Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

SproutMamaK

Indulging my petty side: Jinger Duggar has a boyfriend.

Recommended Posts

Well yikes! I had no idea. I guess must have been sleeping under a rock!

Nah! Bg is worth about 90 million and pays for an excellent PR team to sweep his problems under the public eye. It isn't any different from say the Bob Packwood scandal. His constituents were pretty shocked at how long he had been up to no good under the public radar.

 

For a lot of Christians who have been in mainstream churches and raised outside extreme fundie land, they are unaware due to lack of association and media coverage as there are bigger fish to fry than Jimbob and Bill Gothard. Their brand of cult behavior tends to make local news, sometimes state news especially in specific areas like Michigan where BG has his girl camp, or in the Flint area because locals successfully worked to keep him from opening another of his IBLP youth detention centers for "wayward" youth, or in Indianapolis where one of the local tv stations broke the news of abuse at his detention center there including beatings, sexual assault, food and sleep deprivation, and torture, a facility that tax payer dolars was supporting due to family court judges sentencing youths to time there. The other way people find out is when a person they know willingly joins the cult or is forced by spouse, or in my case was having trouble at the local PS so well meaning parents thought the answer was the innocent sounding parochial school in the next town over which turned out to be a horror show leaving me depressed, electively mute for a period of several weeks, and suicidal. But hey, the school won an award from BG himself for teachig his "wisdom". Sigh.....

 

It is one reason I speak out on these threads. I would give anything for the court of public opinion to so severely scorch this organization that it disappears from the world, its materials no longer published, its followers left without support or validation.

Edited by FaithManor
  • Like 25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to say there are people who are very into ATI and all it entails a la the Duggars.

 

However, there were and are a lot of families who got in with good intentions regarding homeschooling and family life and then nope'd out of there after actually attending a conference or coming up against some of the stricter legalism and requirements. I know many more of the latter because I know a lot of families who were homeschooling back when it wasn't what it is now and saw ATI as a great support network and didn't realize or never encountered the true gothard mentality because really they just wanted a group to help them with their new, very non-mainstream choice. I know people who were still damaged by the interactions and social cliques they encountered through ATI, but I also know their families weren't in it for some sinister reasoning of controlling their kids or being part of a cult. IOW, I know a lot of former ATI'ers and they are mostly "normal" people. I even know people who use the curriculum now who have no idea about all the baggage. So I think there's a vast range of what one might encounter when they come across ATI.

Yes. There is the basic conference and on the surface it sounds kind of okay. Then comes the advanced conference. This one is quite expensive to attend and the materials are ridiculously priced so many families don't get in any deeper. Then there is a decent percentage of those that do attend the advanced training and go,"uhm no way", and go no further. Then there are those that try to implement it, and are not successful and give up or simply do a few things and no more. Families tend to be more deeply ingrained when they attend an ATI housechurch because the cult uses other ATI families to pressure the non compliers into "doing it right", and that includes trying to pressure the non compliant families into isolation from non-ATI families on pain of "going to hell". So there is a spectrum.

 

That said there are enough kool aid drinkers for the organization to be worth almost a hundred million which is a big chunk of change for an otherwise small, not widely known 501c religious operation.

Edited by FaithManor
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not familiar with it. I grew up in a pretty liberal household where religion was something you practiced in Sunday mornings and even that wasn't until I was in high school. My house was strongly matriarch run and they didn't believe in sheltering children AT ALL, much to my own personal damage so I would have liked a little shelter.

 

My mother swung the other way - also damaging - and was very liberal (and agnostic) - when I was 15, I felt like I was the parent and she was the rebellious teen.  

 

while you can find this type of mind-game outside of religion, using religion as a means of manipulation and control is deeper and it is harder to break away.

 

if you haven't seen the movie "gaslight" with Ingrid bergman and Charles boyer - I would recommend it.  that's where the term 'gaslighting' came from.  as has been mentioned - m gaslights, and is so brazen about it, allows footage to actually be shown  on tv.  however, to see "it", you really need to know what you're looking for and what it is.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So did the kids not get paid? As adults (the ones who were), I can only imagine that remuneration was part of the deal.

 

No, the way these shows work, each separate household gets a check.  She has no money of her own, everything belongs to her father.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

Josh molests two sisters. They tell mom and dad. Nothing is done.

He does it again, more sisters, including the then five year old. They make him confess his sin to a police officer on suspension pending investigation for child porn who had CONFESSED to the men in the church already, JB being one of the eldership! He "counsels" with the pervert. Same man sentenced to 56 years shortly after the "counseling" took place. Again no attempt to get real help. No professional counseling for the girls by parental admission.

 

More incidents, and Josh is shipped off to work with a contractor friend for a few months.

 

No police, no therapy by licensed professionals, no nothing. The girls were sent to ATI camp for counseling. Gothard's sex abuse counseling material requires victims to accept responsibility for sex assaults because "men can't help themselves" and says they must ask the perp for forgiveness for not being modest enough, or being without chaperone, or for leading on, or giving the wrong impression, or whatever trumped up crap the perp claims caused him to sin. That sick and twisted camp is right here in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and VERY well known for its abusive tactics which include "isolation therapy" , ie solitary confinement until the young lady confesses her sin, and food deprivation as well, along with personal counseling with BG himself if the young lady is his type which includes medium height, thin, brown wavy or curly hair that is worn long with bangs and never pulled up, and pink eye shadow or similar pastel shade because Bg has a thing for pastel eye shadow and pink is his favorite. In his "wisdom booklets", tells girls to color their hair brown and perm it if necessary in order to be the most attractive.

 

When social services came to talk to the Duggars after the Oprah report, they hid the kids. When they were served a subpoena to produce Josh, they sent him to BG's boy camp in Texas. Since the statute of limitations for a full investigation had expired, the prosecutor did not pursue charges for failure to comply.

 

Josh then gets caught in the Ashley Madison mess, and shows his perverted side yet again. What do they do? Take him to a "camp" run by a church organization founded by Jack Hyles - a man who during his ministry used church funds to keep his mistress in style for morw than fifteen years and then later got in a heap of trouble for trying to coerce a family in the church to NOT report the violent rape of their special needs daughter by one of the elders, a buddy of JH's, followed by his unwavering support for his son-in-law who was convicted as a youth pastor of statutory rape with one of the girls in the youth group and taking her across state lines for an abortion. All well known facts within ATI and IFB circles. And this is where poor little joshie is sent for "counseling".

 

And when one of Anna's married siblings who is no longer ATI wanted to come get her and the kids and take them home, away from the crazy, JB took her and the children to their vacation cabin and her family was allowed no contact according to Anna's siblings.

 

If this is "strong" and "family focused" no thanks.

Good Heavens!  I wasn't aware of most of this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

Josh molests two sisters. They tell mom and dad. Nothing is done.

He does it again, more sisters, including the then five year old. They make him confess his sin to a police officer on suspension pending investigation for child porn who had CONFESSED to the men in the church already, JB being one of the eldership! He "counsels" with the pervert. Same man sentenced to 56 years shortly after the "counseling" took place. Again no attempt to get real help. No professional counseling for the girls by parental admission.

 

More incidents, and Josh is shipped off to work with a contractor friend for a few months.

