|
Post by musicmom on Apr 28, 2010 9:18:00 GMT -5
You know, I really appreciate the point that Jane has made that it's important to know what's out there before you take the leap out of QF. I don't have a lot of time right now, but I was definitely shocked and surprised at much I found out after leaving.
I DID think that the whole problem was in my ex. I did think that when I got out of the abusive religion and away from the abusive man, that all would be ok because the world was a good, friendly place.
I was NOT prepared for the reaction that I got from the world. I saw myself as something of a heroine for leaving this abusive father. I thought that protecting my children was doing a huge service to society - the very society that would be containing the kids when they grew up. I felt that I was preventing another generation of character disordered individuals from starting families of their own, wreaking havok wherever they touched.
This is not the general reaction I got from the world. I was the suspect, must-be-crazy, lady in the shoe with all these kids. Kids who, I might add, were not acting particularly sweet and obedient because of the family upheaval and abuse that they had recently suffered.
I just didn't LOOK good to the world anymore. I looked great before - with my hard-working husband and all my kids standing in a well-scrubbed row. Suddenly, I didn't present that image anymore to the world and my reputation suffered as a result.
It's very subtle. It's the way "regular" moms look at me when they find out I'm divorced with a bunch of kids. You immediately get the feeling that it's all your fault for some reason. It's the way the teachers at school talk to you. It's the feeling you get at church from all the regular moms and families.
I was not expecting that kind of negative energy which I cannot seem to defend against or change. I was used to being held up as an example of good motherhood (sort of like Michele Duggar) even though I knew I didn't deserve it. I knew how bad things were in my house and how the children were suffering.
Now everyone is so much happier and actually has a chance of growing up without serious mental illness, but the rest of the world looks on dissapprovingly. They liked it better when I was faking my way through.
Jane is right - there is patriarchy and hatred of women everywhere in our society almost. It is embedded in the cultural group-think. It is embedded in my own mind, my earliest teachings. It is embedded in our institutions and social expectations.
There is a certain sense in which the QF lifestyle protected me from this un-named force. I am glad that I left it, but I DO wish that I had known more what I would face. Hatred of women is not contained in one man, or one church. It is everywhere and now I am facing it in my daily life. I do wish I had known that. It surprised me to a degree which I cannot even put into words.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 25, 2010 16:20:22 GMT -5
I just don't understand why everyone has to keep telling Janedoe that they skip or skim her posts or would she please shorten them or learn how to write better, etc..
That's not our business. For goodness sake, we can all scroll down if we don't have time to read - I do that myself, even though when I have time, I read every word she writes.
But I think it's insulting and hurtful to keep telling her these things. Maybe some of us do write more properly and more to the point - but people have different gifts and abilities. I would still rather have the opportunity to read what she has to say, and now because of so many people's criticism of her (even wondering if she's a woman or whether she's mentally ill ) she will not write here anymore.
I do not think any of this was necessary. Skip the darned posts, if you don't care for the writing style.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 23, 2010 20:19:08 GMT -5
"Some people don't have a will to make their kids as robotic as is needed. I've seen that more than once, it just isn't in them to compel their children into obedience that way, maybe they are people who are scared of conflict so they tend to just do it all themselves rather than argue with a 12 year old. Or maybe they are very kind hearted and it never feels right to be on their kids backs all the time. Really you need your kids robotic slaves not to be overwhelmed by the sheer work load. "
This was me - very kind hearted to a fault. The whole way that QF worked in our house was because my ex was a military-style disciplinarian. He could just enter the room and the kids would pop up to serve. The sheer knowledge that he was coming home each night caused everything to get done during the day. It's hard to describe, but the kids just robotically followed his every command, or even his unspoken thoughts about what they should do. Of course, there was a lot of harsh discipline which had been doled out in the past and was always there as a back-up to the deep, commanding voice and impossible expectations.
I remember just dreading what they kids would do after Chris moved out. I mean, I knew he should be gone and that his presence was destructive - but he was the energy directing the whole running of the household. I had no idea what would happen when he left, but I knew they wouldn't be the Von Trapps lined up in a row anymore.
So, it wasn't too bad. They (and I) did take about a year or so in which they all just sort of relaxed like rubber bands released into the air. It was pretty wild there for a while. Most days we've reached a new equilibrium, but I still need to work on my humane discipline skills since I really didn't need any before at all. I tend to not be as firm as I should be, because all that excessive discipline really scared me and I still have quite a bit of PTSD whenever I try to be forceful.
