessed be the breasts that gave you milk, etc., that is how Esteemed women's bodies and ability to nurture was in Those days, man has done all in his power to Strip her of that Glory, especially by interference. It's not just man's controlling women's womb in whether she births children or not, or has sex or not, but HOW she gives birth [they've been tampering with it from day one] to When she gives birth to How she nurtures her children stripping her of all her maternal-natural God given POWERFUL instincts, ripping the bonding process, deminishing (sic) woman's ability to Rely on her OWN internal Voice in child rearing/nurture/releasing to where women have internalized the misogyny to a point where she now turns against herself/polices herself, etc. [yes, this is Radical Goddess-Eco Feminism except for me the Goddess is in God, He is both Father and Mother to me, and I have no qualms in saying so--hear me Roar if you know what I mean, the Lioness, the Eagle, we So need to get back to Spirituality and DUMP man's doctrines]. Anyway, yea this just really gets me, the Nerve of these men. One day, if they do not repent and turn back To the Lord God, they will have to answer for their usurping HIS creation/design, their interfering and controlling/destroying what Nature, gave Woman, the Mothers of Life [and it's not just 'childbearing it's Life in so many ways, a woman does NOT have to be a Mother to be A LIFE SOURCE, SHE', IS, LIFE SOURCE, period, in all she does. If women could ONLY see that, how Precious SHE IS, TO GOD? POWERFUL, EMPOWERED, NOT TO BE DEMEANED, WEAKENED, STOMPED ON, SILENCED, ERASED.... to Erase Woman, is to ERASE GOD--GOD, PROVIDER, NURTURE, OUR LIFE SOURCE, It's really that simple. And the more I read the OT, the more I see, God DID give Women, yes, Means of BIRTH CONTROL, herbs, sacred times, times God set apart for Women to be with Him, to be restored in her soul and in her life, her relationship with Him, how DARE men, try to interfere with that...they are NOT GOD, they had better, really heed this. They are NOT GOD. In sincerity, Jane
|
|
|
Post by bananacat on Mar 8, 2010 10:48:08 GMT -5
"Quiverfull women are more than mothers. They’re domestic warriors in the battle against what they see as forty years of destruction wrought by women’s liberation: contraception, women’s careers, abortion, divorce, homosexuality and child abuse, in that order."
Do they really think that none of this stuff happened more than 40 years ago? They're the ones who advocate hitting infants with plumbing supplies!
Women have always had careers to support their families. Both of my grandmothers HAD to work so their kids wouldn't starve. The true difference is that they were excluded from education and good careers because of their gender, so it was just that much harder for them to take care of their families. Both of my grandmothers were faithfully married, and did everything "right", and they still had to work.
Abortion has been around since the beginning of time. The difference there is that women use to risk their lives and health for it, and I suspect that some people are more upset that women don't have to go through that anymore than they are about the actual abortions.
Divorce wasn't very common until recently simply because people used to die a lot earlier. There's a saying that I like: "Half of all marriages end in divorce, but the other half end in death". A lifetime commitment is much longer now than it ever was before.
And of course homosexuality has been around forever too. The real difference is that now people don't feel as much pressure to hide it or feel guilty about it.
Sorry for the rant, but these self-righteous, arrogant people are so irritating.
|
|
|
Post by janedoe on Mar 8, 2010 10:56:21 GMT -5
LOL sorry don't mean to get like on my Radical-Eco Feminist soap box here but that breastfeeding/and their Interference, oh, just blew the top off my head, literally,
and so I would presume that with these babies born that close there is a loss of real time-bonding too, between mother and child therefore, not only are WOMEN being
ROBBED, SO OUR THE CHILDREN...
how DARE these Men? Oh, oh, ooooooh, these men are something else, there Seriously needs to be some RISE UP WOMAN consciousness going on,
but I feel, that this power, may scare a lot of women. That is sad, it truly is, but you know, these MEN obviously are FEARFUL OF THE POWER, GOD GIVEN LIFE POWER, OF
WOMAN.
