|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Aug 3, 2010 9:09:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by amyrose on Aug 3, 2010 10:43:38 GMT -5
This may be a bit of a snark, so forgive me....but what's with the proposals in tacky restaurants? The Duggar one was in that place full of vinyl booths and dead alligators on the walls and the pics linked in this post are one taking place at Arbys.
Are all courtship proposals that low brow??
(I say this as a woman who was proposed to in the kitchen next to the rabbit cage, granted, but these people seem to present theirs as enormously romantic events yet there they are in a tacky restaurant....I'm confused).
|
|
wendy
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by wendy on Aug 3, 2010 10:46:09 GMT -5
Why, oh why, is it mostly crazy fundies who embrace old-fashioned cooking? Darn it. And then, because it is often imposed by economics or patriarchal husbands, it's regarded by many as a symbol of oppression. *sigh*
Homemade bread made from fresh-ground wheat is delicious. A grateful family and a couple of beers makes it even better!
/a little OT. Good post.
|
|
phatchick
Junior Member
Medicated for Your Protection
Posts: 80
|
Post by phatchick on Aug 3, 2010 11:08:31 GMT -5
This may be a bit of a snark, so forgive me....but what's with the proposals in tacky restaurants? The Duggar one was in that place full of vinyl booths and dead alligators on the walls and the pics linked in this post are one taking place at Arbys. Are all courtship proposals that low brow?? Do you know how hard it is to find a place where the demon rum isn't sold? (OK, that was a little snarky) Besides, he has to save his money to provide for all the little blessing they're going to have. Throwing money around in fancy restaurants would be poor stewardship of the resources god gave him. FWIW, my fundy ex-boyfriend (the one who at 18 told me god had told him to marry me) proposed to me at an A&W. I wish I was joking.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Aug 3, 2010 11:09:10 GMT -5
I loathe all this talk about how someone that dated was giving pieces of their heart away and will only have fragments left to give when they get married! Psychologically speaking, that is nonsensical. Biblically speaking, that is made up gibberish. The heart is a generic term for the emotional/spiritual core of a person, right? You can't "give that" away, nor can little bits of your personhood be torn off. When one says they did something whole-heartedly that does not preclude them from ever engaging in any other different activity whole-heartedly because, well, they have no "heart" left for other activities. The sheer idiocy of this statement leaves me with zero respect for the people who parrot it as some sort of proof that their conclusions are sound. Oh, and parrot it they do. You know they have never stopped to think about it seriously even once. I even know one woman who took a wedding cake to youth group, made the girls leave the room and had the boys scoop out servings of cake with their hands. The girls were invited back to see what their "hearts" will look like on their wedding day if they date. UNBELIEVABLE! I'll say it here- I have slept with dozens of men in my wild years back in the 70s, and kissed dozens more. Some of them I even fancied myself in love with, though most were merely a good time. Now even though I regret sharing something so personal and beautiful so casually, none of that has at all affected my ability to love my husband with "my whole heart".
I am a mature adult. I love my husband as a mature adult, with my "whole heart". I have never cheated on him and have no desire to cheat on him. I also love each of my two children with my whole heart. It does not diminish my love for one to love another. As fas as other fundie lies, not being a virgin has not ruined our love life either. I don't compare my husband with past lovers. They never even enter my mind! My love life with my husband is a highly personal individualistic relationship and no other relationship I have ever been in has any bearing on this one. Likewise, even when I was living in promiscuity in the 70s, it wasn't a competition. I wasn't comparing guys on a plus minus scale, but rather enjoying experiences as varied as the people themselves. That talk is so crazy. I eat every day and yesterday's meal has not ruined my appreciation for today's breakfast. Fundies are SO WEIRD!
