|
Post by arietty on Nov 29, 2009 21:45:55 GMT -5
And in case I was not clear in my rambling post:
Why are you putting solution in quotes as though this is not really a solution at all. Yes it IS a solution to dump your abusive husband. Some people cannot be fixed. As you probably do realize this is not something you just wake up one day and do, it's the end of a LONG process of trying and working and agonizing.
I am so pissed off reading this sentence. I have 8 kids. My oldest 4 kids who all remember the abuse have THANKED me for "dumping" the husband. My daughter thinks she would be a street kid and an addict if she'd had to live under his tyranny through her teens.
So yes, it is a solution.
|
|
|
Post by charis on Nov 30, 2009 17:01:06 GMT -5
With my post, I was attempting to express some compassion for luvmyblessings and find common ground between her, myself, Vyckie, and all moms of a QF.
Foolish me. That'll teach me!
Is there anyone here who has departed from deadly aspects of QF without departing from their husband or their faith?
I thought not...
(if you are reading that as a judgment on you for leaving your abusive husband, sorry but you are reading wrong. I would have left my abusive husband had he not made some significant changes)
|
|
|
Post by journey on Nov 30, 2009 18:01:58 GMT -5
charis, I didn't realize your husband had made some serious changes. What do you think prompted it, and how long have these changes been going on for? (I am happy for you, if you think you are seeing genuine and authentic change, and hope that your situation continues to become more and more positive). On leaving one's husband and leaving one's faith, I think there's an important distiction to make between women who leave the legalistic stuff behind (but had a happy/normal marriage) and women who leave the legalistic stuff behind but didn't have a happy and/or normal marriage. Despite the similarities (both were caught up in legalistic frameworks, and suffered because of it), there are some HUGE huge HUGE differences between those two groups of women. In many ways, they are apples and oranges and therefore really should not be compared. luvmyblessings was speaking out for QF families where there are healthy/happy dynamics at play, and I think that part of her communication was important and well said. Are all families who practice QF abusive? No. There are QF families who have, for the most part, healthy and happy dynamics, and that is GREAT! This is a good qualifier and important to remember. (The part I didn't like was the part where luvmyblessings told Vyckie exactly what Vyckie's problem was, in authoritative terms...that was just noooot good....if luvmyblessings could have just stuck to the, "Some QF families are happy and healthy" part, I would have been nodding my head at her post). But for the families where there are unhealthy dynamics at play, as you well know, the QF/biblical-patriarchy/etc legalism is a death sentence, in that the structures and teachings of the thing make it very hard to discern the abuse in the first place, much less realize that you have the power (and the right, and, even, the imperative) to demand that changes occur and/or get self and children to a healthy and safe place. I don't think that most people here begrudge truly happy and healthy families (whether they have 1 kid or 8). Happy healthy homes are a beautiful thing. As for leaving one's faith, I think the evidence so far is that some do and some don't. It is probably very similar, statistically, to those who leave cults. Many people's faith has been shipwrecked as they experienced and then escaped abusive churches and cults. Being married to a spiritually abusive man is hardly any different (other than likely more destructive, in that the relationship is so much more intimate and the target of abuse is so much more focused, being only one person instead of a larger group). I think that when a person's faith has been misused in such a way as to cause them to allow themselves to be destroyed, it's a very fair thing for each individual to be allowed the space in which to process that fact, and to re-look at their faith very carefully and/or set it aside (for a time...or forever) so that they can have the space in which to process. It's important to give people that gift. The sad thing, in a sense, is that if the woman in question was Muslim or Mormon, many Christians would be delighted if she was not sure anymore about her faith....we'd be encouraging her to continue, to really investigate the claims of Mormonism or Islam and we would encourage her questions and doubts along those lines. Well, we need to give Vyckie and other women like her the same grace to not be sure anymore about Christianity. After all, her faith was a defining factor (if not the defining factor) in what allowed, enabled and encouraged years and years of dysfuntional destructive living---not just to her but also to her children. Any mama bear worth her salt would be doing a very wise thing by carefully stepping back and re-evaluating the ENTIRE situation for the sake of providing the children with the healthiest environment possible. I am a person who has a very difficult time throwing off the concept of God... I cannot escape this "sense" in me that God is there. Even if I wanted to throw God out, I don't think I could do it and still be authentic to who *I* am. Yet...I understand what Vyckie is doing somewhat, in that aside from that deep internal sense that there is a God, I do have many questions about things within my Christianity that I once would have never questioned. I have re-examined many things and have come to some very different conclusions than I once held. I need and needed the space to do that. I still am in that process. I need freedom to be in this process, not condemnation for it. My own faith (is there anything more deeply personal than that?) was used to make me set aside my power, my freedom, my rights, and meekly accept destruction, humiliation, and a loss of who I was/am. This is no small thing. We need to be gracious here, as women recover from this world and their own unique experience within it, and allow each other the freedom to process and feel and make choices for ourselves as we seek to find healthier ways to live, to protect our children and our own recovering sense of self, etc. I think that it's possible that we can affirm the good things that luvmyblessings said, finding common ground, (and I think some did that), while at the same time pointing out that this is not a good forum to hop on and hand out a big lecture promoting the QF lifestyle and how "you just didn't do it right." If this forum is all about providing a safe place for women to process through their recovery from abuses that occured within (and because of) the QF/"Biblicalfamily" camp and its teachings, then what luvmyblessings did went directly against that.