Talk about some serious Vagina Envy going on.
This shows me that there isn't just a need of 'healing' but there is a real need of Women Consciousness of WHO she Really is, who God designed her,
it's NOT this beat down child body enslaved/controlled codependent on man, [referring to Christianity here] and it's just irksome, to see this garbage in the doctrines that MEN have perverted I believe since after Paul died, typical in all religions mind you, it's not just Christianity and the same happened in OT in Judaism too, they couldn't just Receive God's ways/Life oh no, they had to 'remold God into the image They so wanted, and they did this yes, with patriarchy, mixing with 'strange' beliefs of 'gods' that were all about abuse/hierarchy and power, the Gentiles are doing the same exact thing. [I am seeing this more and more reading the Word, and it's not just relations of abuse over women, it's the stripping of earth, the 'altar's of steps that like WOW, God demanded that His altars be made on ground with HIS created stones, not hewn stones, nor 'money' to be graven as He was not a God that money could bribe/or control, oh, I mean, this is OT law, Human Rights seriously, the OT law was Human Rights, if you really pay attention, to WHO GOD really is,
it's So contrary to the lies spewed by religion, it's just unreal. The sabbath rests, for land and animals, the Native Indians had more Understanding of the True Ways of GOD
than these faux patriarchs, faux meaning man's patriarchy, not Judaic [true Judaism].
Well, anyway I am seeing it, it's frustrating that so much has been robbed from women, from children, from the earth, due to the encroachment on God's Life to Us, His LOVE, we are made in HIS image, HER image [there are Numerous examples all through the Bible of Yes, GOD'S FEMALE SIDE, and SHE is POWERFUL, Jesus saying how long He wanted to gather the Jerusalem like a HEN gathers her chicks,
HOW did HE know that? The metaphors are all over the place, and they are very powerful, they truly are. Its not an Abuse power, mind you, no, or an usurping Power over Men, no, not at all, but it IS a power,
that provides/nurtures Life [not just births life] of humanity, nurtures the planet [is supposed to, not rape and pillage it for gold, silver, hoarding food/stripping water/nutrients for greed], the animals, I mean,
it's like all there, from Genesis to Revelations. But all it takes, is a 'little leaven' Jesus said [and in OT this was spoken when setting up the Passover about that leaven] to leaven the entire lump, the Pollution, both of Herod and of the Pharisees, the religious patriarchs who knew not mercy, love, or God...Jesus said, they did the works of their father, the Devil.
The son of perdition will be revealed, usurping God, sitting in the Temple,
to those who have ears, let them hear. [think about Jesus overthrowing the money tables and cleaning out the temple in Jerusalem, it wasn't a Pagan temple Jesus cleaned up]
Sincerely,
Jane
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Mar 8, 2010 11:27:46 GMT -5
I noted that Michelle Duggar paraphrased Mother Teresa in saying, "You can't have too many flowers." I have two words for her: purple loosestrifeCome to think of it, I have two more words for her: water hyacinth
|
|
|
Post by francescateresa on Mar 8, 2010 11:37:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by janedoe on Mar 8, 2010 12:50:05 GMT -5
There were herbs used to slow down or prevent pregnancy in B.C. years and A.D. years, now Which ones were used among Judah/Israel/Samaria I don't know, I find it interesting though that hyssop, which was a bitter herb, is a birth control and mandrakes [mentioned in Bible, used by Rachel and Leah are sexual stimulants/for birth], anyway, interesting, if any one has or wants to do research on this: www.ashtreepublishing.com/Book_Childbearing_Year_Herbal_Contraceptives.htmWhether or not these were needed, however with the 'allowing' [Jesus said hardness of hearts and also if you know the societies/warfare and the demographics of widows and rates of survival of widows, slim to none, fatherless, slim to none due to lack of food/ability to farm and famines and so forth in those time periods] -- with allowing multiple wives, so doubt seriously if women had high numbers of children, by herself, like in Nuclear andro-centric patriarchy, etc., so maybe herbals for birth control weren't needed, whether they used them or not, I don't know, you would Think some did, due to the Cultures