I am sorry. Really I am. I was not raised with such a view and in my marriage there is no such view. The last thing either of us would say is that I am any less ANYTHING than my husband. We make decisions jointly. Like someone else, I will defer to him when I have no POV on a subject or should I say, I don't care either way ( he does the same). I seek his advice, because I admire his world experience and knowledge which is different than mine, just as he seeks mine. I am a very vocal if I feel that something is or isn't right. I know some teach inequality, but seriously this has never been something I have experienced (though I have seen what I might call inequality by others so I can see your POV). I am really really sorry you have gone through this and I can understand completely where you would view it with trepidation. As far as the other points that she--sorry can't remember her name-- made, I have no personal insight into them, though I consider clitoral removal, personally, as mutilation, but also understand it as a cultural attempt to stifle a females sexual satisfaction thus making her submissive or something. I think it's abuse, personally. That being said, I just can't in my mind equal it with my experience of "head of house" --for lack of better wording right now. I know you probably have no understanding of what I am saying or might view it as condescending but that is not my intent.

HECK NO! Not me! Do I look like Angelina Jolie? :lol: Dont answer that. :D I love kids, but I have my limits. And you?

My point was, since density seems rampant sometimes, is that while I disagree with some aspects of the Duggars I can't claim patriarchy as an issue like she has. I also strongly suspect she grew up in our society with it as a background. Maybe her father was very aggressive and she is basing all men that are the heads of their home on that, or maybe a husband? I don't know her. Doubt I ever will because of limitations she has placed. She hates the idea, with a obsessive nature. That alone makes me suspect.

:iagree: Ah a voice of reason. :001_smile: I would never think of telling my daughter that either. She can do what she wants in life. If she wants to be a pro pitcher for the Seatle mariners, GREAT. if she wants to get married and have babies, GREAT. Or anything in between. :-)

Patriarchy is what our society is based on. Any first year anthropology student knows that. :confused: I guess we have different views. I think, having read your many posts, that you equate abuse with people that may look to the husband as the head of his home. My husband is the king of our home, but guess what, I am the queen. I don't think my family, nor my family of origin, are exceptions to what you equate as the norm. I know many families that follow a biblical view that the husband is the head and many that have no view at all. I would say abuse has no such boundaries. It crosses all boundaries and effects families on both sides of the aisle. So I am very confused as to why you say patriarchy is abusive in nature. One lady that I know practices a nature religion and her first husband abused her. Does that make me say all that practice her views abuse their spouses and children? Nope............:confused: you just confuse the dickens out of me. WEAK WEAK WEAK Argument. Sorry.

can we say "Pavlov" :lol:

:grouphug: :grouphug::grouphug: I have been quiet on qiverfull. I think it means different things to different people. The term has been around a good 30 yrs. I know because I grew up knowing the term and I am 41. I tend to be of the mind set also that the man is the head, but that we both give 100% sometimes one gives 150 and the other 50% that's just how it works. Marriage is a partnership in the sense that you help each other and love each other as you love yourself or more. Not making sense, I know, but I can't seem to find the right words. If God allowed us to have more we would. I was older when I had our daughter, not for lack of wanting. Our wee Bear has been very much wanted and desired for many years. Because of advanced maternal age, we had to go through genetic counseling and the testing for somethings. Regardless of the outcome, we would have never thought of not having our girl. Even though we were counseled that we had that option if tests would have came back differently then they did. I think judging someone for following through on a pregnancy that MAY be (or even 100% for sure is) catastrophic is wrong. Whatever they may or may not be you can't judge them based on this, well you can but I think it's a weak argurment. Most women with many pregnancies that I know are not healthy looking and generally look older than their years. Mrs. D is an exception to the rule in this. Being pregnant removes a lot of things from our bodies and we need time to build that supply of nutrients back up. In in Biblical times women weren't having a child every year, as a general rule. I would venture a guess that the really large family came about from the industrial revolution and a need to produce more and more, i.e., larger semi mono-agriculture farms, etc. I think families this big have always been the exception, not the norm which is part of some people fascination with them.

Heirloom seeds are able to reproduce themselves. Some GM seeds are said to have been turned off. Proponents claim also that heirloom seeds have longer root systems and are able to pull nutrients better from the soil and thus their fruit is better because of it. I tend to buy heirloom and save seeds sometimes. Sometimes I am successful, other times not. :-)

:lol: have you been hiding in my closet? yeah I could be season 2. Life style of the middle class and VERY boring --duex.

My plan is to let my daughter go where her interests are. So far no indications that she wants to read at almost 4. I plan to use a lot of play and introduce it slowly, but I do get negative feedback for this and it frustrates me to no end. Don't make me feel like I am a bad parent or my child is stupid and tell me I am not "challenging" her enough. UGH! Yes it dealt with the DVD's but also touched on early reading and how most children little brains aren't wired properly for it yet.