 

No police, no therapy by licensed professionals, no nothing. The girls were sent to ATI camp for counseling. Gothard's sex abuse counseling material requires victims to accept responsibility for sex assaults because "men can't help themselves" and says they must ask the perp for forgiveness for not being modest enough, or being without chaperone, or for leading on, or giving the wrong impression, or whatever trumped up crap the perp claims caused him to sin. That sick and twisted camp is right here in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and VERY well known for its abusive tactics which include "isolation therapy" , ie solitary confinement until the young lady confesses her sin, and food deprivation as well, along with personal counseling with BG himself if the young lady is his type which includes medium height, thin, brown wavy or curly hair that is worn long with bangs and never pulled up, and pink eye shadow or similar pastel shade because Bg has a thing for pastel eye shadow and pink is his favorite. In his "wisdom booklets", tells girls to color their hair brown and perm it if necessary in order to be the most attractive.

 

When social services came to talk to the Duggars after the Oprah report, they hid the kids. When they were served a subpoena to produce Josh, they sent him to BG's boy camp in Texas. Since the statute of limitations for a full investigation had expired, the prosecutor did not pursue charges for failure to comply.

 

Josh then gets caught in the Ashley Madison mess, and shows his perverted side yet again. What do they do? Take him to a "camp" run by a church organization founded by Jack Hyles - a man who during his ministry used church funds to keep his mistress in style for morw than fifteen years and then later got in a heap of trouble for trying to coerce a family in the church to NOT report the violent rape of their special needs daughter by one of the elders, a buddy of JH's, followed by his unwavering support for his son-in-law who was convicted as a youth pastor of statutory rape with one of the girls in the youth group and taking her across state lines for an abortion. All well known facts within ATI and IFB circles. And this is where poor little joshie is sent for "counseling".

 

And when one of Anna's married siblings who is no longer ATI wanted to come get her and the kids and take them home, away from the crazy, JB took her and the children to their vacation cabin and her family was allowed no contact according to Anna's siblings.

 

If this is "strong" and "family focused" no thanks.

 

 

I thought it was a short term thing and as soon as parents found out, Josh was shipped off, never to happen again?

 

This whole thread boggles my mind.  Granted I wasn't a fangirl, but I'm feeling pretty sad and disillusioned. :(  The other reality family - Jeubs - are they ATI?  I know their kids totally rejected the family and the legalism that was rampant there.

 

 

Ya'all, if any of us learn anything from these messes, big families or little, it's that focusing on the outside while not recognizing the wholeness of the person, created unique and in the image of God, and not on relationships as individuals, never works.  :(

Edited by BlsdMama
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Ya'all, if any of us learn anything from these messes, big families or little, it's that focusing on the outside while not recognizing the wholeness of the person, created unique and in the image of God, and not on relationships as individuals, never works.   :(

 

Yup, focusing on the outside is EXACTLY what they do. It's called 'countenance" as in, they MUST have a "joyful countenance" at ALL times. If you just found out you had a late miscarriage, were just beaten with a wooden spoon, whatever, you had better look "joyful" or you are going to hell. Seriously. 

 

Oh, and be "sweet". Women must always be "sweet". 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't help but think that this family does not have a long history in this lifestyle.  It's ONE generation.  The parents didn't grow up this way.  They decided well after marriage.  It's like a phase that they've been too public about and now pride won't let them out.  There is just no way that ALL of those kids are going to continue to live this way and raise their families this way.  They MUST have relatives they can turn to for some normalcy.  It's not like they're Amish and will be shunned by their entire family.  As more and more siblings marry and have access to the world, or at least the internet, it's going to get easier and easier to build a less extreme life.  As the boys come of age they'll have even fewer restrictions on their movement and opportunities.  JimBobTopia just doesn't seem sustainable to me.

 

 

uh, yes.  they WILL be shunned by their entire family if they have the audacity to leave.  their siblings will "love them" by backing the parents in their efforts to coerce them to return.  they will face enormous pressure.

 

the one thing about this type of mental manipulation training - jb and m don't have to actually be there.  they're the voice in their children's heads telling them what to do.  to go against that - requires a huge paradigm shift in their own self-percetion.  then the perception they have of their parents, the relationships they have with their siblings . . it's a much bigger deal than many realize to leave this type of controlling environment.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, focusing on the outside is EXACTLY what they do. It's called 'countenance" as in, they MUST have a "joyful countenance" at ALL times. If you just found out you had a late miscarriage, were just beaten with a wooden spoon, whatever, you had better look "joyful" or you are going to hell. Seriously. 

 

Oh, and be "sweet". Women must always be "sweet". 

 

That is just like Raising Godly Tomatoes-the kids are not allowed to be grumpy or sad or anything but happy and sweet or they get punished (spanked) or put in the corner until they are "sweet." Ugh. I recently came across a book review written by a woman who grew up with that tomatoes lady and her family..so tragic.

 

On another note, I find it interesting that the ATI camp is in Michigan which is also where the author of Raising Godly Tomatoes lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. It is a rules without relationship paradigm and those always seek to suppress individuality, and focus on group think, group behavior, group pressure, etc

to keep the individual in line.

 

" A Matter of Basic Principles", one of the best expose writings on Gothard/IBLP/ATI is (if memory serves) still available on Amazon if one wants to learn more.

 

There is an interesting read by Cynthia Jeub on www.spiritualsoundingboard.com

"Breaking the Pattern of Idealizing Parents". It may explain some of the questions about the Jeub family who then threw Cynthia under the bus in a podcast response.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is just like Raising Godly Tomatoes-the kids are not allowed to be grumpy or sad or anything but happy and sweet or they get punished (spanked) or put in the corner until they are "sweet." Ugh. I recently came across a book review written by a woman who grew up with that tomatoes lady and her family..so tragic.

 

On another note, I find it interesting that the ATI camp is in Michigan which is also where the author of Raising Godly Tomatoes lives.

We seem to be a hotbed of religious crazy here. Vaughn Olman the organizer of the "Let Them Marry Conference" who proposes arranged marriages for girls as soon as they sport signs of breasts, is also from Michigan. I do not yet know how he got his start in lunacy, but seriously I'd like to know what is in the soil here that causes this stateto grow these people.

 

And don't start me on our recent state legislature sex scandal. I think we need to have a pervert purging here or something!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is just like Raising Godly Tomatoes-the kids are not allowed to be grumpy or sad or anything but happy and sweet or they get punished (spanked) or put in the corner until they are "sweet." Ugh. I recently came across a book review written by a woman who grew up with that tomatoes lady and her family..so tragic.

 

On another note, I find it interesting that the ATI camp is in Michigan which is also where the author of Raising Godly Tomatoes lives.

 

 

I was a member of RGT for years - since 2001.  I don't recall ANY conversations on ATI.  While the author (Elizabeth) was very strong on children being able to express emotions in a more acceptable manner than pitching a fit - spanking was not a huge part of the parenting style advocated there.  Many of us were *very* much about relationships and respecting our children as individuals.  I'm more than willing to accept how much I don't know about ATI, but I can tell you the atmosphere of the boards on RGT better than pretty much anyone here.

 

I don't see how she could have been an advocate of ATI anyway - she was never a fan of courtship as embraced by all the "popular" conservative books that came out.  She advocated a mix of dating and courting - advocating delaying the physical relationship but felt that courtship didn't allow the couple to get to know each other well enough to make a good decision and also felt that it didn't allow the couple to "back out" if the other person wasn't what they were expecting, that initially it was a pre-engagement from Day 1.  She also wasn't a big fan of the Daddy picking thing - that while the parents insight was valuable, ultimately it needed to be the getting to know one another and deciding if the other person was a good fit for a marriage by the individual.

 

Nope, can't paint all super conservatives with the same brush.  This one doesn't fit.