|
|
|
Post by anatheist on Nov 30, 2009 18:33:35 GMT -5
Is there anyone here who has departed from deadly aspects of QF without departing from their husband or their faith? The reasons that I left Christianity had nothing to do with fundamentalism or personal life problems, so there are certainly those here who did not depart from their faith as a result of QF or of being in an abusive relationship.
|
|
|
Post by arietty on Nov 30, 2009 18:40:00 GMT -5
The sad thing, in a sense, is that if the woman in question was Muslim or Mormon, many Christians would be delighted if she was not sure anymore about her faith....we'd be encouraging her to continue, to really investigate the claims of Mormonism or Islam and we would encourage her questions and doubts along those lines. Well, we need to give Vyckie and other women like her the same grace to not be sure anymore about Christianity. WOW that was a real eye opening point Journey.
|
|
|
Post by philosophia on Nov 30, 2009 19:37:09 GMT -5
With my post, I was attempting to express some compassion for luvmyblessings and find common ground between her, myself, Vyckie, and all moms of a QF.
Foolish me. That'll teach me!
Is there anyone here who has departed from deadly aspects of QF without departing from their husband or their faith?
I thought not...(if you are reading that as a judgment on you for leaving your abusive husband, sorry but you are reading wrong. I would have left my abusive husband had he not made some significant changes) Honestly, Charis, I felt bad for my own rant after I read your post. I think your post was sensitive and charitable. But, I must admit, one of the reasons I jointed this site was for the ability to vent frustration with what I am dealing with, so sometimes I post nasty things. But they are more a product of my circumstances than of someone like luvmyblessings personally. (Or any of the other Christians on the site) So, if you have felt attacked by anything I have said, I offer my apologies. I have read your posts for a long time, and like you! In answer to your question, because the lifestyle is so impregnated with faith (ha) it would be a rare woman who felt compelled to leave it if she were in a happy marriage. That's just my opinion. :-)
|
|
|
Post by kisekileia on Nov 30, 2009 20:38:53 GMT -5
"I think that when a person's faith has been misused in such a way as to cause them to allow themselves to be destroyed, it's a very fair thing for each individual to be allowed the space in which to process that fact, and to re-look at their faith very carefully and/or set it aside (for a time...or forever) so that they can have the space in which to process. It's important to give people that gift. "
Thank you for saying this. It applies to a much broader range of situations than just QF, too.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Dec 1, 2009 1:52:19 GMT -5
After all, her faith was a defining factor (if not the defining factor) in what allowed, enabled and encouraged years and years of dysfuntional destructive living---not just to her but also to her children. Any mama bear worth her salt would be doing a very wise thing by carefully stepping back and re-evaluating the ENTIRE situation for the sake of providing the children with the healthiest environment possible. We need to be gracious here, as women recover from this world and their own unique experience within it, and allow each other the freedom to process and feel and make choices for ourselves as we seek to find healthier ways to live, to protect our children and our own recovering sense of self, etc. Journey, you are amazing. Thank you for all of this. As I've said before, what you went through cannot be considered a waste, since this is what you have brought out of it. You truly understand "love one another," in ways that I can learn from too. . .