around them, I know the Egyptians used a lot of herbs, this would be an interesting study, if I find anything, in Judaic history will share--again, referring to herbs used to slow down conception, not abortants, though those do exist [they are dangerous though, not something to be fooled around with that's for sure, penny royal can kill a pregnant woman, causing bleeding out, etc.] OK found something, this study says Yes, there WERE birth control herbs USED by midwives in Biblical times in those lands, excerpt: The first big issue is: Were Birth Control and Abortions Available to Ancient Women? Yes. They are referenced in texts contemporary with the bible. Most of these texts are Greek or Roman. Gynecology, for example, was written by Soranus around 98CE, the Hippocratic Writings by Hippocrates generated between 430-330BCE, and De Materia Medica by Dioscorides was written around 30-40CE. These all provide some kind of birth control or abortion method (Houston.) Scrolls found in Egypt dating to 1900BCE, describe ancient methods of birth control that were later practiced in the Roman empire during the apostolic age (Catholic.com). Another source gives examples from Greek botanist Theophrastus (370-288 BCE) who studied silphium, an ancient 'wonder drug' known for having abortive qualities. There is also anecdotal evidence from the first century by way of Catullus. Catullus was a Roman poet who wondered how many kisses he and his girlfriend might enjoy. "As many grains of sand as there are on Cyrene's silphium shores." (Islam.com) In Aristophanes' 421 BCE comedy The Peace Hermes provides Trigaius with a female companion. Trigaius is worried she may become pregnant. "Not if you add a dose of pennyroyal," advises Hermes. In the Greek myth of Persephone and Hades pomegranate is alluded to as a contraceptive (IslamOnline.) Kathleen London of the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute sums it up best: "Since Ancient times, people have been attempting to control the sizes of their families. Clearly, men and women have wanted to control the number of their offspring for physical, emotional, social, and economic reasons and they have taken responsibility for attempting to use various methods of contraception." That brings me to issue two: What Methods Were Used?read rest, link here: www.drury.edu/multinl/story.cfm?ID=9891&NLID=166Just a note, I personally do not believe in abortion except in cases of rape/incest--my personal choice--so I am not Advocating abortion, I prefer Prevention, of unwanted pregnancies and Male RESPONSIBILITY, including if it's population control, Vasectomies, not just forced sterilizations/abortions of women--Reproductive Rights, not dictators over wombs. I believe in breastfeeding/ midwifery and herbal medicines, homeopathic remedies [the real ones not the corporate faux market], natural methods that women passed down to daughters, generation to generation in Yes, including in Judaism, and I would suspect in early Christianity [though that history or Herstory rather, has been erased by men--there ARE bits out there however], anyway, just interesting...the Conclusion though, is that yes, Women DID take Ownership of their Bodies then--no doubt about it, Rachel and Leah, with the Mandrakes [powerful herb] and the Midwives, these were Women Spaces, men didn't interfere too much [at least Then] nor did men have control, that didn't come till way later, when MEN encroached more and more on WOMEN'S SPACES, taking Control [read Mary Daly]. Interesting too when you look/study at ancient societies and the women spaces/within tribes then, you get a completely Different picture, from the nuclear 'model', which didn't come till After Rome/Greek, and more so, after Capitalism-end of agrarian age. [though the rate of female empowerment differed, from tribe to tribe/society and so forth] Just interesting, that's all. Jane
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Mar 8, 2010 14:02:19 GMT -5
In regard to:
Emotional blackmail? Wow. I was trying to help you make your posts accessible to more women here because I thought you had some valuable points that should be heard. Others here have similarly tried to explain what they found difficult about reading your posts. Communication is a two way street and to make us do so much of the work to access your contribution to this forum is unreasonable. If you say to us all that we can take it or leave it, why even bother posting? You end up just talking to yourself.
