|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 8, 2010 10:13:55 GMT -5
I absolutely L*O*V*E* your last paragraph, Kiery! I would go do cartwheels in the yard except I haven't done a cartwheel in 30 years and that last time I messed up my knee! ;D All the rest of your story makes me very sad. I was posting about the "bait and switch" of home school advocates on my blog recently. When we started out, it was to give our children courage to be different, confidence to do what others said could not be done, intelligence to come up with a plan and the diligence to carry it out. In your case, home schooling gave you exactly that! Kudos! The "switch" was that after a while home school speakers at conventions stopped talking about preparing students for life in the big wide world and switched over to protecting students from the big wide world. As one commenter put it, the seed was planted in a jar so it could get a good start, but then was never transplanted out of the jar. Forced to stay in the jar, it withers, barely surviving, or dies. But home school students are not plants, they're people! People with brains and feet and legal rights (as adults anyway)!!!! Congrats on escaping the jar! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 5, 2010 11:46:06 GMT -5
I like Florida's home school law. I didn't find it excessive at all. It gave me a good start. Knowing someone could ask to see my daily log and my portfolio with two weeks written notice was great motivation to be diligent and thorough.
I DO get that the parents most likely to hide (ignore the laws about reporting/registering their home school, avoid medical doctors, isolate in "like-minded" social networks only) are the ones that need watching the most.
But how?
My only suggestion is peer pressure within the home school community. I would gladly promote openness and accountability if I were still in home school leadership of any kind. It's the only righteous position.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 4, 2010 13:20:34 GMT -5
Oh yeah, one more comment. I think it was Sierra who said that she felt that home schooling was actually better for her than having to go to public school everyday in a prairie dress, changing schools every two years, etc. Glad to hear it. My daughter also tells me that she loved the home schooling part and all the time it gave her to develop her interests. Also all the time it gave her to lick her adolescent wounds, so to speak. My son doesn't have to home school. He chooses to do so. I suggested reading The Teenage Liberation Handbook earlier and I will do so again. For many teens, public school is like a prison. I'm for freedom of choice for teenagers. That's something I could whole-heartedly support. For movement teens that would probably mean they would run to public school! For some public schooled teens, that would mean they could be free to design their own home school program. For my teen things would pretty much stay the same.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 4, 2010 13:13:39 GMT -5
This home school mom has no problem with regulations as long as they are not burdensome or intrusive.
I don't mind keeping records, even daily records.
I have no problem with standardized testing, but they should be evaluated fairly. The 50% on a nationally standardized test is the public school average. That does not mean an "F" folks, that means a "C".
Also since public school kids aren't kicked out of school, I don't think home schooled kids should be forced to stop home schooling if they fall below the 50th percentile, BUT I would think that should trigger mandatory evaluations for learning disabilities, by a professionally lisened child psychologist of the parent's choosing and the parent's expense.
I actually prefer evaluations to standardized testing, because when I paid a lisenced school psychologist to evaluate my kids, she administered standardized tests, went over the results with me, looked at my portfolio, gave me kudos where I was doing well and gave me advice for where I could improve. All for about $75 a child. It was well worth it.
I loved home schooling in Florida, which has covered most of the bases people here have mentioned, including signing an affidavit that you have never been convicted of crimes against children.
I also liked that one reported to your local school board attendance officer. They could request to see your portfolio and daily log upon two weeks written notice. This helped save a lot of kids from no education. And if you were actually teaching, it was easy to see that, too. It took like five minutes for them to complete a check of your box of materials and glance through your log.
The thing is, those who are criminal and paranoid just home school illegally. If they are in your support group, you won't know they are illegal unless they tell you.
I would definitely turn in someone who was home schooling illegally. If you are going to stand on some lofty notion of liberty that puts you above the law, you should be willing to go to jail for that principle. The founders were. They risked their lives, even.
The state I living in now requires annual standardized tests filed with the state. I am in full compliance, and I always have been both here and in Florida.