|
|
|
Post by pennygirl on Dec 1, 2009 18:24:14 GMT -5
Weren't the Jeubs on TLC or some show within the past year or so? I remember having a bad impression of this family (the episode showed them getting ready for the birthday party.. I think they just do one for all the kids once a year or something) I remember seeing the little toddlers running around unsupervised and the mom laughing that she doesn't know where one of them is.. ha! happens all the time! or something like that I don't believe in staring at your child and keeping them in arms reach but you watch little kids! If you are too tired, too busy, don't give a hoot.. then don't have so many. That dad did seem "engaged" but the mom just seemed aloof. Also, their oldest daughter was kindof ex-communicated or something because she chose to follow a sinful life path.... The girl was just a teen or maybe in her early 20's... still a "kid" ..wow.. what a way to show that "Christian Love".... and while I am mentioning the neglectful parenting aspect that just glares at me... I remember the Duggar RV excersion.. the little baby was behind mom and dad in the front while at least 3 "toddlers" were strapped all the way in the back with pacifiers stuck in their mouth. I just have one child.. he is now 15 but when we would ride in the car.. he in the backseat in a carseat.. i always reached back and rubbed his leg. There is just such an odd emotional detachment thing going on. I have family that is into this stuff. Their kids are now grown (this is my cousin's family) but I remember at the family gatherings.. the mom would sit at the table yapping away while her kids were who knows where. I was out on the back patio and I saw her littlest who had just learned to walk toddling around the back part of the yard.. unsupervised. During one pregancy this lady was like "This pregnancy is going to be all about me for once! I am not going to gain alot of extra weight and I am going to aerobics class 5 days a week" If you are going to be so self centered WHY have these kids? dats all
|
|
|
Post by ashmeadskernal on Dec 2, 2009 11:14:30 GMT -5
Ouch. Pennygirl, that hurt. That's what my husband likes to call single-child-syndrome. He would know, because he used to have it, constantly complaining that I wasn't supervising the kids properly/enough. Until I left him for a few hours with three toddlers to watch by himself...
I'm the parent who can't pinpoint where every child under 4 of mine is at all times, who when family comes over 3 times a year will spend all day long yapping away at the table with other adults (finally! Real live Adult Conversation for the first time in months!) while my little toddlers are off who knows where unsupervised. And I can't touch any of my kids from the front seat of the vehicle I drive in. And if I had the babysitting time available to me, I'd love LOVE to do aerobics/prenatal yoga 5 days a week while pregnant this time. Because then, I'd actually get out of the house and talk to real live human beings without having 85% of my attention always being directed towards my children. Kinda hard to have an actual conversation when your attention is always being interrupted like that. And the lack of real conversation day after day after month after year leads to a real sense of isolation, that the internet just can't ever take away though it does make it bearable.
It's not that I don't love my kids. It's not that I'm not engaged most of the time. It's that it is impossible to hold to the single-child-syndrome ideal of constant 24-7 supervision of little toddlers (plural) AND get my very real needs met at the same time.
It's not selfish to put your mask on in the airplane first before putting your child's mask on. But it is very judgmental to assume that all women have free-will to choose how many children they will have, to know beforehand how difficult raising closely spaced children will be without having any experience to draw on besides the glowing perfect faces on TV, to know beforehand how she will react to significant sleep and social deprivation, especially when there is significant emotional and/or spiritual abuse occuring which significantly and deliberately diminishes a woman's ability to trust her own judgment in matters of petty concerns as well as significant ones, like birth control.