I grew up in poverty and when I left the Hare Krsna movement took many women's studies courses and lived in one of the most active feminist communities in the country. I'm all about women not being in boxes or forced to conform. No one's asking you to write like an academic here. We'd just like to be able to quickly read and ascertain your point. Some of your points are valuable but most of us will never find that out if you continue writing such long posts. I think an equal point can be made about our time being a valuable resource that should be respected as much as your non-conformity.
I've been trying to read through each of your posts but now that I see that you are willfully disregarding my request for clarity and greater ease of access to your thoughts I guess I have to give up. That's unfortunate. I have to ask, though, aren't you just creating another type of box for yourself?
|
|
|
Post by bananacat on Mar 8, 2010 14:05:39 GMT -5
This topic brings up a really good question, and I'd like to get an answer from someone who was in the movement. It seems like the Duggars use NFP to increase their chances of pregnancy. First, is this common among other QF families? Second, how is that any better than using NFP to prevent pregnancy? It seems that there are two slightly conflicting attitudes here; that you should leave your family planning up to God, and that children are an absolute blessing. Those two things could be conflicting if God only wanted to give you a few blessings.
It seems to me that "leaving it up to God" would mean having sex whenever you feel like it, and accepting fewer children if that's what happens. But I think that Duggars have actively tried for every single pregnancy. If God wanted them to have fewer children, how would they even know it? And more importantly, would they accept it?
|
|
|
Post by dangermom on Mar 8, 2010 14:18:04 GMT -5
I have wondered this as well. Some people have kind of tried to soft-pedal QF to me, saying that it means that you leave the number of children you have up to God, whether that is 1 or 5 or whatever, and accept what you get. Well, I have two and I'm assured that two is what I'm meant to have. But somehow I don't think that would cut it in real life. I would be told that I was either rebellious, hiding some serious sin, or under a curse or something. There doesn't seem to be an option where God gives you 3 and then you spend the "extra" energy serving others outside your family. (Extra is in quotes because I think only QF folks would say that 3 would leave you with tons of time and energy. Ha!) Also, janedoe, I do agree with tapati--I am mostly skipping your posts because they're just too hard to read. Of course you can write the way you wish to, but if you want engagement and conversation, long posts with little punctuation make that difficult. I'm saying this in a purely friendly way.
|
|
|
Post by ambrosia on Mar 8, 2010 14:41:47 GMT -5
[note, CAPS for only stress-emphasis here, I know it's not 'fascist grammar internet 'elitist' kiss the boots of grammar Nazi rules--but I write in my OWN style, on the internet--I do NOT write academic style or go by 'conformist' Rules, I do not CARE to 'conform' to fit into some Patriarchal 'mold' and Especially a Class Mold--I talk street, actually I tame it down a lot, so not to offend, but I decided LONG time ago I would NOT betray my 'class' or pretend to be somebody I'm not just because Society, has a class hierarchy--and a Race hierarchy, it wreaks of Privilege snobbery to me and though I Could yes, write in proper grammar/academic as I do know how, I CHOOSE NOT TOO, Nightmares of the lunatic fringe radical Marxist feminists* I thought had been left behind decades ago. Very well, since you choose to write in a way that only you find intelligible - deliberately at that - I have no qualms about coasting right by your posts. I am often willing to make an effort to understand people because many have something to say that they have trouble expressing. If you can't at least make the effort I feel no need to. (ETA) * I don't mean to make any comment on janedoe's personal position. The attitude I quoted caused a flashback to many of the meetings I went to in the 70s, in which nothing was ever accomplished because no one could agree on the appropriate non-sexist, non-classist language. Colossal time-wasters.