But yes - QF only can function by a combination of brainwashing straight from birth and oppressive discipline. Maybe it's sort of like sending soldiers off to war where they might get killed - to require human beings to go so against their natural grain, you have to have rigorous discipline in place.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 23, 2010 12:43:20 GMT -5
I do believe that there are prophets among us - just as John the Baptist was in his time. John the Baptist did not present himself in the typical way - he was known for his unusual appearance and habits. But what he said came right from what he heard from God - so much so that people wondered whether he could be the Christ.
I'm not saying that Jane Doe is necessarily another John the Baptist - but I do read her posts very carefully and I put the effort into understanding them, because I think that what she is saying is very important. I think she is writing not for her own jollies, but because she feels a deep need to say these things to anyone who will listen.
Can anyone really say that her random capitalization and stream of consciousness totally obscures her message? Or is it just that it's easier to skip it - along with the harsh truths that she brings to our unwilling eyes?
And of course, we always do have the option to skip it. Just scroll right on down and don't read it if you are so inclined. I for one am glad for her insights and I will keep reading. She very well may be a prophet.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 21, 2010 12:28:58 GMT -5
Yes, I agree with this last post.
I remember we used to jokingly refer to families who were postponing births as "slackers" - this even if they had 8 or more kids! It was somewhat in jest, but there was truth to it too - taking a break meant that you couldn't really trust God the way we were all supposed to be.
In fact, this was the straw that broke my marriage's back. When I told my husband that I was simply too physically and emotionally overwhelmed to have another child, and then he called me a "baby" - that was the beginning of the end. It was just inhumane, and I could finally recognize it as such.
My take on having the kids help: I do give mine responsibilities, but I am really careful to make sure it's not impinging on their development, including their social life. I am quite flexible about letting them off for things if there's a good reason. I also pay them for chores when I need more help than what seems reasonable to expect of them. This works real well for teens who always need money for stuff - of course, I am the only who knows that I'd probably have to shell out the bucks anyway because I want them to be able to do this stuff. This way, I get more help around the house.
Congrats Vyckie!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 20, 2010 12:38:47 GMT -5
Hey everyone Many thanks for the comments - you have all given me so much to think about. It just feels so darned good to tell a story like this and be heard - really be heard. Not that anyone can change the past for me - as much as we'd all love to do that for each other - but I swear it's healing for me just to tell this and have your loving responses. I have been so busy with school lately and gotten into some serious on-the-side reading (Jane, ordered "The Creation of Patriarchy" that you mentioned as well as Andrea Dworkin's "Right Wing Women") and I'm wishing I could just hole up and do a few years of my own self-directed study in feminism and the history of women's struggle. I am learning a lot and it is really helping explain a lot of the feelings I struggle with now - why, as a single mom, I feel this kind of shame from the rest of society, as if I'm not a respectable woman anymore, now that I'm not under a man...Things like that , that I really didn't understand. Setting myself apart from my mother's feminism - or whatever it was, maybe that was just a front - really did set me back about 1000 years as far as knowing when I was being abused or taken advantage of. I have a LOT of catching up to do, but I do feel myself to be getting stronger. Keep those suggestions coming!! I will check out that Pearl Jam song - thanks. Jane - mulling over your responses. Makes me realize how much I still have to learn. Anyway, I'm glad you all appreciated the story. As I told Vyckie, it didn't seem totally NLQish in its theme, but hopefully you all could kind of see where it was leading me (no where good!). Peace to all
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 15, 2010 12:30:27 GMT -5
"that I think do help....at least, with knowing the feelings [for me it's been self hate to rage] that surface are not un-normal, I guess is what I'm trying to say, it's the part where your father takes this kind of ownership, over your menstrual and sexuality that just screams in this way...reliving you know, that this is more than just patriarchal controls, but it's a form of Incest actually, emotional sexual incest, but it's incest all the same."
The last sentence of this made me want to say something that's been bouncing around in my head lately:
I think that our culture is so left-brained, and so linear thinking that we think that for there to be any SERIOUS abuse, it must involve the body. It must be physical or sexual to be respected. I always thought this too, and downplayed in a big way, the very intense emotional abuse that I received growing up.