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Dec 2, 2009 12:06:06 GMT -5
Ouch. Pennygirl, that hurt. That's what my husband likes to call single-child-syndrome. He would know, because he used to have it, constantly complaining that I wasn't supervising the kids properly/enough. Until I left him for a few hours with three toddlers to watch by himself... I'm the parent who can't pinpoint where every child under 4 of mine is at all times, who when family comes over 3 times a year will spend all day long yapping away at the table with other adults (finally! Real live Adult Conversation for the first time in months!) while my little toddlers are off who knows where unsupervised. And I can't touch any of my kids from the front seat of the vehicle I drive in. And if I had the babysitting time available to me, I'd love LOVE to do aerobics/prenatal yoga 5 days a week while pregnant this time. Because then, I'd actually get out of the house and talk to real live human beings without having 85% of my attention always being directed towards my children. Kinda hard to have an actual conversation when your attention is always being interrupted like that. And the lack of real conversation day after day after month after year leads to a real sense of isolation, that the internet just can't ever take away though it does make it bearable. It's not that I don't love my kids. It's not that I'm not engaged most of the time. It's that it is impossible to hold to the single-child-syndrome ideal of constant 24-7 supervision of little toddlers (plural) AND get my very real needs met at the same time. It's not selfish to put your mask on in the airplane first before putting your child's mask on. But it is very judgmental to assume that all women have free-will to choose how many children they will have, to know beforehand how difficult raising closely spaced children will be without having any experience to draw on besides the glowing perfect faces on TV, to know beforehand how she will react to significant sleep and social deprivation, especially when there is significant emotional and/or spiritual abuse occuring which significantly and deliberately diminishes a woman's ability to trust her own judgment in matters of petty concerns as well as significant ones, like birth control. Hear hear! I was a single child, and one of the things that hurt me the most as a little girl (the thing that made me absolutely sure at age 7 that death was better than becoming a mother) was seeing my mother devote 100% of herself to me all the time. It may seem counterintuitive, but what it taught me was that women don't deserve to have lives when they have children. That if they spend any amount of time or energy on themselves and let the children fend for themselves once in a while they are Bad Mothers(TM). To take a horribly superficial example, whenever my mom got new clothes (as gifts, usually, because she only ever shopped in thrift stores for herself) they would almost immediately be given to me because I 'looked better in them anyway.' That was so depressing and just wasn't true. I wanted my mother to have nice things and do nice things for herself, but she steadfastly refused because she professed she was 'living for others.' But living for others is really one of the most profoundly selfish things you can do to the people who care about you - because it means you refuse to receive their love. This level of self-sacrifice from my mother meant I had to watch my father's abuse whittle her down to the bone, it meant she yelled at me for sticking up for her because I 'provoked' him by telling him it was unacceptable to call her stupid, it meant I felt all the pain directed at her. When someone you love doesn't love herself, you've got the most emotionally draining relationship possible. Because all your affection goes down a black hole. So hell yeah, if I ever have kids, being pregnant will be 'about me.' I will drop off the kids with babysitters and let them play in their rooms unsupervised. And I will read books, go out and meet friends, and keep working because I refuse to teach my kids that mothers are there to supply their needs and aren't really people in their own right. (Edited for clarity.)
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Dec 2, 2009 12:30:43 GMT -5
My own experience is that there's this thing called "the Mommy Wars." And they are unwinnable. Everyone has their own ideas about how to be the best mom, and so many people think nothing of measuring both themselves and all other moms by that standard. And that means that at any event, half the people in the room will think I'm being too lenient/neglectful, and half will think I'm being too protective/strict. Nothing I can do about it but do what seems best to me. I remember reading a letter to the editor in our local paper, where the writer was ranting about seeing a mom pushing her toddler on a trike, while the toddler was wearing a helmet. "Overprotective!" was the judgment. But if the same parent had pushed the same toddler on the same trike without a helmet, another person might very well have sent in a letter saying, "this mom was endangering her kid!" It's easy to do, and the trap is to start trying to compete in this "Mommy" competition ourselves, and wear ourselves out with second-guessing our own parenting. I've judged both myself and others like this. But what I've learned is that none of us knows how to raise someone else's kids. The toddler being strictly supervised when we think the mom ought to spend some time on herself, may have epilepsy. The toddler playing by herself in the back yard may be essentially a quiet, compliant child in general, and the back yard well baby-proofed. Unless we see out-and-out abuse or neglect, I think the best thing to do is not to worry about it.
|
|
|
Post by anatheist on Dec 2, 2009 13:02:39 GMT -5
I was a single child, and one of the things that hurt me the most as a little girl (the thing that made me absolutely sure at age 7 that death was better than becoming a mother) was seeing my mother devote 100% of herself to me all the time. It may seem counterintuitive, but what it taught me was that women don't deserve to have lives when they have children. I second this, and I'd like to add that as an only child with a SAHM, I felt stifled, I felt like I had to fight for alone time, and when I was older, my mother always wanted me to be keeping her company instead of doing activities with my own peers. To make matters worse, my mother was very extroverted while I was introverted, and I felt like when I was with my friends, she just couldn't stop talking to them- which could be a positive thing sometimes insofar as she was very friendly- but it had the effect of making her the "friend" and me the weird quiet kid who was just kind of hanging around to the side. I *knew* that my "friends" liked my mother better than me, and it still hurts when I see someone from childhood and the very first thing they say is "how is your mother, I just love your mother". She came to EVERY SINGLE ONE of my sports games and then out to eat afterward with the team, so I felt like I couldn't even escape her to just be myself with my own teammates. Edit: I think that it's good for a parent to have some interest in their child's activities, but I feel like traveling 2-3 hours behind the bus for every away game is the same as never letting your kid go anywhere or do anything without your involvement. I wished all the time that she would get a job.