|
|
|
Post by amyrose on Aug 3, 2010 11:14:12 GMT -5
Why, oh why, is it mostly crazy fundies who embrace old-fashioned cooking? Darn it. And then, because it is often imposed by economics or patriarchal husbands, it's regarded by many as a symbol of oppression. *sigh* Homemade bread made from fresh-ground wheat is delicious. A grateful family and a couple of beers makes it even better! /a little OT. Good post. Good question, Wendy. I have a friend who grew up in a strict Fundamentalist family and attended a church that is now wholly embracing patriarchy. She will barely go in the kitchen because cooking is a sign of oppression. Her husband does all the cooking, even preparing lunches for her and the kids to eat when he is at work. I, on the other hand, love to cook. She was here recently and noticed three very brown bananas on my counter. I told her they were almost ready for banana cake, one of my husband's favorites. She proceeded to chew me out for being "submissive" and not having "an egalitarian marriage" as proven by my intention to bake a cake. She cannot comprehend that I bake and cook because it is something I like to do. Since I rarely cook with a recipe--and when I do I nearly always have to change it up a bit--cooking is a creative outlet for me. She can't even begin to comprehend that it is anything but a task enforced by my husband. I feel bad for her and others with similar backgrounds/experiences that so many necessary and even enjoyable things in life become such vivid symbols of the oppression and inequality that was forced on them.
|
|
|
Post by amyrose on Aug 3, 2010 11:19:00 GMT -5
Do you know how hard it is to find a place where the demon rum isn't sold? (OK, that was a little snarky) Besides, he has to save his money to provide for all the little blessing they're going to have. Throwing money around in fancy restaurants would be poor stewardship of the resources god gave him. FWIW, my fundy ex-boyfriend (the one who at 18 told me god had told him to marry me) proposed to me at an A&W. I wish I was joking. I thought of the alcohol problem after I posted. I should have known that. When I taught at the "Christian" school (it's always in quotes because the way those people behaved was so far from Christ like that I find the fact that they claimed to follow Jesus to be delusional), we were often cautioned against going to restaurants where alcohol is served. I guess that pretty much leaves you to getting engaged at Arbys or A&W.
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Aug 3, 2010 11:29:25 GMT -5
I loathe all this talk about how someone that dated was giving pieces of their heart away and will only have fragments left to give when they get married! Psychologically speaking, that is nonsensical. Biblically speaking, that is made up gibberish. The heart is a generic term for the emotional/spiritual core of a person, right? You can't "give that" away, nor can little bits of your personhood be torn off. When one says they did something whole-heartedly that does not preclude them from ever engaging in any other different activity whole-heartedly because, well, they have no "heart" left for other activities. The sheer idiocy of this statement leaves me with zero respect for the people who parrot it as some sort of proof that their conclusions are sound. . . . Fundies are SO WEIRD! I was going to post something along these lines but you've already said it quite well. I do have a related blog post called The One That Got Away, inspired by this post by Andrew Cohen. I think their fear is that getting to know nice young men might spoil your appreciation of the young man your dad prefers that you marry.
|
|
|
Post by amyrose on Aug 3, 2010 11:38:38 GMT -5
I think at the end of the day, these parents have a deep need to control their kids. I caught a Focus on the Family broadcast one day where a man actually used the word "control", saying that he realized that he was not in "complete control" of his children when he sent them to school--so they pulled them out, moved to an isolated rural area and homeschooled--a choice deeply admired on that broadcast. The whole stupid "giving away pieces of the heart" thing is really about control. Kids --boys or girls--who are allowed to date are going to develop their own ideas about the kind of person they want to marry and possibly even find someone they want to marry on their own. And then the parents are not in control.
When I listen to the parents I have known who are just Evangelical (as in not patriarchical or QF), they express all kinds of fears about their children leaving the faith. And the solution to keeping them in it seems to always be isolating and controlling them so they have no exposure to anything or anyone else. One of my close friends often talks about the importance of only people she chooses influencing her kids. Of course, dating is going to be a huge issue if you look at the world that way--what if they date someone outside the faith?
|
|
|
Post by susan on Aug 3, 2010 12:18:05 GMT -5
For some reason, what grabbed me was the part about the baby girl learning that she needed permission to eat and it wasn't ever going to be on HER timetable.
Is it just me, or have others also got the impression that QF wives aren't supposed to take up too much space??? Years ago, I was at a Christian get-together of some friends who are very QF/Patriarchal, and I remember overhearning this young man talking to his girlfriend and her practically being in tears.
His employer/spiritual leader was related to the family having the get-together, and after meeting the girl that his employee wanted to marry, he told him he should wait at least five years. Because 1) The woman seemed like the sort who would put on weight (he'd seen her refill her plate a couple times; she was crying because there was this old clean-freak guy who was going around with a trash bag disposing of people's full plates the minute they turned their head, so she'd had her food snatched and had to get more, like me and many others),
and 2)He also thought the girl was over-talkative and was the sort to gossip. He actually felt overeating and being chatty went hand-in-hand, so he strongly cautioned the young man to wait for five years, because by that time it would be obvious whether she was going to get plump.