But what is abuse? It is primarily an abuse of power. It steals energy from a less powerful person and gives it to a more powerful person, which then, gives them even more power. Yes, this can be done through beatings and sexual abuse. But, in its purest form, EMOTIONS are power. Our emotions are our energy that we use to connect and have influence on the world. The fact that you can not definitely spot emotional abuse, and that most people would not know it was occurring, does not change the fact that emotional abuse is probably the quickest and safest way to obtain power from someone else -especially a child who needs love from its parents and will do anything to get it.
An added plus to emotional abuse is that the child doesn't even have a name or construct to know he or she is being abused. It just feels normal to them. You grow up feeling tired all the time and concerned about everyone's else feelings. Then you're labeled "codependent' and you feel you have some sort of disease.
I guess what I'm wondering, is - not that we have to rate them - but perhaps this emotional abuse that these QF parents do - maybe it's the worst kind of abuse there is. The most damaging and the hardest to detect and deal with. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 14, 2010 21:34:03 GMT -5
I have known a couple homeschool families that had no birthdays, and no Christmas as well. In both these families it was 100% the father's idea, and he was just a control freak jerk about it. Both of them seemed to get some great pleasure out of NOT having birthdays and sermonizing to anyone who would listen about why his kids were spared this horrible paganism. There is something about withholding enjoyment from others that controlling personalities really run with. That is too true, Arietty I began to dread birthdays, holidays and any kind of celebrations beyond the strictest religious ones. My ex just felt it his bounded duty to ruin each and every family celebration we had. We'd all work so hard - decorate, cook a great meal, the kids would be so excited. Then Daddy would get home and find some trivial, tiny thing that was wrong and the whole thing would be derailed and we'd all be sitting their with resigned faces once again. Definitely, he was uncomfortable with any joy.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 8, 2010 22:37:46 GMT -5
Arietty, Thank you SO much for this post. It really gives me so much hope. I am about 2 1/2 years now since my ex moved out and sometimes I wonder if I will ever get to the other side. Definitely, things are so much easier now, in so many ways. My kids are doing better. I am getting healthier. But the apathy and the dullness of life: that really takes some getting used to. Taking care of the needs of 9 people without any eternal significance...Where does the motivation come from? I mean, I do it. But it is so different. I used to be ON FIRE as a mother/homemaker. I was really really good at it. I made great meals every night. Now, we have take out probably 3 days a week and when I do make dinner, I put it on the table buffet style and we just casually eat and chat with whoever is there. And I just cannot make myself care more than that. I am getting to know my kids as people and enjoying the relaxed, real relationships we are building. That really encourages me, what you said about having that strength in your family now. I have moments of feeling that way even now. I have discovered feminism - finally. Read The Feminine Mystique and was like "wow, why didn't I read this 20 years ago???". I have certain feminst blogs I check every day. A part of me is getting much stronger - and I think it's the part of me figured it was safer to submit than it was to fight. I feel much more in solidarity with the rest of my sisters all over the world - as opposed to "well, I am a true woman because I am living God's plan". Haven't checked out feminist/lesbian music - any suggestions? Didn't get into the drinking, but I will confess an affair with a married man which I would guess might have served a similar purpose: finally being that rebellious teenager I'd never been able to be. Not that I'm proud of it, but it was a stage I guess. I don't recommend it. I realized that I didn't want any part of deceiving another woman. So, 2 years down, how many more to go? You're ten years down the road and you sound pretty darned good good for you!
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 5, 2010 11:30:14 GMT -5
Oh, and one more thing!!! I am going to have all my girls read "The Feminine Mystique" by Betty Friedan. I've just read it recently, and I just wonder how different my life would have been if I had read it in college. My goodness - she answers every single one of the QF selling points that I bought into. And it's been published for 40 years!!! Seriously - I will pay them to read this book. Maybe the boys too
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 5, 2010 11:26:53 GMT -5
Sea,
Wow!!!! Thanks so much for posting this lengthy excerpt! I am definitely going to have to get that book and read it.
Rules: I do remember when joining my ex's fundamentalist Catholic church, that I would now be safe in my marriage (unlike my mother) because we both had certain rules to follow. I did notice that my rules were harder than his (and in the future they would be MUCH harder) but I loved believing that we were both held accountable to doing certain things.
The beginning of the end came when I realized that he didn't really believe his religion - well, he did as a sort of OCD ritual. But I actually remember showing him religious books and articles about how he wasn't supposed to be mean to me, he was supposed to be loving, not to hurt the children, etc.. He looked at me like "Are you an idiot? Do you really think I care?". And I realized that the whole system had been used to get ME under subjection and that he had absolutely no accountability. He felt no guilt and he had no faith. And he had all the power.