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Dec 2, 2009 13:33:11 GMT -5
I remember in the preface to a book I read a while back (I wish I could remember which book), the author talked about going to a large multi-age party in the Philippines. She kept trying to keep track of her children and was surprised that no one else seemed to be watching out for theirs. She finally realized that rather than watching each child, the other parents were watching the floor: whenever a child came into their space, no matter whose it was, if that child needed a drink or a diaper change or some correcting, that adult would take care of the problem. Once she realized that, she was able to relax and enjoy the party while being available to any child in her area.
I grew up in what was a "watch the floor" society in many ways, and it does allow children a good mix of freedom and security.
|
|
|
Post by margybargy on Dec 2, 2009 14:31:48 GMT -5
My own experience is that there's this thing called "the Mommy Wars." And they are unwinnable. Everyone has their own ideas about how to be the best mom, and so many people think nothing of measuring both themselves and all other moms by that standard. And that means that at any event, half the people in the room will think I'm being too lenient/neglectful, and half will think I'm being too protective/strict. Nothing I can do about it but do what seems best to me. I remember reading a letter to the editor in our local paper, where the writer was ranting about seeing a mom pushing her toddler on a trike, while the toddler was wearing a helmet. "Overprotective!" was the judgment. But if the same parent had pushed the same toddler on the same trike without a helmet, another person might very well have sent in a letter saying, "this mom was endangering her kid!" It's easy to do, and the trap is to start trying to compete in this "Mommy" competition ourselves, and wear ourselves out with second-guessing our own parenting. I've judged both myself and others like this. But what I've learned is that none of us knows how to raise someone else's kids. The toddler being strictly supervised when we think the mom ought to spend some time on herself, may have epilepsy. The toddler playing by herself in the back yard may be essentially a quiet, compliant child in general, and the back yard well baby-proofed. Unless we see out-and-out abuse or neglect, I think the best thing to do is not to worry about it. Yyyyyyeeeeeeeeessssssss! Everyone's situation is different. I'm a helicopter mom of one. But I don't expect all moms to be hoverers. In fact, I'm trying to back off my hovering somewhat. No one's ever commented on it so hopefully it's not too excessive. I 'spose I'll hear about it from a therapist in 20 years or so.
|
|
|
Post by charis on Dec 2, 2009 20:05:35 GMT -5
charis, I didn't realize your husband had made some serious changes. What do you think prompted it, and how long have these changes been going on for? (I am happy for you, if you think you are seeing genuine and authentic change, and hope that your situation continues to become more and more positive). I think he crossed a line which finally broke the self-righteousness; where he finally knew he was wrong and in imminent danger of losing the marriage and family, and he decided that was not what he wanted. Nothing I did or did not do. It was his choice. He became vastly more considerate and respectful. One recent example: Just this month, he planned a surprise 50th birthday party for me and I was amazed at the thought and time he put into inviting all my dear friends, (the very ones from whom he tried to isolate me a few years ago). It was a true and sacrificial demonstration of nourishing and cherishing me. We need to be gracious here, as women recover from this world and their own unique experience within it, and allow each other the freedom to process and feel and make choices for ourselves as we seek to find healthier ways to live, to protect our children and our own recovering sense of self, etc. I think that it's possible that we can affirm the good things that luvmyblessings said, finding common ground, (and I think some did that), while at the same time pointing out that this is not a good forum to hop on and hand out a big lecture promoting the QF lifestyle and how "you just didn't do it right." If this forum is all about providing a safe place for women to process through their recovery from abuses that occured within (and because of) the QF/"Biblicalfamily" camp and its teachings, then what luvmyblessings did went directly against that. You are ever so gracious, and I am very glad you are on board here as a regular blogger, journey. I felt like some of the judgments of luvmyblessings made it an unsafe place for her, and at times some of the assumptions and judgments about QF people have made it an unsafe place for me. Like you said in your