Now as to the other point, being surrounded by mandatory reporters in daycare and public school: we are all mandatory reporters as far as I know! I would report anyone I suspected of abuse!
I was more fearful of social workers when my children were young, when they were unable to express themselves clearly and were prone to say things that could be misinterpreted. They all do you know! That's why Kids Say the Darndest Things was such a popular TV show when I was a child.
But everywhere a family goes there are mandatory reporters. Church workers are mandatory reporters. Librarians, store clerks, neighbors, tutors, coaches, kid's program directors, everywhere.
The ones hiding out in the country, not in compliance with state regulations, those are the ones whose children are more at risk. I don't see how more regulations will ferret them out.
I think a useful goal would be for state organizations on down to distance themselves from religious fanatacism; for conventions to start publicly shaming them and speaking out about their excesses- that would be useful.
I joined a facebook group called Run Elsie Run. I'd love for them to sell T-shirts and organize protests at our state convention. ;D
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 4, 2010 12:52:09 GMT -5
People do talk like that. Let us all organize, work hard and pray that the Dominionists and Reconstructionists fail miserably in their agenda. Reminds me of a Civil War re-enactor I heard as a new home school mom. The idea of dressing up and recreating history sounded like an excellent learning experience. I thought this was great, and invited him to speak at our little curriculum fair... whereupon I was humiliated to discover he was a Reconstructionist. Oh my, was I embarrassed! This group was still at least two-thirds full of sane people at this point, who had sucked up and signed the statement of faith so they could attend park days and take part in P. E. and drama classes, etc. I got an earful from outraged moms, and I totally agreed with them. These Dominionists/Reconstructionists are subtle. They mask their true intentions until they think they are in a place where everyone agrees with them. I hope soon all those places will dry up and disappear.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 3, 2010 15:58:03 GMT -5
That's actually a problem with all of society's laws. If people would obey the law in every area, we could all get along much easier. But your point is well taken by me. The only ATI families I knew were home schooling illegally in spite of their being a legal and proper way to home school. If I had known that, I would have turned them in. People who are home schooling legally in that state should have nothing to fear. It's not that hard, and if you can't keep up with those requirements, then you should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Those laws were passed to protect home schooling families who comply from being falsely accused of truancy. But if you ARE truant, then you should be caught and your children required to have access to an education! Grrr to scoff-laws! So who knew your family was home schooling illegally? And why do you think no one ratted them out? And what do you think would have happened if it had become known to the truancy office of your school district?
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 3, 2010 15:51:37 GMT -5
Go, Dorinda! That is wonderful to read.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 3, 2010 12:24:47 GMT -5
Yes, I drop by her blog every week. It's horrible what happened to her. On a completely different note, I have always wanted to ask if she's seen Son of Rambo? It's an Australian movie about a boy from an extremely religious home who goes to public school. It's very sweet, although bitter sweet is probably a more accurate description.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 3, 2010 11:05:42 GMT -5
Chandra is angry, and that comes through loud and clear in her prose.
But anger is no sin, and from everything I have gleaned from my correspondence with Chandra, her anger is justified.
She was hurt deeply by her mother's religion and the way her mother used home schooling to isolate and dominate her. Plus this is the first I have read about sexual abuse. I am angry for her.
On the other hand, home schooling was around before the Movement, though if you read the link I provided, you will see that Movement home schoolers did a grand job of taking over every where they could. It sounds like Chandra's parents were part of that ursurption of home schooling by religious fanatics.
They are not the majority of home schoolers, but they are a sizable minority. And as a sizable minority, they do present themselves as the sum total of all home schooling. They monopolize home school conventions and most support groups. It is understandable that she would identify the Movement as bigger than it is, because it controls the market out of proportion to its numbers.
I believe that is changing however. It is a change I welcome. And it is a change that Chandra's experience demands must happen.