Edited by BlsdMama
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, focusing on the outside is EXACTLY what they do. It's called 'countenance" as in, they MUST have a "joyful countenance" at ALL times. If you just found out you had a late miscarriage, were just beaten with a wooden spoon, whatever, you had better look "joyful" or you are going to hell. Seriously. 

 

Oh, and be "sweet". Women must always be "sweet". 

 

THIS.

 

my sister got married because she didn't want to have a third abortion.  she miscarried the next day.  while her now dh was moving all  their stuff, she was laying on the couch at our grandmothers.  grandmother expected her to act like a blushing bride (especially when she had visitors) - instead of feeling like utter carp because she'd miscarried (after weeks of threatening to miscarry.)

 

a year later, I was married.  dh and I are both very religious - and do not have tea outside of legal marriage.  I had a baby nine months and four days after I got married. you wouldn't believe the "what will people say?" I got from her. (accompanied by her favorite 'swoon'.)  this AFTER my sister (her *favorite* - a very dubious honor.  her favorite victim in that she'd push her into the moat so she could rescue her.) had two abortions and a miscarriage before she ever got married, then got married because she was four months pg.  she miscarried the next day.  (my ultra liberal mother then suggested I be a surrogate for my sister. - no)

 

I wasn't nearly as lippy then as I am now.  (I was doing well to go against her at all.)  "well grandmamma, they'll "say' we were having "tea" on our wedding night."  oooh, I can see her now, her disapproving  reaction, affected swoon, in addition to her turning all shades of red. then she'd get grandpa to come demand I apologize to her.

 

she tried to convince me dh was cheating on me - a WEEK after we got married. (because when men go out of town on business - that's what they do.)  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THIS.

 

my sister got married because she didn't want to have a third abortion.  she miscarried the next day.  while her now dh was moving all  their stuff, she was laying on the couch at our grandmothers.  grandmother expected her to act like a blushing bride (especially when she had visitors) - instead of feeling like utter carp because she'd miscarried (after weeks of threatening to miscarry.)

 

a year later, I was married.  dh and I are both very religious - and do not have tea outside of legal marriage.  I had a baby nine months and four days after I got married. you wouldn't believe the "what will people say?" I got from her. (accompanied by her favorite 'swoon'.)  this AFTER my sister (her *favorite* - a very dubious honor.  her favorite victim in that she'd push her into the moat so she could rescue her.) had two abortions and a miscarriage before she ever got married, then got married because she was four months pg.  she miscarried the next day.  (my ultra liberal mother then suggested I be a surrogate for my sister. - no)

 

I wasn't nearly as lippy then as I am now.  (I was doing well to go against her at all.)  "well grandmamma, they'll "say' we were having "tea" on our wedding night."  oooh, I can see her now, her disapproving  reaction, affected swoon, in addition to her turning all shades of red. then she'd get grandpa to come demand I apologize to her.

 

she tried to convince me dh was cheating on me - a WEEK after we got married. (because when men go out of town on business - that's what they do.)  

 

 

Were you raised ATI too?

 

Part of me wonders if the personal experiences of kids raised in legalistic families also colors their outlook.  It must, mustn't it?  Just as I look at the Duggars and see a family that is raising happy kids, don't you look at the smiles plastered on their faces and think, "Contrived?"

 

I cannot fathom the above scenario.  It makes me want to vomit. (Keeping in mind that our DD was almost six months old when we got married.  My parents were less than thrilled but --- our choice.)  Was your grandmother religious too?  Did she lack normal compassion?  Love for her granddaughter.  I just cannot wrap my head around this. :(

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to be a hotbed of religious crazy here. Vaughn Olman the organizer of the "Let Them Marry Conference" who proposes arranged marriages for girls as soon as they sport signs of breasts, is also from Michigan. I do not yet know how he got his start in lunacy, but seriously I'd like to know what is in the soil here that causes this stateto grow these people.

 

And don't start me on our recent state legislature sex scandal. I think we need to have a pervert purging here or something!

 

 

This wasn't really his stance?

 

I think I'm more sheltered than I realize. 

 

Why does the world hate little girls so much?  India.  China.  Middle East.  And, apparently, here. :(  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a member of RGT for years - since 2001.  I don't recall ANY conversations on ATI.  While the author (Elizabeth) was very strong on children being able to express emotions in a more acceptable manner than pitching a fit - spanking was not a huge part of the parenting style advocated there.  Many of us were *very* much about relationships and respecting our children as individuals.  I'm more than willing to accept how much I don't know about ATI, but I can tell you the atmosphere of the boards on RGT better than pretty much anyone here.

 

 

On her website, she suggests spanking a child with a paddle for fidgeting. She also recommends correcting a kid who is sad and frustrated that he cannot draw a picture well. When a mom asks for advice about a child who is upset that he was hit on the head by a sibling with a toy block, she says that "it is never all right to be mad when offended." She describes a scene where she and her husband spent two hours spanking their toddler who would not come to them. So spanking is a huge part of her method, and she does teach that children are not allowed to be sad or mad about anything, ever.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The joyful countenance thing is both a Gothard teaching as well as a Pearl teaching. In Gothar's materials he teaches that children are to be switched on their bare skin until they no longer cry, protest, or respond every time they fail to be joyful when given a command or look at their parents without a smile. Duggars talked about the joyful countenance rule durin the early episodes.

 

 

It is an insidious control device. One of the most damaging aspects of the cult.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a quote where the tomatoes author suggests spanking for sniffing.

 

"Be honest in your assessment of your child to discern whether he is crying to manipulate or not. If he is, you can only stop it by being prompt, tough, and relentless. Begin by stating there will be no more unprovoked crying, no more crying when Mom says "no", and no more crying for minor injuries. Then prepare to be a mean mother. Stand him in the corner, or even spank, IMMEDIATELY, with the first sniffle. Whatever you do, you must discipline EVERY TIME without exception. If he tones down the crying, but switches to pouting and sniffing instead, tell him that counts too. Only silence and a pleasant face will do. Be tough, and maintain as zero-tolerance approach to this type of manipulation.â€

 

*Bolded font added by me

Edited by MegP
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On her website, she suggests spanking a child with a paddle for fidgeting. She also recommends correcting a kid who is sad and frustrated that he cannot draw a picture well. When a mom asks for advice about a child who is upset that he was hit on the head by a sibling with a toy block, she says that "it is never all right to be mad when offended." She describes a scene where she and her husband spent two hours spanking their toddler who would not come to them. So spanking is a huge part of her method, and she does teach that children are not allowed to be sad or mad about anything, ever.

 

 

I'd love links.  I can tell you in FIFTEEN years of being there - that was NOT the attitude there at all.  I can this with absolute certainty.  However, I can tell you whenever I had a parenting question it wasn't answered with, "Just spank that kid."    Are you mixing her up with the Pearls maybe?

 

 

ETA: I'd like to not be the person who stirs the pot by bringing in the S debate AND I want to further explain the atmosphere.  But I also realize the only thing I'm doing right now is throwing on firewood.........  

 

 

We had several mamas on there that fostered and spanking was utterly off the table.  It was more about consistent parenting.

 

Sigh.  It's been about that long since I read the book and getting in a bickering match about RGT isn't something I'm going to do.  I promise you if what we're talking about above had been permeating the board over there, I would have known it.  Absolutely.   There is no way I could have missed not being allowed to send daughters to college at all, allowing boys to be deviant, belittling little girls, daddies being tyrants....

 

What you are outlining about ATI is totally foreign to me.  I'll admit I'm a little oblivious sometimes but I could not have missed that.  And now I shall bow out so this doesn't gobble up my day. 