I remember having the priest to our house when I was getting close to filing for divorce. He acted so interested to hear my side of the story and why I was about to do it. Then he told me that if I would just quit my job and keep the house cleaner, my husband would be nice and stop abusing us. That was accountability? That's when I realized I had been scammed.
Yep - they scared us (by enabling men to misbehave in all kinds of ways) and then offered us the "solution" to our fears - willingly subjecting ourselves to them, in hopes of escaping a worse fate. Isn't that the M.O. of all dictators and tyrants?
One more comment on this: I so much wish that I had not gone the artsy fartsy route in college. I did not take one course in economics or women's studies. I earned a bachelors' degree in music education but learned almost nothing about the world. It IS scary to live in the world, supposedly as an adult, and not understand how it works. I think my parents should have required me to take some basic, worldly wise courses. It is one of the big reasons that I got married and accepted QF teachings - sheer terror of the world.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 4, 2010 14:21:21 GMT -5
The only good thing I can say about that blog is that she is so far into it that she comes off sounding pretty wacko. It's even possible that many QF women who read it will perceive the nutiness of it since it is so blatantly stated.
The more I think about it, the more I sense that having these expectations (that God will bless and take care of me as a wife and woman if I follow traditional rules) stem from the fear of being a woman and all that it entails. Recently, I have dealt with a lot of anger in myself for all the things I have to put up with as a woman that I never noticed when I was QF. Things like: men leering at me, worrying about what I wear and whether men will think I want attention, my ex-husband getting off scot free with society's approval and I have total responsibility for 8 kids because, well, I'm a woman and he's man, of course!
Not that I really would want him to have access to them, but I almost never sense any society disapproval that he's basically abandoned them. Now, if I did that, I'd be satan incarnate.
Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I've recently had to come to terms with the fact that it's scary and hard to be a woman. We really don't have an equal chance and we have to put up with a lot of crap that men don't. Yes, things are better than they used to be and better than in some countries (worse than in others), but there is a long, long uphill climb to real equality and I was not ready to face that.
I think there was in me, some kind of resistance to realizing this because it is so depressing and scary. So, instead, I rebelled against this knowledge by thinking that if I just EMBRACED traditional womanhood, all would be well. It wasn't being a woman that was problematic - it was rebelling against being a woman! I really thought I had the problem solved, when really I had just forfeited the whole issue, not having had the heart or courage to fight.
Anyone else think that they might have been running from the unpleasant reality that, in many ways, it sucks to be woman and there's not much we can do about it?
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 2, 2010 20:58:28 GMT -5
Your comments about indoctrinating youth reminded me of something weird in the Catholic church.
I accompany a lot of high school kids at solo/ensemble time and one of them is a Catholic high school. The kids all have to go to this retreat called "Cairos" or maybe "Kairos" - not sure. But anyway, they keep the kids up most of the night and they are not allowed to tell the parents or anyone else what they do. This is a diocese-approved event!!! I was talking to one of the teachers and I told him that there's no way in a million years that I would let my kids go on some mystery retreat where they are forced to go without sleep and then not tell me anything. He laughed me off and said that the kids come back much more disciplined and easy to handle. I don't doubt it!!!! I was floored that he didn't care exactly how that was done - just that the kids were docile when they came home was good enough for him.
How stupid can parents be? Or do they figure they are doing their God-given duty to the church by handing over their children to whatever the church wants to do with them? Puzzled!!!
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 2, 2010 19:25:15 GMT -5
Strange - I grew up with my sister and mother always telling me how irresponsible I was. Or, screaming it rather. Now, I look back and see that I was just being a normal kid and not taking on the overly responsible role that my sister had. But when I started to learn about the QF life, it seemed like the perfect chance to do it all again, and prove to everyone just how responsible I really was! Well, I didn't see it that way, of course. But I do think, now that I was definitely trying to prove something. It IS a very tough life. Girls and women bear the brunt of it. My oldest daughter, Grace, is sleeping over at her friends' house tonight which is typical of her. She has a life now - lots of friends, activities. She doesn't spend that much time at home and I miss her. But she used to be "junior mom" and she was so darned good at it, that I got spoiled. I am glad that she is free though. I hope that I let her go early enough that she will not feel overly responsible as an adult - she was 13 when I divorced. I wonder - did any other ex QF moms worry about how things would be managed after you let the slaves go free? That's the thing about this lifestyle - it really only works if you make the kids work way harder than kids should work. I have had to relax my standards about as far as possible without health and human services knocking on my door. But I will not sacrifice my children to this movement, nor will I sacrifice myself to maintain someone else's idea of perfection. Nice article, Arietty
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 2, 2010 10:32:23 GMT -5
Sierra,
When I directed music in a Lutheran church, I never felt more diminished and less trusted as a woman and a person. They had such a negative attitude towards women, which didn't surprise me, after I read some quotes by Luther. They were horrible!