If home schooling is to survive (and I hope it does!) then it must distance itself from religious fanaticism.
ps My experience with college admissions: the private liberal arts college loved home schoolers- but no Movement home schoolers would apply there. The state university made no comment one way or the other, but then my applicant had already completed a year at the private liberal arts college.
The ROTC loved home schoolers, but they loved my daughter as an applicant. Women in the military is hardly a Movement value.
On the other hand, a friend who is a retired professor at Wake Forest said that her experience was that home schoolers were very weak in science and history and believed religious dogmas were real science and honest history. She had a negative impression of home schooling.
So there you have it: it is a mixed bag of responses in my experience.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 3, 2010 10:03:15 GMT -5
Yay! Chandra's story is coming to light. I have been wanting to know more ever since discovering your blog Dispelled Daughters. This is shadowspring, by the way. As a home school mom, I do take exception with this statement: That may very well be true about the vast majority of Movement home schooled children. But homeschooling is not the invention of the Movement, though they have exploited our home school freedoms for their own agenda flawlessly. Read this article, published in 1991, for a historical overveiw of how this happened: www.homeedmag.com/closerlook/355/homeschooling-freedoms-at-risk/Of course it makes perfect sense that you never met an unschooler, pagan, public school refugee, or secular home school family. Families like yours shunned anyone who was not "like-minded". While your mom was sitting in her robe obsessing over her religion, we were reading Holt, Gatto, Shaffer, and others. While your mom used keeping you out of school to hide you away from society, we were using home school freedom to explore the big wide world and give our children freedom and support. To get an understanding of the other side, you might want to read The Teenage Liberation Handbook by Grace Llwellyn. I love home schooling and so do my teens. My daughter is excelling at state university. My son plans to dual-enroll at community college. Butfor all that, I would still welcome stricter regulations if they would protect even one little girl from suffering the isolation and control you suffered! I personally think all high school students should get to choose to stop home schooling if they want. Interestingly enough, my own daughter disagrees. She thinks that it would have been disastrous for her, as angry as she was at the time. But I disagree. If she has turned out not to like it, she could have returned to home school. And if she "fell in with the wrong crowd" then maybe we would have faced our family issues earlier. I think freedom is always a good thing, personally. The "safety" of tyranny is what I fear and loathe!
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 2, 2010 14:54:35 GMT -5
Both of my babies were born in a hospital, by C-section. They came out perfect and pink, scoring 9s on the APGAR scale. I nursed them almost immediately after they were born in the hospital, kept them in my bed/room at first, demand fed them, never let them cry it out, nurtured every interest they even poked at growing up, and home schooled them with an eye on making their dreams come true. I also used disposable diapers, store-bought baby food, and we do not eat all natural, organic food even today. But we're doing okay. =) It has always surprised me how self-righteous natural childbirth proponents were (Sorry tapati! I know that was your 22 yr old self!) Both of my children were breech, and it seemed completely selfish to me to insist on a vaginal birth when it ran the risk of brain trauma to my child! Even if the risk was small, it was unacceptable to me as a mother to run that risk just so I could have the bragging rights of a natural birth. But I had my own issues to be self-righteous about. I too was sure that people who bottle-fed and/or used schedules or- heaven forbid- daycare! just didn't love their children like I loved mine. What a bunch of hooey. I have since learned at my ripe old age of 47, that whatever works for your family is the right thing for your family. Bottle fed babies grow up just as healthy, and apparently the daycare kids have made it okay too. Ah, the self-importance of the young! And I was right in the thick of it, too.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 1, 2010 14:28:41 GMT -5