 

:(

 

I still don't understand the world's hatred for little girls.  Don't people realize God created them too? :(

 

ETA: I'd like to not be the person who stirs the pot by bringing in the S debate AND I want to further explain the atmosphere.  But I also realize the only thing I'm doing right now is throwing on firewood.........  

Edited by BlsdMama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love links.  I can tell you in FIFTEEN years of being there - that was NOT the attitude there at all.  I can this with absolute certainty.  Was spanking ever utilized? It was.  However, I can tell you whenever I had a parenting question it wasn't answered with, "Just spank that kid."    Are you mixing her up with the Pearls maybe?

 

Fidgeting quote--taken from this link-http://www.raisinggodlytomatoes.com/ch14.php

 

 

 

Self-Control

Philana: I'm trying to homeschool a child who fidgets � incessantly. He�s not an unusually hyper-active child in general, he just doesn�t seem to be using any self-control in during school time. 

 

He is supposed to be writing, and I notice he is messing with his pencil sharpener. I tell him to put it down. He does, and then two minutes later, he is tapping the pencil on his forehead or gently poking it into his ear. I tell him to stop. In a few minutes he is pushing against the computer desk door, a no-no. I say again to stop. Meanwhile he is perpetually wiggling in his chair, often falling onto the floor. Soon, he's messing with the pencil sharpener again. Should I be endlessly reminding him all day to stop? Should I swat? What?

 

Elizabeth: First, you must seat this child right next to you while you are schooling, not across the table. Lay your paddle on the table between you and he as a visual aid. Begin like this:

 

Mom: Do you see this paddle?

Child: Yes.

Mom: I'm tired of reminding you not to touch, fidget, wiggle, or to rock in your chair. From now on, I'm going to use the paddle to help you remember. Do you understand me?

Child: Yes Mom.

Mom: What are some of the things I'm always telling you not to do?

Child: Playing with my eraser?

Mom: Yes. What else?

Child: Getting off my chair?

Mom: Yes. What else?

Child: Scribbling instead of doing my math?

Mom: Yes, and I'm sure you can think of a lot of other things, so I'm not going to remind you. I'm just going to use the paddle. Do you understand me?

Child: Yes.

(Two minutes later child begins rocking in his chair.)

Mom: Get up and put your hands on the table. (SWAT!) Now sit back down and go back to your work.

(Three minutes later child begins to poke his pencil through his buttonhole.)

Mom: Get up and put your hands on the table. (SWAT!) Sit down and start working.

(Five minutes later child begins tapping the table leg with his foot.)

Mom: Get up and put your hands on the table. (SWAT! SWAT!) Sit down and work.

 

As soon as he realizes that he controls whether or not he gets a swat, he will start improving. If he laughs, or exhibits a bad attitude, apply an "I Mean Business" spanking. Remember, this will not work if you are not being very consistent, so you MUST train yourself to notice every little thing. Decide what degree of fidgeting is acceptable, taking into consideration the personality of your child, then correct for everything that is excessive. He is probably not even aware of his excessive movements and he needs you to bring them to his attention, and insist he control them. 

 

And being aroused, He rebuked the wind and said to the sea, "Hush, be still." And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm.

- Mark 4:39

 

 

 

 

 

The child who could not draw--from this link-http://www.raisinggodlytomatoes.com/ch06.php

 

"Let Attitude Guide You

Vernita: What do I do when my child stands there with arms folded and a pouty look, not directed at me, but at a brother who won't share a toy? His attitude is abominable. It�s not just in sharing situations, but in other situations as well. Just now he was drawing with a pen on a big piece of paper. Making a mistake, he crumpled up the paper and in a VERY pouty way mumbled, "I can't make a picture." I sent him to the corner. This goes on all day, with him being pouty or grumpy over various trifles. I am Tomato Staking him and making sure I spend lots of time playing with him, and hugging him and loving him. So why is he like this and what do I do? Is it time for more drastic measures, such as spanking?

 

Elizabeth: Since he does this all day, it could very well be little more than a bad habit. At this point I'd treat his depressed "looks" like any other misbehavior. Get his attention and say, "Straighten your face up." Educate him on the attitude and countenance he should have toward anyone. Then tell him what to do next: "Now smile, and share that toy nicely with your brother." Be sure he obeys."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you raised ATI too?

 

Part of me wonders if the personal experiences of kids raised in legalistic families also colors their outlook.  It must, mustn't it?  Just as I look at the Duggars and see a family that is raising happy kids, don't you look at the smiles plastered on their faces and think, "Contrived?"

 

I cannot fathom the above scenario.  It makes me want to vomit. (Keeping in mind that our DD was almost six months old when we got married.  My parents were less than thrilled but --- our choice.)  Was your grandmother religious too?  Did she lack normal compassion?  Love for her granddaughter.  I just cannot wrap my head around this. :(

this is from my grandmother.  midwest, rural, evangelical Baptist, the same attitudes that gave rise to bill gothard (she predates him.) and ati.  she did use religion as a weapon of control. you do what she says, or you'll go to h3ll.  and she put it in those terms.

when my grandparents moved out west - she stopped going to church because the people were "snobby". (her word) no, she just couldn't find one that preached the same carp she liked.  she did watch televangelists on tv. (the thought of tammy faye's mascara still makes my eyes water.) I was only allowed to read books they peddled.  (she about fainted when she saw me reading a sci-fi novel.  she gave me a lecture about it too.)  she was a twisted woman.  she was all about control, and making herself look virtuous.

 

incidentally- I never saw her pray and she never encourage me to do so, there was never a blessing on the food (I spent a lot of time there), I never saw her read scriptures - just watch the televangelists on tv.  then talk to her incredibly sanctimonious minister neighbor (no wonder she thought he was so great.)  he was such an arrogant prick. at least he didn't live there more than a couple years.

 

It was a big thing for me to start associating with people who were "normal".  functional, sincere, had compassion, no ulterior motives . . she didn't like it one bit, and tried to stop me from doing so.

 

grandmother . . I was 13 when I started to realize how screwed up things were. I observed and more and more became apparent.  I remember one time she was being nice - and MY. VERY. FIRST. THOUGHT was. . . 'what do you want?" I hadn't expected that connection, but  at that point, I realized just how closely intertwined they were.  she was never nice - unless she wanted something from you. it was all about herself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Part of me wonders if the personal experiences of kids raised in legalistic families also colors their outlook.  It must, mustn't it?  Just as I look at the Duggars and see a family that is raising happy kids, don't you look at the smiles plastered on their faces and think, "Contrived?"

 

I would've agreed with this statement a couple years ago before everything came out about Josh molesting his sisters and the parents covering it up. Jill and Jessa were forced to go on national TV (pregnant IIRC) and defend their abuser. That is unconscionable IMHO.

 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you raised ATI too?

 

Part of me wonders if the personal experiences of kids raised in legalistic families also colors their outlook.  It must, mustn't it?  Just as I look at the Duggars and see a family that is raising happy kids, don't you look at the smiles plastered on their faces and think, "Contrived?"

 

 

 

I suggested in a pp you watch "gaslight".  what happens when I watch the duggars is the redflags of my experience with gaslighting go off.