Even though I do have my issues with the Catholic church (as you all know:), they honor women so much more because of the influence of Mary. At least, that's why I think I feel better as a woman there. Plus, they have women reading the epistles and in various positions of influence, even though, not priests, of course. That does bother me, but I still feel so much more respected as a woman there, as opposed to in the conservative Lutheran church.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Apr 2, 2010 8:34:05 GMT -5
Shedding of blood - remission of sin - Jesus shedding blood on the cross which was sufficient for remission. That makes sense.
Where does sexual abuse of women and children come in? This does not shed any blood? There cannot be pleasure in it.... How do abusers benefit from doing this? Incredibly rich and powerful people do this - it is what ritual abuse is all about. I keep asking myself - why? What do they have to gain?
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 30, 2010 10:27:16 GMT -5
There's a passage from "To Train Up a Child" that I remember so well from my early days as a parent when we tried to take all Pearl's philosophy to heart.
I wonder if anyone else on the forum remember it, because I think it really encapsulates what I'm trying to say worries me about Christianity.
I'm paraphrasing, but it's something like this: "Until your child can look at a cross and take in the peace that comes by knowing that God's Son has been crucified for his sins, until your child can understand that, he is suffering under the guilt and shame of his birth. As a merciful parent, it is doing kindness to your child to punish and scourge him (the child) until he is old enough to understand that it has been accomplished by the Son of God. You will be giving your child peace of mind and settling his conscience by punishing him."
THIS is the poop in the brownies of Christianity as far as I'm concerned!!!
I think it is totally the projected guilt and shame of the PARENTS that they put on this innocent child, and then beat it out of them. Of course, they throw in the mind fuck that they're helping the child get rid of his own guilt and shame, for his own good, of course - because they "love" him.
Children, in my experience, do not experience guilt and shame on their own. They do not feel "born with it". They are born joyful and trusting and happy. It is the projected guilt and shame which are projected onto them - and then, "charitably" scourged away , which they then feel for the rest of their lives.
Does anyone else remember this passage and what are your comments? This being Holy Week at the church I work at, I am hearing so much, every day about how Christ "carries our iniquities" and how wonderful God is for "giving us his only son to be crucified". It is all making me feel so triggered and sick. I guess, because I felt like that's what my own mother did to me, and she used Christianity to justify herself.
Please do not tell me that it's not the fault of the religion - that people can use it for whatever they want to to accomplish their evil intentions. This is the central tenant of the religion. It is not just a little sideline teaching.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 29, 2010 8:32:23 GMT -5
KW,
Oops - well, I cut and pasted that quote from a web-page without checking myself, so I apologize that it was misquoted. I'm in a rush right now, but will go back later today and figure out where it was really from. And, unfortunately, I think there are many more examples like that.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 28, 2010 17:43:35 GMT -5
So, do I really need to be involved in a religion that bases itself on punishing innocence as a means of redeeming the powerful?--musicmom Journey - nice to read your words again Well, what I meant is that Christianity's central idea is that God lets Christ be punished for our sins. Christ is the lamb, the innocent, the sinless. The only one who never sinned. We are, allegedly, the guilty, the trapped, the damned. He is punished in our stead - a concept that has always baffled me (and caused my children to ask many questions that I could not really answer, because their questions actually had common sense to them ) I think....and I'm not sure... but I think that this idea might be the one that lends itself so well to parents who, in trying to achieve their own sanctity, end up punishing their innocent children. We get the idea from God the Father, and, judging