|
|
|
Post by redheadedskeptic on Mar 8, 2010 15:09:11 GMT -5
I always thought their reasoning for having so many children was beyond absurd. Okay, so you believe that bcpills cause "abortions" (which, they do not). So why not use barrier methods? There is obviously something else going on to their philosophy than just "We accidentally aborted our baby and were sad." And yeah, even though I wasn't really a fundamentalist by the time I was married, Gothard's teachings still had influence. Not only does he encourage abstinence after birth, but he also has rules for the woman's menstrual cycle, too. I tried those. They went over like a lead balloon.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Mar 8, 2010 15:16:48 GMT -5
This topic brings up a really good question, and I'd like to get an answer from someone who was in the movement. It seems like the Duggars use NFP to increase their chances of pregnancy. First, is this common among other QF families? Second, how is that any better than using NFP to prevent pregnancy? It seems that there are two slightly conflicting attitudes here; that you should leave your family planning up to God, and that children are an absolute blessing. Those two things could be conflicting if God only wanted to give you a few blessings. It seems to me that "leaving it up to God" would mean having sex whenever you feel like it, and accepting fewer children if that's what happens. But I think that Duggars have actively tried for every single pregnancy. If God wanted them to have fewer children, how would they even know it? And more importantly, would they accept it? The way it looks to me is that the idea is to "leave it up to God," -- but the number of children you have directly corresponds to how much God loves you and wants to bless you. If you only have a few, then it must be because God isn't happy with you. So-- whether they realize it or not-- these families don't "leave it up to God" (in terms of just letting whatever happens, happen) -- they actually try to manipulate it to where they have as many children as possible. The problem is that "earthly blessings = God's love and favor" was refuted in the earliest book of the Bible ever written -- Job. Quiverfull seems to me to be just another form of the Prosperity Gospel I used to be involved in. Verses in Job were taken out of context in that movement, to prove that Job actually WAS at fault for losing his blessings-- for not having enough faith. Therefore, it was still true that if someone was materially blessed, they were full of faith, holy, and in God's favor-- and if not, none of the above. So you grabbed all you could get to maintain the perception of others in the movement, that you were full of faith, holy and in God's favor. The only difference was that you didn't claim you were "leaving it up to God." You "named and claimed" everything YOU wanted for yourself-- because that was what God wanted you to do! Sad.
|
|
|
Post by dangermom on Mar 8, 2010 16:06:13 GMT -5
Verses in Job were taken out of context in that movement, to prove that Job actually WAS at fault for losing his blessings-- for not having enough faith. Wait--isn't that pretty much the exact OPPOSITE of the point of Job's story? Wow, that's some chutzpah there.
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Mar 8, 2010 16:23:09 GMT -5
So-- whether they realize it or not-- these families don't "leave it up to God" (in terms of just letting whatever happens, happen) -- they actually try to manipulate it to where they have as many children as possible. It strikes me (as it always did, even when I was a confused little girl being taught this nonsense) that with a thing like reproduction, it's impossible not to manipulate the situation. Sex is always a choice. Frequency of sex is a choice. Absence thereof is a choice. There is no neutral ground to occupy, whatever the rhetoric says about "God's will." These teachings, combined with only the most rudimentary of sex ed, led little-girl me to believe that a married couple did it exactly once in their lives, on their wedding night, and forever after babies could spontaneously appear whenever God decided to 'bless' them. Which made me doubly terrified of marriage and sex!