 

I've seen many happy families - where all I see is a happy family.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is from my grandmother.  midwest, rural, evangelical Baptist, the same attitudes that gave rise to bill gothard (she predates him.) and ati.  she did use religion as a weapon of control. you do what she says, or you'll go to h3ll.  and she put it in those terms.

when my grandparents moved out west - she stopped going to church because the people were "snobby". (her word) no, she just couldn't find one that preached the same carp she liked.  she did watch televangelists on tv. (the thought of tammy faye's mascara still makes my eyes water.) I was only allowed to read books they peddled.  (she about fainted when she saw me reading a sci-fi novel.  she gave me a lecture about it too.)  she was a twisted woman.  she was all about control, and making herself look virtuous.

 

incidentally- I never saw her pray and she never encourage me to do so, there was never a blessing on the food (I spent a lot of time there), I never saw her read scriptures - just watch the televangelists on tv.  then talk to her incredibly sanctimonious minister neighbor (no wonder she thought he was so great.)  he was such an arrogant prick. at least he didn't live there more than a couple years.

 

It was a big thing for me to start associating with people who were "normal".  functional, sincere, had compassion, no ulterior motives . . she didn't like it one bit, and tried to stop me from doing so.

 

grandmother . . I was 13 when I started to realize how screwed up things were. I observed and more and more became apparent.  I remember one time she was being nice - and MY. VERY. FIRST. THOUGHT was. . . 'what do you want?" I hadn't expected that connection, but  at that point, I realized just how closely intertwined they were.  she was never nice - unless she wanted something from you. it was all about herself.

 

So is it fair to say it wasn't about her religion?  It was about her being an absolutely abusive control freak?  I think people like that are attracted to legalism and using it as a tool to control people and make them do what they want?

 

 

This is so far from my experience that I can't relate.  My grandmother was my champion.  She had 11 kids and when the youngest was five, went back to school with my grandpa so proud of her. The year was right around 1960 and she actually made the papers for doing it.  He pulled out her grades from college just last year and asked if I wanted to keep them.  He was so proud of how bright she was and how well she did in school.  This was after she had passed.   She was my biggest fan, fed me a steady diet of books and read to me all the time.  She was my encourager - even through high school.   They had a beautiful faith life - she was a convert from Methodist I think to Catholicism.  She wasn't good with appearances, lol, those kids ran wild and her house (I hear) was always a mess because she was always in a book....... ;)

 

Maybe I'm more sheltered than I realize but I'm from the Midwest.  Super conservative and religious is NOT what I'm used to here....  I was raised Catholic and it was in name only, utterly cultural with absolutely NO bearing on behaviour or choices.  No one gave one lick about what the church *actually* taught - but go to church on Sundays and you've met your obligation.

 

I met more people with faith and reading scripture in OREGON (just outside of Portland) than I ever knew here.

 

Our life experiences color us so much.......... Sigh.  It's funny what people can't "see" because they can't recognize it.  Funny isn't quite the right word, is it?  Horrific? Strange?  Bewildering?

 

I don't know.  I grew up in about as liberal a family as could have existed I think....... And was always sorry for it.   :(  Maybe now, not so much..........

Edited by BlsdMama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggested in a pp you watch "gaslight".  what happens when I watch the duggars is the redflags of my experience with gaslighting go off.

 

I've seen many happy families - where all I see is a happy family.

 

 

Is it a creepy movie?  (I only ask because things like this really stick with me - I don't like to watch abuse, violence, etc.  I have eight girls and this world scares the jeepers out of me.... Seriously.  ETA: When I was younger I loved Law & Order, even SVU.  Now it makes me feel like my daughters are just prey.) 

Edited by BlsdMama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This wasn't really his stance?

 

I think I'm more sheltered than I realize. 

 

Why does the world hate little girls so much?  India.  China.  Middle East.  And, apparently, here. :(

If you are referring to Ohlman, yes this is his stance. Girls should be betrothed at what he believes is the first sign of puberty though he did go on to say if breasts or periods occur before age 12, probably the parents should wait. 12 is the banner year in his materials. Start looking for a husband when she is 12. 

 

As for Gothard, yes the beating until they remember to always look happy is his stance.

 

For what its worth, Michelle Duggar advocated blanket training on several online motherhood sites until they got the TLC show and then her posts were purged. Several years ago a couple of hivers that had been on those boards when Michelle was a prolific poster, posted screen shots here. Michelle advocated that as soon as a child began crawling that he or she be trained to the blanket by beating the baby's legs with a flexible ruler - she even recommended the Staples brand and alerted moms when the back to school sales occurred which made the rulers dirt cheap so they could stock up - every time the child crawled or rolled off the blanket until it learned to stay put. This way the mother of a young baby could be happily anywhere in the house without directly supervising baby because she would know her child would be afraid to leave the blanket.

 

Physical abuse is part and parcel of the Gothard dynamic for gaining control. He gets away with it because spanking is legal, and he only describes the level he recommends taking it to in ATI materials which can only be purchased by conference goers. In interiew, he denies it. But as the accusations of extreme physical abuse at his ALERT camp for boys, Journey of the Heart camp for girls, and ILBP Youth Center in Indianapolis abound, it is clear that he advocates it and his followers implement it. Gothard all through the 70's, 80's, and 90's did not allow his advanced training seminars to be filmed/videoed so that the worst of what he advocated was not public knowledge. I have to say that the internet since then has not been so easily silenced.

 

We have the IBLP materials from the 80's due to my dad faking interest in the cult and paying something like $800 or $900 dollars to attend the conference so he could get his hands on the materials. I have posted excerpts - quotes with full citations - in the past. A few years ago in fact. But, I haven't been doing that lately because the books/manuals/papers are on loan to a local psychology office. I don't have the expertise to really help people, but they do so I figure they need the information a lot worse than I do. However, since it is so hard to get one's hands on it, and so expensive, I still retain legal custody of them and should the office not want them anymore, I would get them back, and post more of his insanity just in the hopes of helping to end the organization.

 

Oh, and here is a quote from Vuolo's own blog concerning the courtship. It doesn't make me confident on Jinger's behalf.

 

"everything they said only confirmed what I had already been seeing: a humble, meek, modest, intelligent young woman with a burning desire to sacrificially serve the Lord in any way she could."

 

That's typical ATI speak. If it had been worded differently, I might have held out a little hope. But it is practically word for word out of ATI courtship materials. Sigh.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BLSDmama, I can't speak for gardenmomof5, but I will say that in my experience, narcissists and sociopaths are drawn to these types of cults/religions in order to use them as a tool to gain victims. But, I've known some that had no religious affiliation as well.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have zero experience with cults.  I was brought up to believe the world was my oyster and I was capable of achieving anything I desired.  I come from a long line of strong matriarchs who modeled independence and confidence.

 

And yet, as an ADULT, I found myself trapped in a manipulative, controlling relationship with a new set of relatives.  It isn't noticeable at first.  And those who are fortunate enough to eventually notice it, often become paralyzed.  They might (or at least I did) at some point realize something wasn't right deep down, but was perfectly reasonable on the surface.  There's a cognitive dissonance that's excruciating.  Loyalty to family has a life of its own. What will people think?  What will people do?  Who will I be hurting? How can I protect myself without great risk?  Isn't leaving just as scary as staying?

 

And I'm just talking NPD crap, not cult-from-birth level stuff.  Technically, I'm still not even all the way out yet.

 

I don't think I"m smarter or better for recognizing the need to remove myself, but I know I wouldn't be as close as I am if I hadn't been raised the way I was.  My heart goes out to those who weren't, who face much larger obstacles.  It is not a simple matter of will.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

uh, yes. they WILL be shunned by their entire family if they have the audacity to leave. their siblings will "love them" by backing the parents in their efforts to coerce them to return. they will face enormous pressure.