No worriesm tapati. That is a profoundly sad experience with your Dad, and one all too common. I remember seeing my father twice. Once through a courthouse door window when he was on the stand. Someone held my eight year old self up to the window to see. He did not ask to see me that day that I know of. The next time I saw him was a few years ago in his coffin. I went to the funeral specifically to see what he looked like. As far as the Cat Steven's song, I wince when I hear it. It reminds me of my husband's missionary father, who "hated...even his own children...for (Jesus) sake" and is surprised to find that his children don't really have time for him now that he would like a relationship. I have no pity for any man who can send five and six year old children thousands of miles away to the care of strangers in orphanage-type conditions for ANY REASON, much less in the name of my religion! It goes against common sense, natural affection and responsible Bible interpretation. And so, what goes around comes around, you reap what you sow, and/or ain't karma a beyotch. Take your pick.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jun 1, 2010 9:04:22 GMT -5
I just want to voice my opinion about reversal "ministries". Understandably it was very important to the people on this thread, but I found the literature extremely offensive and abusive. It claimed that tubal ligations and/or vasectomies were greivous sins, for which there is no Biblical text to cite. All they could cite was a poor simplistic interpretation of the Onan story, and to make that stick they had to paint God as double-minded. What struck me as so tragically and mean-spiritedly misguided is that even IF one could prove that medical procedures to end fertility WERE a "sin", then the blood of Christ would cleanse a penintent soul from guilt and they should be able to accept that with great joy. What I read was a montage of stories of women tormented by guilt, regret and anguish. Reversals did nothing to heal their broken minds and hearts. It rarely worked and they spent years agonizing over things that according to scripture were forgiven. The person who gave me the literature obviously wanted me to join in the mental, emotional torment and spend my days depressed and all of our savings in a probably doomed attempt to undo my tubal ligation. Talk about your works of the flesh! It may hurt to hear my opinion, but I believe that a reversal "ministry" is wicked. It hurts people. It first tells them their value to God lies in their ability to pro-create, and then encourages them to focus on that exclusively and make reversing it their life goal. And what happens to the women whose reversals don't take (the vast majority)? They believe God doesn't love them and that he is punishing them for their earlier decision. Ugly, ugly, ugly. To me, it is just as ugly as the JWs refusing life saving blood transfusions. It's a picture of a nasty opinionated God who will not forgive medical "sins". I totally understand that many posters will disagree with me, but I felt compelled to explain this point of view. Woman attempting to manipluate me to regret my surgery were no friend to God or to me.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 15:03:58 GMT -5
Well, we shall have to object to each other as civilly as possible then, I suppose. I object to the idea that being traumatized means one has a psychological problem. If your toe is bashed in, no one I(I hope) says that your toe is defective! It has been wounded through no fault of its own, and is now in the state of being wounded. Once the wound is cared for, and time has healed it, then the toe is restored. But during the whole process, it was a normal toe. People who react to traumas with obsessive behaviors of any kind are NORMAL people reacting in NORMAL ways to abnormal stressors on their psyches. But as for the rest, you could be right. Normal people who have not suffered from an abnormal stressor on their psyche could, I suppose, get involved in cultish groups. I can't imagine how or why, but I'll take your word for it. My experience and learning is not the sum total of human experience, that's for sure!
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 14:13:50 GMT -5
krwordgazer, You're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 14:08:18 GMT -5
Nikita,
I agree that any ideology which is all-consuming in a way that results in isolation from others outside that group, neglect of self-care, obsessive thoughts, etc. is on par with any other pathologically excessive behavior.
As for Mother Theresa, I was not surprised at the death to find out that she struggled with depression her whole life. She surrounded herself with human suffering as an occupation. She accomplished many amazing works of charity that still keep on giving today and I have the utmost respect for her.
She handled her all-consuming involvement in her faith in a responsible way, by making it a full-time occupation. She did not have children and then neglect them to do "ministry".
As to whether or not she had personal pain she was pushing aside by staying so active in helping those less fortunate, I could not say.
But I do know if you ask any person recovering from excessive behaviors (substance abuse, QF theology, cults of any kind, etc.) they will all agree that the behavior was a symptom of an underlying trauma that had not yet been addressed.
I have never once met any person in recovery who did not share this experience.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 11:08:53 GMT -5
Loved your post, Becca blue.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 10:47:27 GMT -5
I will agree with this, only traumatized people will be attracted to excessive religion, QF included.