latest blog at NLQ, the denial is very strong. Ten years ago, I thought my husband was the godliest man on the face of the planet. I made excuses for him, defended him, to outsiders and even to the children (much to my regret over failing to defend and protect them when they needed it). How do we know luvmyblessings isn't in that place of denial? If she is condescended to and judged, she will be more defensive and stay trapped in the gilded cage. t is discouraging that you sound SO MUCH like I did as a QFer. ... That is not acceptable in my opinion.Yeah ~ me too. You totally sound exactly like me (only considerably less articulate ~ LOL). QF women are strong women. Vyckie apparently discened that LMB sounds like she did? Not sure why that gets a I thought the idea was to reach out to women who are stuck where she was? My misunderstanding. I understand that Vyckie was triggered, but I flinched when I read her "less articulate" comment. (unlike Vyckie's description of Warren, my husband is very intelligent and we were "idiots!" "if you had a brain, it'd be lonely!" "no common sense!") I wasn't triggered by LMB and I was able to see some points of agreement between her, myself, Vyckie, and anyone else who has a QF of children (whether or not they left their husband and/or faith). But then I regretted the attempt since it just triggered someone else (who is among the "safe" here)
|
|
|
Post by ambrosia on Dec 2, 2009 22:00:18 GMT -5
I think he crossed a line which finally broke the self-righteousness; where he finally knew he was wrong and in imminent danger of losing the marriage and family, and he decided that was not what he wanted. Nothing I did or did not do. It was his choice. He became vastly more considerate and respectful. This is really the nub of everything. I don't remember the platitude, but it is something to the effect of "the only person who can change hirself is hirself". No amount of kowtowing or praying or hoping will change someone else. We have only (limited) control over our lives. Congratulations charis in your relationship.
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Dec 2, 2009 22:26:25 GMT -5
t is discouraging that you sound SO MUCH like I did as a QFer. ... That is not acceptable in my opinion.Yeah ~ me too. You totally sound exactly like me (only considerably less articulate ~ LOL). QF women are strong women. Vyckie apparently discened that LMB sounds like she did? Not sure why that gets a I thought the idea was to reach out to women who are stuck where she was? My misunderstanding. I understand that Vyckie was triggered, but I flinched when I read her "less articulate" comment. (unlike Vyckie's description of Warren, my husband is very intelligent and we were "idiots!" "if you had a brain, it'd be lonely!" "no common sense!") Charis ~ you are right ~ that was a horrible and totally unnecessary remark. I have been in a really pissy mood lately which I'm blaming on the fact that Heather and I have both been too busy to get together for coffee for a couple of weeks. Usually, when I can hear my old self in the words of QFers such as I did with Michelle, rather than being triggered and getting snarky, I have plenty of patience and do my best to engage them in productive convesation. I never want to run them off like I did with Michelle. So I've been thinking about this the past few days ~ and trying to figure out why all the sudden I'm getting mad at the women who are now where I once was ~ and it is because I am going through this stage in which I actually am feeling seriously pissed off at "the old me" ~ I've run out of patience and understanding for the stuff I used to believe and the way I seriously fell for all the QF/P garbage and my family really suffered as a result of my denial and all my excuses. Just a few days before Michelle posted her CRAP (sorry ~ whatever her intentions, to me it was highly offensive), I found out that Angel had been to the hospital on her birthday because she cut herself again ~ and so I'm thinking we are STILL seriously screwed up. And for all my good intentions ~ for all my sincere desire to love the Lord and to follow HIM (not a set of rules, not a bunch of misinterpretations of the bible or the QF teachers ~ I wanted to follow HIM ~ JESUS CHRIST, my Lord and Savior to Whom I had wholeheartedly committed my life) ~ I was totally wrong and because of my devotion to seeking God's best for my family ~ I did not protect my daughter when she needed me. Journey made an excellent point somewhere on the forums today ~ she said that what we were doing was actually all good stuff ~ supporting my husband, building him up, not "gossiping" about him, etc. ~ all that I did to be a good wife totally backfired on me and I ended up with the exact opposite results of what I was working so hard for ~ a happy, loving, godly family. So yeah ~ I'm really pissed off at myself right now