So, let me get this right..... and correct me if I'm wrong.... They are raising their daughters to be good mothers in the future (don't we all hope that????:confused:). The daughters appear to be the caretakers of the smaller children. So the only way to be a really good mother, by this analogy, is to be the caretaker of your younger siblings? :confused: I HELPED my mom with my younger brothers, but I was never in any shape or form the caretaker. When they got a ouchy, they didn't run to me, they ran to mommy. That is where I think they have over stepped some important roles in the family (or appears to have, and I am also basing this on large families I have known IRL, yes it is just an assumption and not all large families function this way. Some smaller families function this way too and it's because the mother steps back away from the role of Mommy). I am concerned by the blurred roles and boundaries. It might work for them, and if it does great. In my mothers family it lead to animosity among the siblings. The mothers in my peer group that I have known that have large families foist a lot of child rearing onto girls as young as 9 or 10. We all agree that it isn't just giving birth that is wrong for babies having babies right? I mean emotionally they need to still be allowed to be kids, right? :confused: The boys are never cast into the role of being a dad at 10. they are allowed to stay play and have fun, even when older. I guess my way of saying help is different what most here think the word means.

http://rewireyourbrainforlove.com/why-early-reading-is-bad-for-your-child-early-brain-development/ PLEASE don't attack me. I am just searching for information and seen this and thought I would share with some. Let me add, with much frustration, on the part of teachers, my parents and me as a small child, I COULD NOT read until I was somewhere around 8 years old. Trust me this ws not for want of trying on the part of many. Once I began to red there was no stopping me and I would be willing to bet long before the 5th grade that I had surpassed all my peers that had been reading since 4-5 yrs old. By 12 I was reading college level (trust me I was tested). I am not saying that early reading is bad for everyone, but there maybe something to this.

Has anyone said helping with chores and siblings is wrong? :confused: I think children should have chores. I helped with my siblings. Helping is not wrong and only to be expected in a family. I give up....:lol:

My almost 4 yr old has a few chores. I admit I spend more time encouraging her when it comes to some. She feeds our dog and lets him out/in. She needs help cleaning her room. She begs to help load and unload dish washer so I let her we also work on making the bed now She also helps put things in the recycle bins Soon I will be adding helping to pick up laundry Glad to see chores are still encouraged! Also I don't think we will ever give allowance for normal chores. Famlies work together.

LOL Sarah's only child. :D

I got them when I was 29. I was very sick for about 24 hrs. I had a high fever and it wasn't until the next day that I noticed the spots. My brother also had them as an adult and he had a fever for a week. So yes, generally you get a fever, but not the whole time. I felt great after the first day or two.:tongue_smilie: ETA: My little one may have hd them when she was almost 2, doc office refused to let me bring her in based on what I told them. She had very mild cse if she did. That was when I was told the vaccine does not protect, it is designed to give you a more mild case if you do get it. So the ones with the vaccine may still get it.

Me too. Wither by choice or chance many only have one child. How many LARGE families are in the Bible, are those listed an exception to the rule? I think Abraham and Sarah had but one..... but I guess Issac was "damaged" because he was an only child? Or at least that was the implication. I never said that the Duggars were wrong, I just said what I have seen IRL has been a lack of parental oversight or raising of younger children, i.e., too much reliance on olders to raise youngers. Not just help mom change diapers or do laundry but to honestly take over raising the children. I also doubt that the girls would be going on trips if they weren't on TV, but who knows. They are not reality. Reality is not like that for most families, big or small, unless their is another source for income besides daddy.

We have a newer one in the basement and an old (about 20 yrs) on the back porch, outside. Of course we live in Western WA but never any problems.

Wow. So the girls can but the men/boys can't? Especially the husband? I believe you I am just shocked.

EXCUSE ME? Ok, someone lumps all large families together and its WRONG, yet it's ok to lump all single or two child families together? geee, my father was an only child, and he did not behave in this fashion at all. He was the most kind and giving man. He fought for those that were weaker than him, both in the military and as a nurse. My husband is an only also. He doesn't show those characteristics either and is kind beyond reason, more so than people I know with several siblings. Can't speak for our child, whom God means to be an only it appears, four year olds are too young to pass judgment, but we are not raising her in this mentality. I think even "normal" sized families today can have that entitlement mentality about them, ITS SOCIETY. I know you qualify your statement, but really..... :001_huh: UGH.....

Prayers for a speedy recovery!

I think the point is being missed..... I don't wish to argue. The older children APPEAR to raise the younger ones in many RL families of this size. From what I have seen of the show, it appears the same is happening here. By raise I don't mean help, I mean RAISE. They are the mommy in all but the literal sense. I also think they can't be that "goody goody" like butter won't melt sort of thing. I am sure there must be something that makes them human. I am Christian too, but I happen to be one of those ones that sin. *gasp*

:iagree: and the point I was attempting to make.

Not talking about chores. I think the older ones do a bit more than chores, personally, in the families I have known. Their are chores and their are CHORES. Ya know what I mean? Helping out with dinner or dishes or helping to feed the animals or working in the yard is one thing, often times they take on the role of parent as the parents are unable to because of so many in the family, I guess. the families I know the parents refuse to admit that the children do so much. FYI, I work really hard getting my daughter to do chores. I work harder getting her to do them at this age then if I did them myself. :lol: Chores are important.

Really? I read part of their book one time (The Pearls child "training book") and didn't agree with it. Interesting. Every large family I have ever seen and known personally do expect the older children to pick up a lot of slack, more than what a normal family does. It makes me wonder about large families (not passing judgment on anyone here that I have not met). It's the only way they can function. Some children may not mind but what about the ones that do? I don't watch the show often enough to really know, they come of as goody goody to much for me. I am too big a sinner I guess. ;) But on the same token I do admire some things about their lifestyle. I wonder though how much freedom of choice do the women have? Let me explain a bit more, I am raising my daughter to think she can do anything and I encourage her to try many things. Are their daughters given the sme oppurtunity?