People with unresolved trauma seem to be compelled psychologically to recreate that trauma in their lives over and over until they deal with it or die.
The children of the traumatized are always affected by this, wounded by this, and in this way the pain (and the compulsion to try to suppress it) continues to be passed on from generation to generation.
The only way to stop it is to first end the compulsive behavior, and then start dealing with the pain one was trying to suppress and ignore. In this way, the traumatized person can stop playing out the painful scenario over and over, process it in a healthy way, and move on with a new healthier ways of being.
This frees them up to admit how their addictions hurt others, take responsibility for that, humble themselves to those they have hurt (always the children) and model this new healthy way of processing the pain and anger of trauma.
Some people's pain is so overwhelming and their shame over the trauma so all-encompassing that they never stop their compulsive, destructive behavior. They are too afraid to stop the behavior, because then they will have to deal with the feelings/trauma and they are too terrified to take that step.
I wish people could understand this. Even with shows like Intervention and Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew people still fail to see this reality.
I guess they don't want to accept it, that it really IS TRUE that "there but for the grace of God (or random chance if you prefer) go I..."
Not all people who experience trauma will spend their lives suppressing and running from the pain. Some families will provide safe places to heal and model healthy ways of overcoming the trauma. Many times, however, the family is the source of the pain.
And sometimes even in healthy, supportive families, a person who has kept the trauma a secret from their families because of fear of rejection or hurting the family. Even if that fear is not valid, when a person believes that it is they will behave accordingly.
Like I wrote earlier, this is very personal to me, and it is also personal to all those who are escaping the QF lifestyle.
We don't have defective ("addictive") personalities.
In our woundedness we were attracted to things that gave us a feeling of significance and worth while at the same time provided a way to focus on something outside of ourselves so intently that it supressed our pain.
When we leave the "addiction" behind, we still have to deal with the trauma that was always there, plus new traumas that were dealt to us in our "addictions".
I guess I am asking for readers to thoughtfully consider the implications of this. Anyone traumatized as a child who was without resources to work through it for whatever reason, will be compelled to suppress the pain through outside stimuli, either socially acceptable means (work, hobbies) or otherwise (drugs, sex).
All wounded people without resources to deal with/process the trauma will respond in the same way. Only the types of excessive behaviors vary.
It is not dependent on the personality of the traumatized.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 31, 2010 10:23:05 GMT -5
With great humility I must correct this dangerous and ugly idea:
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN ADDICTIVE PERSONALITY.
There simply is not. No research has ever backed that up. All the data about personalities: introvert, extrovert, intuitive, judging, etc. are present in equal amounts in people who are driven to excess and in those who are not.
What IS always present in people who are involved in addictions (whether chemical or behavioral) is unresolved emotional trauma.
What you are calling an addictive "personality" is better understood as "symptomatic of trauma".
All compulsive behaviors- drinking, gambling, excessive religion, counting, cutting, eating disorders, etc.- are ways that wounded people try to shut out painful emotions while at the same time creating feelings of significance in themselves.
This is a very important distinction. Personalities of all kinds respond to unresolved trauma with excess of some kind or another. If the trauma is unresolved, the excess takes over the life of the traumatized person, becoming the main characteristic that defines the person's life.
Whether it is becoming a long-distance runner who can't quit despite multiple injuries, being a workaholic who gives way more than the job requires, being so religious that you leave the love of God far behind in your pursuit to be "blameless", or partying on a daily basis- they are all addictions that at the beginning gave a sense of accomplishment and worth to a wounded soul while at the same time serving as a helpful distraction from the pain that never goes away.
It is not a personality disorder.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 30, 2010 22:05:10 GMT -5
That was actually a source of debate in our Christian circles at one point! I'm ashamed to say that *I* was the arrogant SAHM questioning the ministry value of our church run daycare.
Oh if I could go back in time and re-do my life....