for taking that major detour down the QF/P road. And actually ~ I haven't gone as far as to get angry at God, along the lines of what atheist wrote: If you really believe that Vyckie had a true love for god and a true desire to obey him, then why do you think that god let her be led astray? You claim out of one side of your mouth that you believe Vyckie had the right motives, yet on the other side you say that she suffered because she did only one thing wrong. What possible reasons could there be for the holy spirit to not direct her toward the truth? What possible reasons could there be for god to not guide a person whose heart he could see as sincere? Vyckie listened to people whom she believed were also loving and following god. Where was the holy spirit to tell her not to listen to those people? The way that I see it, either you're lying about how much you believe that Vyckie was sincere about her love for god, and all your "oooh Vyckie, you're so preccccious" rhetoric is condescending, or else, the god that you're promoting is one who would watch his beloved child fall onto a harmful path even as she was begging for his direction. There was a time when I was asking these very questions ~ my heart is right, Lord ~ and You know it ~ so why haven't You guided and protected me when I begged for help in giving Angel a better life? Right now though, I'm not feeling angry at God because I'd have to believe there actually is a God in order to be mad at Him. So ~ that just leaves me to be angry at ~ I'm angry at ME.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Dec 2, 2009 22:55:33 GMT -5
Nothing I did or did not do. It was his choice. He became vastly more considerate and respectful. One recent example: Just this month, he planned a surprise 50th birthday party for me and I was amazed at the thought and time he put into inviting all my dear friends, (the very ones from whom he tried to isolate me a few years ago). It was a true and sacrificial demonstration of nourishing and cherishing me. If it was not anything you did or didn't do, nothing another woman could copy and do right, (which is most definitely true!), than why the initial disparaging implication that dumping the husband wasn't a real or good or valid solution? Such that it got quotes around it? And the feel from the post that it wasn't a good plan? See, the thing is, fundamentalists usually are not content to decide their own lives. They aren't content to use their religion to guide their experiences and their choices. They want to put it into LAW. They want to control MY life too. And when that kind of talking is allowed, than it immediately becomes a VERY unsafe space for me, and anyone else who doesn't walk in lockstep. So... for instance, the abortion topic you mentioned earlier. You are NOT judged for thinking it immoral, like I think not being an organ donor is immoral. You ARE judged (and get me SERIOUSLY pissed off) when you indicate you want to legislate your beliefs. That goes for *all* religious believers on here. The ones YOU call "safe," are so because they *don't try to push their lifestyle on everyone else.* Imagine that!
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Dec 2, 2009 23:17:44 GMT -5
Just a few days before Michelle posted her CRAP (sorry ~ whatever her intentions, to me it was highly offensive), I found out that Angel had been to the hospital on her birthday because she cut herself again ~ and so I'm thinking we are STILL seriously screwed up. And for all my good intentions ~ for all my sincere desire to love the Lord and to follow HIM (not a set of rules, not a bunch of misinterpretations of the bible or the QF teachers ~ I wanted to follow HIM ~ JESUS CHRIST, my Lord and Savior to Whom I had wholeheartedly committed my life) ~ I was totally wrong and because of my devotion to seeking God's best for my family ~ I did not protect my daughter when she needed me. Oh, Vyckie. I'm so sorry. *hugs* I can see that a birthday would be a difficult time for Angel. It doesn't mean things aren't much, much better for her now-- it means she still has a lot to work through. And if I understand what I learned in my adult-child-of-alcoholics therapy-- the feelings of anger, even at yourself, are ok to feel. Letting yourself feel them is part of the healing. If you, yourself, are one of the people you need to forgive and release, you can't do that without letting the emotions come to the surface to be resolved. And Angel must let her emotions come to the surface too. It's easy at her age to want a quick solution-- to feel she should be "over it" by now and to be frustrated because she's not. But it will take as long as it takes. Please don't look at her episode as going back to square one. Look at it as just another step in a process that's going to feel sometimes like three steps forward, two steps back-- but it is getting somewhere. It truly is.