|
|
|
Post by arietty on Mar 8, 2010 17:28:37 GMT -5
This topic brings up a really good question, and I'd like to get an answer from someone who was in the movement. It seems like the Duggars use NFP to increase their chances of pregnancy. First, is this common among other QF families? Second, how is that any better than using NFP to prevent pregnancy? It seems that there are two slightly conflicting attitudes here; that you should leave your family planning up to God, and that children are an absolute blessing. Those two things could be conflicting if God only wanted to give you a few blessings. It seems to me that "leaving it up to God" would mean having sex whenever you feel like it, and accepting fewer children if that's what happens. But I think that Duggars have actively tried for every single pregnancy. If God wanted them to have fewer children, how would they even know it? And more importantly, would they accept it? The only people I knew who used NFP to conceive were those that had fertility problems. Otherwise I can say overwhelmingly NO that was not done among any qf families I knew at all. Leaving it to God was just that, leaving it to God. I also never in all my years QF came across the idea that God loved you less or you had done something wrong if you ended up with only a few children. I have only come across this idea on this forum. One popular writer on QF and homeschool issues here had only 5 and was never able to conceive again, this was never ever presented as a failing on her part. She was sad about it personally because she wanted a few more children but would often use her inability to have more as an example of why leaving your fertility to God didn't automatically mean having gazillion kids as a way of allaying the fears of younger mothers that they would not be able to handle a huge family. I also knew women who had a huge amount of miscarriages, over decades sometimes, stillbirths as well, due to diagnosed physical problems. Not once did I ever hear them or anyone else imply that they were in God's disfavor or had done something wrong to bring this on. All such problems or lack of fecundity was blamed on one thing: The Fall. Our bodies are faulty because of the fall which is why we get cancer, get sick, fail to conceive, miscarry, die. Really, they just blamed it on the reality of the world, that our bodies don't always work perfectly. None of these people I'm remembering were in pentecostal churches, they were all either home church or small conservative denominations. Prosperity, name it and claim it, demons causing every problem, those weren't teachings that were heard in those groups or promoted in any of the homeschooling qf groups I was familiar with. Perhaps that has something to do with it, though I know Vyckie wasn't in those circles either.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Mar 8, 2010 18:01:22 GMT -5
What an excellent article!
I am wondering if anyone knows of any links to the actual teachings that breastfeeding should be limited in order for the wife to become fertile sooner?
|
|
|
Post by millifred on Mar 8, 2010 18:14:33 GMT -5
I would be interested in how women who subscribe to the QF philosophy would respond to some of these posts. I say this not to be critical, but because I truly am interested.
When I completed the part of my nursing program dealing with pregnancy, birth control, etc I came to the same conclusion that Michelle did - that BC was not a good thing and was actually a very early abortion in most instances. I came to this conclusion without anybody preaching to me about it. I stopped using birth control but only had one more baby. All birth control methods have a certain risk inherent in their use.
If women in OT times used the methods described earlier they were risking their lives by doing so. This is scientific information and should not be ignored. A woman of Michelle's age would find it quite dangerous to use most if not all available birth control methods leaving a sterilization surgery as her only other option.
|
|
|
Post by arietty on Mar 8, 2010 18:25:23 GMT -5
A woman of Michelle's age would find it quite dangerous to use most if not all available birth control methods leaving a sterilization surgery as her only other option. How are condoms and/or a diaphragm dangerous?
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Mar 8, 2010 18:34:08 GMT -5
I also never in all my years QF came across the idea that God loved you less or you had done something wrong if you ended up with only a few children. I have only come across this idea on this forum. One popular writer on QF and homeschool issues here had only 5 and was never able to conceive again, this was never ever presented as a failing on her part. She was sad about it personally because she wanted a few more children but would often use her inability to have more as an example of why leaving your fertility to God didn't automatically mean having gazillion kids as a way of allaying the fears of younger mothers that they would not be able to handle a huge family. I also knew women who had a huge amount of miscarriages, over decades sometimes, stillbirths as well, due to diagnosed physical problems. Not once did I ever hear them or anyone else imply that they were in God's disfavor or had done something wrong to bring this on. All such problems or lack of fecundity was blamed on one thing: The Fall. Our bodies are faulty because of the fall which is why we get cancer, get sick, fail to conceive, miscarry, die. Really, they just blamed it on the reality of the world, that our bodies don't always work perfectly. My church definitely subscribed to the idea that the more children you had, the more in line with God's will you must be. 5 children was a pretty average family size; it was below that number that you started to get people questioning your spiritual walk. For my mother, who was able to bear only me, I remember watching helplessly as she spent nights sobbing into the wee hours of the morning, asking God what sin she had committed that caused him to close her womb. I remember the altar prayers, the laying on of hands, the travelling from church to church and the annointing with oil, the prayer cloths - she tried everything, including surrendering her will to God in the end. But that was not before 7+ years of waiting for God to give her the 'promised son' as a sign of his favour. She blamed herself for having had sex before marriage, for having had an abortion as a teenager, for not submitting enough to her husband... you name the 'sin,' she thought it caused her infertility. And yes, she was absolutely treated as 'less than' in my church. She had only one child and an unbelieving husband. It had to be her fault.