I did later hear that this couple got married, and the young man quit working for this "spiritual leader." The spiritual leader is divorced now, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by km on Aug 3, 2010 12:39:22 GMT -5
The spiritual leader is divorced now, by the way. Shocked, I tell you. I am completely shocked.
|
|
|
Post by hopewell on Aug 3, 2010 12:47:30 GMT -5
At one Church I attended everyone would giggle and say "Babbling brook" when anyone mentioned someone talking on and on--it came from the pre-marriage counseling compatability test. I can't remember what the "strong silent" type guy was called, but Miss Babbling Brook was very famous.
You are correct--women MUST be PLEASING to their husbands. Remember, Ruth Bell Graham wore he actual wedding dress on her 50th or something anniversary! I'm sure this is how the husbands think. [Well, MOST men in fact since they are so visual!!] And, so what if you have had 18 kids in 15 years? It's just your selfish gluttony that makes you eat! And women must not "bore" their husbands with chatter about problems--they must be a positive "encourager" at all times. Always give a "good report" on someone, always use a pleasant tone!
There was so much information in the various books and articles I consulted for this that my head was spinning!! That Training Our Daughters to Be Keepers at Home book was enough to keep me going for years!! How many teens know how to "care for the bereaved?" I was always taught simple good manners carried you through situations like that, but darn if I wasn't wrong!! You've got to be TRAINED to deal with it! To pick the right casserole to take, etc!!! lol
Thanks for the nice comments.
|
|
|
Post by km on Aug 3, 2010 13:29:24 GMT -5
Reading through your post right now, hopewell. This setence struck me:
"From that moment on she will be surrounded with an odd mixture of encouragement and suspicion all aimed at keeping her not only technically a virgin, but totally untouched by any man’s hands or lips until her wedding day."
So, here's what's weird to me about this mentality... Er... Let me rephrase that. Here's what seems contradictory to me: Young men and women in QF are completely obsessed with marriage. They write lists containing qualities they feel are essential in a future spouse. They pray for their future spouse. I never understood the obsession with marriage, and at such a young age! At 16, most people could care less about marriage. I think, for some young people (especially women), it becomes the only way to get out of the house, but still... If the goal is "sheltering," then what is the deal with the fixation on marriage? It always made me very uncomfortable, even years ago when I was sympathetic to the QF perspective.
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Aug 3, 2010 13:31:25 GMT -5
It strikes me that the only way to win as a woman is not to exist.
-If you gain weight, you aren't caring for your husband's visual/sexual 'needs' -If you try to lose weight, you're vain -If you buy your kids new clothes, you're wasting your husband's money -If you don't buy them new clothes, you're a bad witness -If you make every meal from scratch, you're focusing on 'works' not 'grace' -If you don't, you're not a Proverbs 31 wife -If you have an opinion and voice it, you're domineering -If you don't, you're not 'supporting' your husband -If you like to socialize with other women, you're a gossip -If you like to socialize with men, you're a homewrecker -If you don't like to socialize, you're unfeminine -If you dress hyper-modestly, you're denying your husband his natural attraction to you -If you don't, you're a slut -If you read Above Rubies, etc., you're wasting your time when you should be serving your family -If you don't, you have no idea how to serve your family
It would be so much easier to fight if their chosen method was genocide.
|
|
|
Post by km on Aug 3, 2010 13:32:31 GMT -5
By the way, hopewell, the little disclaimers you've inserted every two sentences or so made me laugh out loud.
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Aug 3, 2010 13:35:24 GMT -5
Reading through your post right now, hopewell. This setence struck me: "From that moment on she will be surrounded with an odd mixture of encouragement and suspicion all aimed at keeping her not only technically a virgin, but totally untouched by any man’s hands or lips until her wedding day." So, here's what's weird to me about this mentality... Er... Let me rephrase that. Here's what seems contradictory to me: Young men and women in QF are completely obsessed with marriage. They write lists containing qualities they feel are essential in a future spouse. They pray for their future spouse. I never understood the obsession with marriage, and at such a young age! At 16, most people could care less about marriage. I think, for some young people (especially women), it becomes the only way to get out of the house, but still... If the goal is "sheltering," then what is the deal with the fixation on marriage? It always made me very uncomfortable, even years ago when I was sympathetic to the QF perspective. Marriage keeps them eternally focused on others so that they never have the chance to develop thoughts of their own that might contradict QF/P/ATI/whatever. Children are married off early and produce children after raising their own siblings - and they are told that they urgently need to pass on Biblical values to their own children. Constantly teaching others the party line leaves no time for them to question it themselves. I came out of fundamentalism a year before my former best friend (still a Branhamite) had her first baby. Now she's pregnant again. If she ever gets a moment to step back and evaluate her life, she'll already have at least two kids and a husband hanging in the balance. It will be much, much harder to walk away.