 

the one thing about this type of mental manipulation training - jb and m don't have to actually be there. they're the voice in their children's heads telling them what to do. to go against that - requires a huge paradigm shift in their own self-percetion. then the perception they have of their parents, the relationships they have with their siblings . . it's a much bigger deal than many realize to leave this type of controlling environment.

 

I meant that they'd likely have grandparents or uncles or cousins that they've met, know live differently, and would feel comfortable approaching. Heck, they could probably even reach out to a TLC camera guy or Oprah or someone. I'm not doubting they are heavily influenced. I'm just saying that they are not generations deep into this and isolated from people who live differently. There's a limit to how much JimBob can influence their adult decisions once they are out of his house.

 

I'm not claiming it's easy to overcome your upbringing, but if a kid WANTS to make a change as an adult, once they're financially independent of their parents, they can. The married daughter just has to throw up her hands and say, "Sorry Dad, my husband wants me to move to New York. I've gotta go." These won't be the first kids who went a different way once they left super-religious fundie homes and communities. You get a different support system, live your own life, play nice at home on the holidays, and you're out without burning bridges. I grew up in fundie-ville and I've seen this play out time and time again. I'd guess in a family of 6 kids, you might get two who aspire to live exactly like their parents did and the rest modify or go another way completely.

 

They're GOING to leave. It's expected. Once they're in their own adult homes it'll be difficult for the parents to micro-manage 20 different households. It's not like they're FLDS and have compound police. They just move and say "See ya at church, Mom" and that's the beginning of moving about the world without a sibling chaperone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is it fair to say it wasn't about her religion?  It was about her being an absolutely abusive control freak?  I think people like that are attracted to legalism and using it as a tool to control people and make them do what they want?

 

 .

 

 

it was very much about the religious teachings with which she grew up. as I said, the same teachings that gothard and the pearls would have also grown up and influenced  their own teachings.

 she was in her 40's when she moved out west.  she had a long time to absorb those teachings.  she constantly "talked" about her views of religion.

 

Is it a creepy movie?  (I only ask because things like this really stick with me - I don't like to watch abuse, violence, etc.  I have eight girls and this world scares the jeepers out of me.... Seriously.  ETA: When I was younger I loved Law & Order, even SVU.  Now it makes me feel like my daughters are just prey.) 

 

it was made in 1944.

it's a suspense movie, quite tame by today's standards.

 

no physical violence (that I remember) - it's psychological, it's very subtle, it's mind-games . . .

 

 

eta: you were also saying you came from the Midwest.  I specified *rural*.  where anything trying to call itself a city was at least an hour's drive away with today's roads.  back in the days before telephone, before radio, before internet - it was much easier to raise people to this level of control

Edited by gardenmom5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant that they'd likely have grandparents or uncles or cousins that they've met, know live differently, and would feel comfortable approaching.  .

 

 

, once they're financially independent of their parents, they can. 

questionable about how they would feel  approaching their relatives.  they will have grown up with the message - they're sinners.    anna's brother wanted to help her after josh's molesting his sisters  came out.  he wanted to get her away and protect her and her girls.  maybe one day anna  will escape, in the mean time,  she defers to jb - and she isn't even his daughter!

 

jb has made them all so dependent upon the proceeds of reality tv, he controls their finances.  (and certainly something he'd never want to give up.  he likes the lifestyle.  he has not more job skills than he's allowed his children to develop.)  while they could end up with a show of their own and control of the bucks if they left - I'm not holding my breath on that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say after reading this thread is that it disgusts me how people will "discipline" children in the name of the Bible. I am not about letting children run rampant, but seriously - not even letting them be CHILDREN??? These threads about the Christian extremists always make me ill.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say after reading this thread is that it disgusts me how people will "discipline" children in the name of the Bible. I am not about letting children run rampant, but seriously - not even letting them be CHILDREN??? These threads about the Christian extremists always make me ill.

 

 

as an adult - being able to look back on the using religion as a means of control, made me more sympathetic to those who grew up with a religion, and now want nothing to do with one.

 

it's one thing to grow up in a healthy family and reject that family's teachings.  it's a whole 'nothing ball of wax to grow up in this and reject it.

 

at times I marvel I have anything to do with religion at all.  my grandmother using religion as a weapon *really* adversely affected my ability to believe/feel God loved me for *decades*.​  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

questionable about how they would feel  approaching their relatives.  they will have grown up with the message - they're sinners.    anna's brother wanted to help her after josh's molesting his sisters  came out.  he wanted to get her away and protect her and her girls.  maybe one day anna  will escape, in the mean time,  she defers to jb - and she isn't even his daughter!

 

jb has made them all so dependent upon the proceeds of reality tv, he controls their finances.  (and certainly something he'd never want to give up.  he likes the lifestyle.  he has not more job skills than he's allowed his children to develop.)  while they could end up with a show of their own and control of the bucks if they left - I'm not holding my breath on that happening.

Control of the finances is a big deal. Both in BG's paradigm as well as Doug Philip's, women are not allowed to have a bank account because if they have money then they have a temptation to not obey their husbands or fathers. In DP's world, the woman is not to even know where her husband banks.

 

My dh has an uncle that was into this stuff, and when his uncle came down with brain cancer, his aunt who had been married to him for 30 years did not know where he banked, had never seen a paycheck, did know what kind of insurance they had, nothing. She was not allowed to get the mail. Her husband was a pastor and all of their personal mail was sent to the church so she couldn't open anything herself. While BG doesn't preach this particular extreme concerning the mail, it is a logical outcome for the men who take the control and dominance aspects of male headship to its extreme edges.

 

So don't count on these girls having access to any money they may have earned from the show. 

 

Relatives who offer access will be shunned. See the spin off thread that Amy G started about trying to help an adult child in a similar situation. She offered assistance and when the family found out, they punished the young adult by grounding her from outside contact with the rest of the world. It is essentially house arrest, and it does happen. Again, see the sex and human trafficking websites on this. The process is the same as for those that keep an illegal maid, mail order bride, etc. Same exact thing, and especially because in the worst cases, birth certificates and ss security numbers are locked up and only the head of household knows where they are at which makes it very difficult for the young adult to even get an ID so he or she can fly, apply for assistance, prove citizenship, get a GED, or secure a job. The Sovereign Citizens movement is an advocate of home birth with defying the law and not registering that birth so that the government doesn't know the baby exists. I am not saying at all that this has happened to the Duggars. They do not appear that extreme. Certainly the last child, born early due to pre-eclampsia and in a hospital, would have had birth registration because the hospital would not have allowed it any other way. But consider the Amish. Some sects, like our local one, is totally against birth certificates and social security numbers so their kids have no established citizenship or identity. This makes it impossible for their young adults to get employment outside the sect.

 

The Duggar kids, good news, definitely have ID because they've been to China so have passports. That is a good thing for them. The bad news though is that since BG does preach that women shouldn't have their own money and JB has been one of the main spokesperson's for the organization, he probably follows the admonition on finances.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was very much about the religious teachings with which she grew up. as I said, the same teachings that gothard and the pearls would have also grown up and influenced  their own teachings.

 she was in her 40's when she moved out west.  she had a long time to absorb those teachings.  she constantly "talked" about her views of religion.

 

But she wasn't in her Bible - so essentially a defunct sector?  Because I just don't see how if you're IN scripture that you can miss the parts about how God looks at the heart (motivation) of a man and ALL of everything about the Pharisees and legalism essentially leading to the death of faith.  How acts do not lead to salvation and Christ's love and compassion for the weak, the crippled, the lowly, the sinners?