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Dec 2, 2009 23:25:23 GMT -5
So ~ that just leaves me to be angry at ~ I'm angry at ME. And after writing all that, I have to add that I am angry at Michelle too. I am angry because it is apparent from what she wrote that she is determined to stick by her uninformed assessment of what my problem really was ~ interested only in pronoucing her judgments without bothering to look at the body of evidence which I asked her to consider. She continued to insist that I was following a set of rules ~ and then she proceeded to delineate the list ~ and I honestly don't know where she got the list from because I certainly have never said that I HAD to have long hair, wear dresses, have all the babies I could ~ at home, submit to an abusive husband, etc. in order to win God's approval. Michelle insists that she knows this about me: Yet I strongly believe you are blaming your troubles on Christianity because what Christianity means to you is a list of rules and regulations to follow to be "good" and if you don't live these list of rules and such then you are going to burn in hell or that you are not pleasing to God. Its wrong thinking. It is evident that she did not bother to read my story or to discover that I NEVER BELIEVED IN HELL ~ so I clearly was not following a performanced-based "fire insurance" version of Christianity. I KNEW about grace ~ I was not serving the Lord out of fear. I actually feel the urge to yell at Michelle: I AM NOT PUTTING QF IN A BOX ~ QF PUT ME AND MY FAMILY IN A BOX. But I won't do that because it would give Michelle the satisfaction of pulling out her "I am sorry you are bitter" trump card. I asked Michelle to read this: nolongerquivering.com/2009/06/20/vyckies-story-part-19b-a-godly-family-trusts-the-lord-with-their-family-planning/ and please tell me how my reasons for having 7 children were different from hers ~ and rather than reading the post and spelling out the differences, she responded with this: As far as my reasons for having children vs yours. I see they were VERY different.What the hell kind of answer is that? And after all that ~ she cowardly deletes her account and moves on. So yeah ~ the "considerably less articulate" remark was uncalled for ~ but I'm not feeling terribly apologetic for expressing my anger about luvmyblessings' drive-by assault here on the NLQ forums.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Dec 3, 2009 15:22:19 GMT -5
Vyckie, you certainly have a right to be angry at the "drive-by assault." As far as being angry at yourself-- I do hope you direct most of your anger at those who deserve it most -- the leaders and teachers who promote Q/F, and who tell well-meaning people (who only want to please God) that this way of living is the best way to please God. These people are making lots of money off books and recordings, in order to promote this travesty-- and people are falling for it and then, like luvmyblessings, joining the leaders and teachers in adding to the pain of those who crawl out of it lucky to be alive. And so many times the leaders and teachers of it find ways to avoid any consequences for themselves. It's disgusting. I was angry with myself after Maranatha, when I realized that I'd been in a cult. I was angry with myself because I knew I walked into it of my own free will, and I thought I should have known better. But you know what? I was young, and those who started the movement were much older. They were the ones who should have known better. I eventually (years later) was able to release them, too-- but only after I put the blame where it belonged most, and forgave myself first. . . Hugs to you.
|
|
Hillary
Full Member
"Quivering Daughters ~ Hope and Healing for the Daughters of Patriarchy" Now Available!
Posts: 129
|
Post by Hillary on Dec 3, 2009 22:11:31 GMT -5
Vyckie, if I may add my humble thoughts, along with some hugs?
I'm thankful that when I "came out" or "woke up" (however you want to call it) from my similar life-structure I had my husband's financial and emotional support so I could stare at the trees for hours while consuming massive amounts of coffee and going showerless for a week. I did this for months, talking to no one. I don't say this to be discouraging, for I realize not everyone will be able to heal and recover like this, for practical reasons. But I do say it to illustrate how intense it is. Intense, deadly, and serious. And mine wasn't even as crazy as yours ~ no kids, especially kids who attempted suicide! Knowing how traumatic and difficult it is, look how far you've come, in such a short amount of time: besides the responsibilities of mothering, writing a book, being the bread winner and bread maker, not to mention the internal changes and shifting of a lifetime of ideology, thought patterns, the questions. Healing from this stuff takes time and attention ~ lots of it, even when you don't have time and attention to give. This means going moment by moment, day by day, breath by breath. For you are still YOU. You're still a woman with needs, hopes, dreams, fears, frustrations, regrets, aches, rages, love. Those who love you, who care, will understand if/when you have those off days. Those who don't ~ so what? It's important to vent, so VENT ~ and then remember your family and your goals and what is important. These things will help keep you going when others come along and judge, condemn, revile. Believe me. I know.
|
|
|
Post by aussiemama on Dec 4, 2009 9:30:28 GMT -5
I can't help but notice that a lot of these people with fifteen or so kids are richer than most of us are...
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Dec 4, 2009 13:15:53 GMT -5
I can't help but notice that a lot of these people with fifteen or so kids are richer than most of us are... those are only the higher profile ones...
|
|