|
|
|
Post by km on Aug 3, 2010 13:42:07 GMT -5
Oh, and the other thing that made me laugh here? The unfortunate name, "Jerusha Faith."
|
|
hrd
New Member
Posts: 46
|
Post by hrd on Aug 3, 2010 13:56:12 GMT -5
I love that Jerusha Faith thing, too!
This brought back so many memories or stupid youth groups when we learned about how thinking about having sex was tantamount to actually having sex, and how dating was not ever mentioned in the Bible.
I really wish you'd rephrase that sentence regarding Islam, though!
|
|
|
Post by coleslaw on Aug 3, 2010 14:12:31 GMT -5
I love that Jerusha Faith thing, too! This brought back so many memories or stupid youth groups when we learned about how thinking about having sex was tantamount to actually having sex, and how dating was not ever mentioned in the Bible. I really wish you'd rephrase that sentence regarding Islam, though! I bet blanket training was never mentioned in the Bible either, or plumbing supply line.
|
|
|
Post by usotsuki on Aug 3, 2010 14:34:23 GMT -5
Or computers, magazines, telephones...
|
|
|
Post by km on Aug 3, 2010 14:37:40 GMT -5
...or capitalism...
|
|
jo
Junior Member
Posts: 73
|
Post by jo on Aug 3, 2010 14:54:19 GMT -5
You have two editing mistakes in your post.
1. Gary Ezzo has changed the name of his program. The program is now called "Let the Children come......."
Along the ____ Way.
Each stage has a different adjective listed in that blank. Its the same program as Growing Kids God's Way. They were just trying to shed the negative association and press with their well known names.
2. Tomato staking is NOT less offensive than Pearl. Elizabeth is actually a personal friend of the Pearls and merely felt the parenting expert field lacked a female voice. The sole purpose of tomato staking a child is so that you can administer their spanking immediately upon transgression to promote stronger first-time obedience than having to hunt them down first before you hit them, or having to set up specific training sessions as Pearl encourages.
|
|
|
Post by km on Aug 3, 2010 15:18:25 GMT -5
Jo: Hopewell's post is not meant to be taken seriously. It's writen as humor. She's mimicking the way a lot of QF people write about these things.
|
|
|
Post by hopewell on Aug 3, 2010 15:52:00 GMT -5
Ok, the Islamic thing was misunderstood. I should have mentioned the public beatings, stonings, etc. No offense to Islamic parents who are, of course, well intentioned. Seriously--no offense meant.
Sierra your list gets it right. The idea is to keep a woman too busy and exhausted to think this mess through.
What struck me over and over again in researching all of this was the total lack of humor, the gut-wrenching seriousness with which everything is pursued. It's almost like thinking "ok, I have to smack the five-month old who just nursed to hard--if I don't he could grow up to be a serial killer!" These people need to just plain relax a little!
As to "Jerusha Faith" I just thought it was so appropriate! If you've noticed, the Duggar's little plaques with the "meaning" of each child's name. Look up Jerusha sometime! I've always been amazed the Duggar's don't have a Jerusha--"yet"
|
|
|
Post by debrabaker on Aug 3, 2010 16:29:59 GMT -5
The word, "helpmeet" is an offensive translation of the Hebrew word, "ezer" which is better rendered, "Help," or "Helper,"
It is used once in reference to Eve and is translated Helpmeet (gag) the other 20 or so times it appears, the "Helpmet," Is God Himself and, curiously, He doesn't get diminished by being someone's meet, no God is a Mighty Helper, a Rescuer, or simply Helper.
A very poor translation which is a reflection of the sexism and bias on the part of the translaters and a pisspoor excuse to mistreat women.
|
|