 

So it is sects... But I don't understand, if these religions push scripture AND the people are reading their Bibles.... why are they so vulnerable to believing?  (Keep in mind my background is cultural Catholic.  When I came to a real faith in Christ as a salvation figure/Son of God verses viewing Him as something as a solely historical figurehead of the Church it was life altering. Our marriage is split in belief, me as a non-denominational Protestant and DH is no longer Catholic (due to hypocrisy between Church teaching and actual living out in family's lives but them wanting us to still belong to the Church for nothing other than belonging to the Church) but we do not attend any church at all and so I read scripture as essentially my teachings.  The idea of not reading for oneself or just "falling for" a charismatic teacher without reading scripture and going THIS deep in on the say so of one person is weird.  I have to assume these people have issues to begin with - like narcissism or some kind of deep need to belong/control/something.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

at times I marvel I have anything to do with religion at all.  my grandmother using religion as a weapon *really* adversely affected my ability to believe/feel God loved me for *decades*.​  

 

 

(((((Hugs)))))))

 

:(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But she wasn't in her Bible - so essentially a defunct sector?  Because I just don't see how if you're IN scripture that you can miss the parts about how God looks at the heart (motivation) of a man and ALL of everything about the Pharisees and legalism essentially leading to the death of faith.  How acts do not lead to salvation and Christ's love and compassion for the weak, the crippled, the lowly, the sinners?

 

So it is sects... But I don't understand, if these religions push scripture AND the people are reading their Bibles.... why are they so vulnerable to believing?  (Keep in mind my background is cultural Catholic.  When I came to a real faith in Christ as a salvation figure/Son of God verses viewing Him as something as a solely historical figurehead of the Church it was life altering. Our marriage is split in belief, me as a non-denominational Protestant and DH is no longer Catholic (due to hypocrisy between Church teaching and actual living out in family's lives but them wanting us to still belong to the Church for nothing other than belonging to the Church) but we do not attend any church at all and so I read scripture as essentially my teachings.  The idea of not reading for oneself or just "falling for" a charismatic teacher without reading scripture and going THIS deep in on the say so of one person is weird.  I have to assume these people have issues to begin with - like narcissism or some kind of deep need to belong/control/something.)

 

people can easily twist scriptures to mean what they want them  to mean.

 

and evangelical baptist  is hardly "defunct" (it is also a spectrum).  she was very much, death - hell, fire - brimstone; do what I say or God will d@mn you.

 

questions were not allowed.  questions about religion, were even worse.  you were to believe  what you were told - or you were a heretic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So don't count on these girls having access to any money they may have earned from the show. 

 

 

the only way they'll ever have money (same for their husbands if they do the show) is if they completely rebel against jb, and get their *own* show.  (JB may even have stipulations in contracts to prevent that from happening. I can see him doing so.  he's so creepy.)

 

I'm not holding my breath on any of them ever telling jb and m to stick it where the sun don't shine . . . they've been 'programmed'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, in the ATI paradigm, parents are encourage to NOT look to scripture for help with parenting and marriage. They are told that BG has had additional revelation, ie his wisdom booklets and newsletters, to interpret scripture for their benefit and that doing what BG says is doing what God says.

 

See the cult think at work?

 

He even says in his writings that God gave him a special revelation on this stuff.

 

And people fall for it.

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a matter of fact, parents are encouraged to have their kids read wisdom booklets and NOT the Bible. When older, the focus is on OT and not NT. Jesus is kind of side bar...BG's side kick, like he is"Batman", and Jesus is "Robin." Scary stuff.

 

And then the father in any family is the "high priest" so pretty much no one comes to god except through their physical father.

 

This belief is paramount to the Doug Phillips former Vision Forum Ministries cult. Women and girls could not take communion unless their fathers or husbands were present to serve it to them. A grown woman could take if if her five year old son was there to serve it to her even if he was not considered by the eldership to be old enough to take communion himself. It was a way of making the women understand that they had no individual agency with god, no possibility or relationship with god outside daddy or husband or some other appointed male.

 

It makes the male very godlike in the house, and sets the girls up to believe they'll burn in hell if they go against daddy or daddy's handpicked hubby for them.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say after reading this thread is that it disgusts me how people will "discipline" children in the name of the Bible. I am not about letting children run rampant, but seriously - not even letting them be CHILDREN??? These threads about the Christian extremists always make me ill.

 

 

 

I agree. This thread has left me open-mouthed and about as close to puking as possible. 

 

 

 

ETA: Honestly, at the risk of controversy this is NOT christianity. Christ did not preach these things. It is a distortion of the real message conjured up by disturbed people seeking monetary gain, IMO.

Edited by MyLittleBears
  • Like 20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for many of us the weirdness of the Duggar world is hard to fathom precisely because we see a surface resemblance to our own world and assume that the resemblance goes beyond the surface. I remember years ago reading comments somewhere where people were slamming the Duggars because the older children were helping to raise the younger children. As an older child in a large family I couldn't see the problem with this--of course we helped take care of our younger siblings, we loved them and were all invested in helping family life run smoothly. My oldest sister in particular acted in many ways as a third parent to the younger children and was very close to them.

 

BUT oldest sister also went off to a top tier university at age seventeen, with my parents' encouragement and support. By the time she was 26, she had completed graduate school at one of the most prestigious programs in her field and was established in a career. That is a long cry from where Jana Duggar is now. 

 

Thing is, if you haven't lived with parents whose modus operandi is to control and limit their children's lives, such a dynamic is virtually inconsceivable.

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for many of us the weirdness of the Duggar world is hard to fathom precisely because we see a surface resemblance to our own world and assume that the resemblance goes beyond the surface. I remember years ago reading comments somewhere where people were slamming the Duggars because the older children were helping to raise the younger children. As an older child in a large family I couldn't see the problem with this--of course we helped take care of our younger siblings, we loved them and were all invested in helping family life run smoothly. My oldest sister in particular acted in many ways as a third parent to the younger children and was very close to them.

 

BUT oldest sister also went off to a top tier university at age seventeen, with my parents' encouragement and support. By the time she was 26, she had completed graduate school at one of the most prestigious programs in her field and was established in a career. That is a long cry from where Jana Duggar is now. 

 

Thing is, if you haven't lived with parents whose modus operandi is to control and limit their children's lives, such a dynamic is virtually inconsceivable.

 

 

this - 1000x this!

 

 it is so subtle, the pieces by themselves as face value seem innocuous or merely 'odd/ecentric' at worst.  but it's the sum.  it's the underlying message, it's incredibly subtle.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a member of RGT for years - since 2001. I don't recall ANY conversations on ATI. While the author (Elizabeth) was very strong on children being able to express emotions in a more acceptable manner than pitching a fit - spanking was not a huge part of the parenting style advocated there. Many of us were *very* much about relationships and respecting our children as individuals. I'm more than willing to accept how much I don't know about ATI, but I can tell you the atmosphere of the boards on RGT better than pretty much anyone here.

 

I don't see how she could have been an advocate of ATI anyway - she was never a fan of courtship as embraced by all the "popular" conservative books that came out. She advocated a mix of dating and courting - advocating delaying the physical relationship but felt that courtship didn't allow the couple to get to know each other well enough to make a good decision and also felt that it didn't allow the couple to "back out" if the other person wasn't what they were expecting, that initially it was a pre-engagement from Day 1. She also wasn't a big fan of the Daddy picking thing - that while the parents insight was valuable, ultimately it needed to be the getting to know one another and deciding if the other person was a good fit for a marriage by the individual.