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 30, 2010 17:12:56 GMT -5
I have no statistics about QF but I do have experience of being a stoner/partier "looking for love in all the wrong places" gal at one time.
I can definitively say that everyone abusing drugs/alcohol has suffered some sort extreme emotional duress that is either on-going or has not been dealt with by the chemically-dependent person.
No question about it. I hate to use the word addict because though I was a full-time partier by the time I was sixteen, when I quit at age nineteen there was no detox to go through. As I slowly came to myself, partying lost all appeal to me. Gradually I scaled back until I just had absolutely no desire for it anymore.
So I am not the least bit surprised to know that many children of fundie/QF spiritual and amotional abuse turn to partying to ease the pain. And also to say "you can't control me now!"
I also encourage everyone here to be kind to everyone you know acting out in substance abuse. There is a trauma to their hearts that needs healed, and partying helps dull the pain. Not that substance abuse should be condoned, but hopefully you could plant a hope of freedom by saying, "I'm hoping (praying) for the day you don't need that anymore."
Sorry to be preachy. It touched my own life, so it's personal for me.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 30, 2010 11:48:22 GMT -5
Well, that post explains a lot of why "Christian" home school support groups have not been supportive of me! I am going to grab my two children and go out for some junk food now. Not because I hate my kids, but because I love hot wings.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 28, 2010 15:30:48 GMT -5
Brad wrote: And now some other man or movement has come along and convinced them to give up their rights, not to their husbands (as they try to make you think), but to the movement.I totally get Brad. Some of these women claim to be submitted to their husbands, but really they are sold out to an ideology. "Submission" becomes a code words and is redefined to mean "SAHM, home schools, no birth control, etc." An example would be a man not wanting his wife to dress like a frump, but wife insisting it's God's way for her to dress. It's submission to the QF ideology, not to the men they actually married. Sometimes it really is like that. My friend who is very QF/prolife has an extremely passive husband. I have often wondered how much of their beliefs and lifestyle were pushed on him by his wife. The no birth-control thing especially. They are deeply in debt, their house is badly in need of maintenance and repair, and yet at no time was the husband really free to say that he didn't want more kids to support. That would be such a heinous sin in his wife's eyes! Nope, it was no sex if you don't want babies. I think that resentment for being forced to be the sole bread winner of a large family (not at gunpoint, mind you, but by social/emotional manipulation) may account for a lot of his subtle abuse towards his wife. Most of his abuse is passive-aggressive abuse- letting his wife down, not keeping his word, not showing affection, not taking care of responsibilities, etc. Emotional abuse is still abuse, and it's extremely painful. Saying that he allowed his wife to be overcome by QF ideology and allowed her to do what she wanted even to the detriment of his life and family is not letting him off the hook. He is still responsible for the choices he made. But it is telling that in some cases, it is the wife who wanted the family to live this way, and the husband trying to please his wife that motivated him to go along. And for the record, the reversal ministry was IMO, the biggest bunch of hideous smelly garbage ever written. P.U. Browbeating people and making them believe they had committed grievous crimes against God when the Bible says no such thing- shame on them! I had these types of literature thrust on me by a QF friend (tubal ligation 1994 and loving the sexual freedom it brings- woot!) and they were poison.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 24, 2010 15:03:05 GMT -5
And the truly ironic part is that there is no better way to guarantee your children will turn away from your faith than by making it a total domination of every aspect of their young lives.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on May 24, 2010 12:41:27 GMT -5
Yes, thanks for writing this. I have already emailed a link to a friend I hope will read it thoughtfully.
This whole new trend in Christianity is so crazy to me! My Baptist grandma told me with derision how those crazy Catholics though they were supposed to advance the kingdom by having babies instead of by sharing the story of Jesus! She was being rude and discriminatory in the way she put things, but theologically she had a point.
Now it is folks from my grandma's tradition that want to increase the number of Christians by biological procreation. Grandma would be shaking her head in disbelief is she were here to see it.
|
|