from the alive and well status of the abuse industry, it must achieve something for the adults. It makes the adults feel powerful and relieved. They become more successful in their lives and no one would ever guess that someone so well respected and "beyond reproach" would ever hurt a child. They dump all their guilt and shame upon the helpless, innocent child and then go about their business stronger and happy. I just can't help but be reminded of all of this when, this morning in church, I hear about Christ "bearing all our iniquities". "Surely He has borne our sins and carried our sorrows." "He bowed His head to those who would smite Him." And on and on. Well, that was probably much more than you wanted, but I am just trying to think this out for myself too.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 28, 2010 12:58:36 GMT -5
I'm going to the coast with my family today, so I have time only for this: Philosophia, where and how, exactly, does the Bible say that God is into child sacrifice? Where and how does He say, "Here, I'll do it for you?" If you're talking about the sacrifice of Jesus, then I don't get it. Jesus, according to Christianity, is the eternal divine God, second Person in the Trinity. He is called the "Son," but not in any biological sense. He was 33 years old at the time he, by his own statement, voluntarily laid down his life, on his own authority. How is that child sacrifice? Exodus 20:29,30 (NIV) "You must give me the firstborn of your sons. Do the same with your cattle and your sheep. Let them stay with their mothers for seven days, but give them to me on the eighth day." Scary stuff. All those innocent little babies. KG, I know what you are saying about having that transcendent religious experience of pure love with God. Christianity has been the vehicle for many such experiences, and for me too. I guess I am just seeing that God is God and can be experienced in so many different ways - nature, Buddhism, music, helping others, seeking my center, etc... So many different ways to approach God and experience the divine. So, do I really need to be involved in a religion that bases itself on punishing innocence as a means of redeeming the powerful? Does that even make sense? Is it, in any way, fair? Can it lead to people doing terrible things and thinking God is cheering them on?
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 28, 2010 12:46:22 GMT -5
KG - I can totally agree with you that Christianity can be used to make people more loving and ethical. There is plenty of fodder for great philosophy, love of God and man, examples of altruistic behavior abound. No doubt, you can find those good meanings if you want to. And many people do. But, I don't think that is the question. I think the question - for me, anyway - is, can I support a religion which I see to be encouraging child abuse by the example of God, and by many MANY verses in scripture. Along with all the loving things in Christianity, is it doing terrible damage to children by enabling people to cleanse themselves of guilt by chastening their children? I'm thinking yes - it does do this. As an example: Men beating their wives used to be pretty commonplace in most societies. For most women, it was just a fact of life and something that we lived with. Not all men did, of course. Many loved their wives and would never hurt them. The laws of our country actually used to give men permission to hit their wives, as long as the beating instrument wasn't too big (Virginia had this law in place pretty recently, in fact). So, my question is: Even if most of the law was good and just and encouraged good behavior and respect of others, it is ok that it gives permission to beat wives? And did that law cause more women to be hurt? Studies have shown that since the laws have been changed, men do not do it as much as they used to. It is against the law, and is known to be wrong. Some still do, of course, but not near as many as when it was codified in our legal code. Now, it's true that the Bible is not legally binding, but to believing Christians, it is MORE influencial than the laws of our land. At least, it used to be for me. We used to have a certain pride in our house that we followed God's laws, as opposed to men's laws. And this included how we brought up our children. What it said in the Bible definitely influenced my thinking on child discipline and made me feel like I was being a good mother for hurting my children - in God's name, of course .