 

Nope, can't paint all super conservatives with the same brush. This one doesn't fit.

We have used and recommended RGT as well and the women who recommended it to me also don't fit the pattern. I think anything can be used abusively but it's just not a given. Wisdom and Titus 2 women are definitely helpful to younger moms being balanced and gentle on their application of parenting advice though.

 

I found out about the extent of the Duggars recently through this board too and it's pretty awful. I also know a lot of conservative Christian families who are associated with them and have nothing to do with ATI. So I always just wait for the details instead of assuming because a lot of these families are really just mainstream Christian families in solid churches who love their kids, not brainwashing abusers. But the latter do exist and prey on families and children in churches because they think they are easy targets. Vigilance and refusal to shield accusations of abuse from the proper channels of authority are really crucial.

 

In the meantime a lot to families could use some good tomato staking, truth be told! And the older I get the more I see how this can be done with very little correction and s lot more teaching and love. That's why gentle, wise, older moms are so helpful with RGB - So it doesn't become all physical correction and legalism. It's an easy trap to fall into but is by no means a given.

 

As for Jinger, I really hope he is just a Christian and nothing cult like there, for her sake. Until he pops up at conferences or in ATI material I'll reserve judgment.

Edited by Arctic Mama
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thing is, if you haven't lived with parents whose modus operandi is to control and limit their children's lives, such a dynamic is virtually inconsceivable.

 

I wouldn't even want that kind of control!

 

There comes a time when one is just tired.  Ya know?  What are you going to do when stuff doesn't work out and your kid has now become completely reliant on you and/or their spouse?  Seems like a cruel thing to do to someone.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't even want that kind of control!

 

There comes a time when one is just tired. Ya know? What are you going to do when stuff doesn't work out and your kid has now become completely reliant on you and/or their spouse? Seems like a cruel thing to do to someone.

I agree. I actively push my kids out of the nest. That's my job! And I don't want them dependent on me forever.

Edited by Kinsa
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know my cult experience is different than Duggar's, or maybe not. Those of you who know my story from the past know how I was raised. I can tell you that all of my bio family still participate and to my knowledge I'm the only one to get out, though like the Duggar's, I was to marry in the cult and I didn't. But, to this day I'm still stalked and threatened that if I don't come back then had things will happen. I realize the Duggar's aren't a satanic cult, which is how I grew up but honestly a cult is a cult. The damage is the same to a point and I can tell you that it's taken me 13 years to de-program. This is no easy thing.

 

I see the same blank, glassy, and distant look that I see in pics of me years ago, it's scary. It still is hard for me to break my cycle of cult thinking and sometimes I catch myself wondering if I should go back. What's familiar is what's safe in the mind of someone who has been programmed. This is the word that I used for what was done to me. I know what it took for them to program me so it makes me wonder what has really happened to those kids for them not to question the things that go against common sense. Hey! I know conservative Christianity and this is not it. The Duggar's are a cult plain and simple.

 

I don't tout myself as a cult expert but I do know how cults work, satanic or otherwise, and how they program their members so that they never leave. I only got away because some loving friends and my husband were willing to do whatever it took to get me away. I had to cut off contact with my family from the very beginning and not ever have anything to do with them. I see this as the only hope for Jinger, Jana, or any of the other kids because as long as JB is whispering in their ears they continue to stay his programmed robots.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know my cult experience is different than Duggar's, or maybe not. Those of you who know my story from the past know how I was raised. I can tell you that all of my bio family still participate and to my knowledge I'm the only one to get out, though like the Duggar's, I was to marry in the cult and I didn't. But, to this day I'm still stalked and threatened that if I don't come back then had things will happen. I realize the Duggar's aren't a satanic cult, which is how I grew up but honestly a cult is a cult. The damage is the same to a point and I can tell you that it's taken me 13 years to de-program. This is no easy thing.

 

I see the same blank, glassy, and distant look that I see in pics of me years ago, it's scary. It still is hard for me to break my cycle of cult thinking and sometimes I catch myself wondering if I should go back. What's familiar is what's safe in the mind of someone who has been programmed. This is the word that I used for what was done to me. I know what it took for them to program me so it makes me wonder what has really happened to those kids for them not to question the things that go against common sense. Hey! I know conservative Christianity and this is not it. The Duggar's are a cult plain and simple.

 

I don't tout myself as a cult expert but I do know how cults work, satanic or otherwise, and how they program their members so that they never leave. I only got away because some loving friends and my husband were willing to do whatever it took to get me away. I had to cut off contact with my family from the very beginning and not ever have anything to do with them. I see this as the only hope for Jinger, Jana, or any of the other kids because as long as JB is whispering in their ears they continue to stay his programmed robots.

Hugs to you and all the other abuse survivors on here. It is so good to hear your stories so we can be vigilant. I am like a lot of other believers and err on the side of assuming the best of people and their motivations until proven otherwise, but wisdom is needed too and in cases like this where the trail of abuse in the ideology is long and with many casualties it does become very hard to assume that anyone who is more than casually associated with these groups isn't deeply involved, just because of how these work.

 

It's a hard swallow, but I owe a lot of my personal awakening to these kinds of conservative religious predators to people like Faith who present their stories and evidence of abuses associated with these groups. It also becomes easier to tease out who is a decent person and in a conservative faith from who is an a wolf in a flock and using it for cover, because common traits pop up again and again.

 

These discussions have also really opened my eyes to the importance of knowing where my kids are at church at all times, keeping teaching and childcare two deep, and examining any materials that claim to have 'the key' to life and godliness with a skeptical and critical eye, against the bible all the time. I'm still a very conservative Christian doctrinally but I'm a more more aware, vigilant one because of stories and cautions from women on boards like these. So thank you for sharing - all of you!

Edited by Arctic Mama
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love links. I can tell you in FIFTEEN years of being there - that was NOT the attitude there at all. I can this with absolute certainty. However, I can tell you whenever I had a parenting question it wasn't answered with, "Just spank that kid." Are you mixing her up with the Pearls maybe?

Blessdmama, i just wanted to interject that I liked certain things about RGT's website years ago. I was not on a forum (didn't even know there was one), but I read many of her links over a few years. There were several things I liked about what she said. There were several things I didn't like about what she said.

 

I liked that she was firm and intentional. She seemed like a person with a plan. I liked this about her advice a lot. Also, it seemed wise from my perspective to understand how a mom with a lot of kids was *actually* doing things. Book-theories by childless phds never did much for me. So there was that.

 

But there were things there that I didn't like, too. She praised the Blanket training idea. In one post, she talked about switching a baby's hands because he kept taking a book off the bookcase and "tearing the page ever so slightly." I was horrified at the idea of associating punishment with books. This, to me, seems like a really dumb way of keeping a kid from tearing a book. I did the opposite; I always had books my kids could play with and look at handy. Most were board books, but a few were paper and did get torn. But oh well. I would never switch a child or smack their hands to prevent them from being curious about books.

 

She did also have stuff about punishing a bad attitude and that a smile was the only acceptable way to carry out any parental dictate. I grew up with this. it is one thing I knew from pre-children I would never do to my kids.

 

IMO, this type of training is the No. 1 reason my sisters and I were all suceptible to controlling and abusive relationships. I am the only one of the girls in my family who did not marry at least one out-right abusive man. Mine was "only" a boyfriend and was "only" manipulative and controlling. My brother, the only boy, also had a dysfuctional marriage relationship, FWIW.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...