|
|
jeb
Junior Member
Posts: 97
|
Post by jeb on Mar 8, 2010 18:57:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kindaconfused on Mar 8, 2010 18:58:12 GMT -5
Great article!
I think most of what the author said is true. I would also like to add, whether it was intential or not, the overall 'feeling' I got from the article was: the Duggars, with the blessing Bill Gothard, have geared their show towards a more moderate, mainstream audience to draw people in, minimizing the more 'unpleasant' aspects of QF/P life.
I can believe this to be true because really the Duggars profit financially if their show continues and Gothard of course continues to profit, more people buying ATI curiculum and coming to ATI events = more money for him.
It makes everyone's motive all around look like greed.
I would also like to add, the author did not touch on this....I think the best look we had into 'the dark side' of QF/P life is through Josh and Anna. The thing that sticks out in my mind the most about their wedding episode was when her father made that statement that "he was transferring his authority over Anna to Josh" UGH! I was enraged and cringing at the same time.
Sadly, I don't think Anna will realize the truth of situation until she is 40 and birthed 10 more kids. Although, she has already given birth to slave #1 so a few more girls and she will be set to just enjoy being pregnant, giving birth and then handing them off to be raised by Mackenzie and any subsequent older girls.
|
|
|
Post by janedoe on Mar 8, 2010 19:16:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by janedoe on Mar 8, 2010 19:28:31 GMT -5
As for my explanation of my writing style, NOT that I had to explain, it wasn't Intended to any 'one' person or persons here, and has nothing to do with the 70s Marxism, I am not That old, nor am I part of the Marxist groups, once was, haven't been for a number of years.
But this I will say in defense of many Marxist feminists, whom I do know, when push comes to shove, when Action is needed rather than just 'talk' Those women, have laid down THEIR LIVES, many of whom have DIED fighting FOR BASIC RIGHTS WE TAKE FOR GRANTED HERE,
SO, thank you, I take that as a compliment actually. They may be a bit radical, but they have paved the way for a lot of Rights for Yes, the underclass, the Poor, the Marginalized, the Forgotten and the thrown under the bus by the Privileged lot, and while I may not Concur with them on numerous issues,
it's because of their sacrifices on numerous issues, from race equality to working class rights, labor, anti-sweatshop Especially in countries where women have less rights than fundies put here together, that women in these countries are moving forward,
and I will stand by these women, by their side, Any time, Any where. You betcha,
so, while some may think it's an insult, to be thrown in with the Marxist revolutionary feminists, I say, Thank You, I don't. It's many of them from Bangladesh to Iran to Afghanistan to Asia to South America, who are Dying, as we speak,
fighting to Save the Lives of thousands of girls, boys and women. And I am Proud, to have worked and still work, in solidarity, with numerous of these women.
However, my choice to, at least Online, to write, also because I am busy working here with other projects, has nothing to do with a Marxist box, or any other box, it's simply, MY personal choice for reasons that I don't really need to get into here, it's not important.
Sincerely,
Jane
|
|