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 27, 2010 18:13:15 GMT -5
You're using the operative word there, Jemand: "paradigm." Paradigm shifts are absolutely the hardest things to make. They must be done gradually, if at all. At this point our paradigm has changed so completely that theirs makes no sense at all to us. But it took thousands of years. Clothing styles and food choices-- even holidays and laws-- are comparatively easy. But they may play a slow, incremental role in changing how a people looks at the big picture, too. Go ahead and look at it instead as the gradual evolution of humanity. Even from my perspective, that certainly plays a role in it. But what I object to is when our paradigm is superimposed over theirs, and everything they did is viewed in terms of ours. In other fields of study, we are willing to allow experts-- scientists, doctors, etc-- to tell us when what seems obvious to us isn't really what's going on. Why not when it comes to the Bible? Why must we insist that our subjective, literalistic view of the text, has to be the actual meaning? Kwordgazer, I can appreciate part of what I think you are saying: namely, that before the advent of Christianity, child sacrifice was a common, accepted occurrence and one of the major ways that people would cleanse themselves of guilt or do penance for any type of success. Perhaps Christianity DID do some good in that it took that practice and assured people that God had already done that dirty job for us - He sacrificed His Son, so that we didn't have to sacrifice ours. Perhaps because of Christianity, millions of children have been able to live. Perhaps this is a slow evolution toward humane living, as you suggested. The next step might be admitting that taking out our feelings of guilt and shame upon our children is not acceptable in any form and that God does NOT approve of innocent life being killed for the guilty. This would be a tough sell in Christianity, I grant you, since that is pretty much the whole idea of the religion (innocent life slain for the guilty), but maybe we are poised to move forward into something else. Cases of abuse (especially sexual abuse) are way higher in religious homes. I can't help but believe that it's not accidental.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 27, 2010 10:47:37 GMT -5
I absolutely do not think Christianity is anything about child abuse. Never once in my life, the millions of times I went to mass or from all my family or people from church, have I heard anything that would make such a thought enter my head. Anybody who uses religion to abuse children ... that is firmly on them. They are the sick, twisted problem, not religion. One again, I want to express my thought that it isn't religion that is warped. It's using extreme religion to propogate your sick, twisted views that is warped ... and that applies to any belief or cause, not just religion. During all those times you went to mass, did you ever see a crucifix hanging high in front of everyone? Is this not the ultimate symbol of God giving "His only begotten son" for the salvation of the world? Do we not hear that God so loved us that He sacrificed His only son? What is this, if not the ultimate child abuse? And how is it different from parents who abuse their innocent children so that they and their children can achieve holiness and someday, Heaven? I do not mean to upset people here - but I can't help thinking that what is happening to children (like Lydia) is a direct effect of the central idea of Christianity. Not that all people use Christianity to excuse the abuse of children - I don't say that. But that many people see (perhaps not consciously) that message and carry it out with horrific consequences.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 27, 2010 8:31:20 GMT -5
You make a lot of good points here, but I still must ask you - for all those who don't know the finer point of Christians theology (which I submit are simply mental gymnastics to avoid the obvious), what message is being sent out? Do you think most people understand that God was wanting Abraham to open the door to Him? I think what they see is that God wanted him to be willing to sacrifice his only son. To kill him with a knife - an innocent child.
Does not Christian morality teach us that it is the intention which matters, not the act? Well, Abraham, at the behest of God, formed the intention to kill his son. He did not know that God was just "testing". God wanted Abraham to be willing to commit murder - whether he actually did it or not. This to me, is sick. This is not a loving father.
There is also the much more upsetting incident of the flood and the drowning of all human beings except a select few. This is a terrible story and a frightening example of how God views his children - or at least, most of them. No matter how wayward a child, would you support a parent drowning him? Of course not. But this is what God did and whether the story is literally true or not, it is supposed to teach us something, yes?
In some places, Jesus appears to be submitting willingly. But he also said "My God, my god, Oh why have you abandoned me?" and "Father, if you would let this cup pass from me....."
Yes, I agree there is the possibility of great spirituality and genuine love in Christianity - as there is in all the religions, I believe. But I cannot ignore the most obvious meaning of Christianity which is that it is ok, even righteous, to sacrifice your own child to provide justice and absolve your own guilt. This is what child abuse is all about, isn't it?
I am glad you are deeply disturbed by this thought. I think we should all be deeply disturbed by it. And I do not believe that you have never considered Christianity to be about child abuse before - perhaps consciously the idea has never occurred to you. But we have grown up with the messages of Christianity and realized their murderous import subconsciously long before we were big enough to be horrified at what the implications are. Now that we are big enough, we should speak out against the lessons it teaches and the behavior it enables and supports.
|
|
|
Post by musicmom on Mar 26, 2010 17:58:16 GMT -5
Ok, but this is my whole problem with Christianity, Jane.
What is it, basically, except divine child abuse? From Abraham sacrificing Isaac, to Lot offering his daughters to the mob, to God offering his only son on the cross.
It took me a long time to figure it out, but I really think that a huge purpose of Christianity it to allow parents to abuse their kids in the name of God. Every time you look at a crucifix and you see what the creator of the world did to his only son, you count yourself lucky to just be alive and kicking. This is a huge symbol of Christianity and, I think, controls children just by its very subconscious meaning.
I agree, Jane, that sacrificing children is pervasive and has sustained civilizations at times - just think of the Incas and the Aztecs. I believe Christian parents have done it too - in the name of God. Just read a Charles Dickens novel to see how kids were treated in the name of God.
So...how exactly does Jesus come into all this? How does he prevent children and women from being sacrificed and oppressed? How exactly does his blood prevent our wounds?
|
|