The Botkinettes have surfaced and they're giving relationship advice again!

[ChunkyBarbie]

i think too, that in their circles, if you are not married by a certain age people start wondering why.  Then it morphs into speculating what is wrong with you. They may have gotten a little grace being royalty (gag) and all, but I guarantee that we aren't the only ones wondering.  

[refugee]

1 hour ago, Red Hair, Black Dress said:

Maybe that's it -- they are going through the motions.  Because really, truthfully underneath the facade of SAHD obedience and serving their High Lord and Master Geoff - King of the Western Conservancy,  they are seething with rage and frustration.

Seething and shaking with rage that their lives are passing them by and there doesn't seem to be any way to stop it.  Frustration that they are unmarried women in a culture that only values women as wives and mothers of many, many babies.  By that very definition they are lesser women than their SILs.

SAHD seems a great idea when you're 18, 19, 20, 21 and expecting  Godly Prince Charming to arrive any day to whisk you off to your reward for being a SAHD -- wonderful godly marriage and motherhood. After all your SILs achieved it.  Fast forward 10-12 years and you're still waiting. And you're left with 2 thoughts -- 1) something is wrong with you or 2) King Geoff scared/ drove every suitor away.

The robotic delivery and dead-eyed stare is how they keep all that rage and frustration in check,

Alternatively, they could be dead inside, having spent so many years "keeping sweet" that they wouldn't know an honest emotion if it slapped them in the face. If you get in the habit of stuffing your emotions, you eventually go numb. You get accustomed to faking emotions as needed, but you don't feel anything.

I'm sure there's a psychological term for it, but I don't remember what it is. (Disassociation, maybe?)

[CloakNDagger]

3 hours ago, freealljs said:

At what point do they throw in the proverbial towel too and actively pursue love?

That can only happen if they for a second waver, leave home, and start changing their own beliefs, OR something hits them like a ton of bricks so hard they can't ignore it. The hive is stronger than the individual most of the time in the more orthodox households I believe.

[ChunkyBarbie]

3 hours ago, ChunkyBarbie said:

i think too, that in their circles, if you are not married by a certain age people start wondering why.  Then it morphs into speculating what is wrong with you. They may have gotten a little grace being royalty (gag) and all, but I guarantee that we aren't the only ones wondering.  

 I meant to write: I would think, ..not I think too.

 

brain fart 

I wonder if any of the young ladies in their circle think, well if THEY couldn't get husbands what chance do I have?  Then just marry the first guy to come around and offer a courtship. I would like to know what their group really thinks about the Botkinettes  

 

Please excuse the worse than usual random stream of thoughts, I'm sick again  

 

 

[Howl]

2 hours ago, refugee said:

Alternatively, they could be dead inside, having spent so many years "keeping sweet" that they wouldn't know an honest emotion if it slapped them in the face. If you get in the habit of stuffing your emotions, you eventually go numb. You get accustomed to faking emotions as needed, but you don't feel anything.

I'm sure there's a psychological term for it, but I don't remember what it is. (Disassociation, maybe?)

This!  The headship defines the acceptable emotions.  These women, probably since infancy, have a clear understanding of which emotions are acceptable in patriarchy and those that are not allowed. Women are to "Keep sweet no matter what," as Warren Jeffs would say.  

In addition, if something bubbled up from the depths and one or both experienced a change in belief,  their entire life up to that point (including their only source of income) would be exposed as a lie.   It would be a betrayal of family values, especially of their father's entire reason for being, break their mother's heart, blah blah.  They are in bondage on so many levels, it's painful to even contemplate from a distance. 

[CyborgKin]

On 19/02/2017 at 7:19 AM, Red Hair, Black Dress said:

Because I obviously have too much time sometimes:  How does the whole SAHD thing work for an only child -- once the parents are gone?

There are no brothers to take over headship.  Any uncles are likely to be the same age or older than the parents  so probably also deceased.

Does the SAHD then fall under a male cousin --  provided there are any -- and provided the male cousin(s) agree.  And what if the cousins aren't fundie?  Do they throw themselves on the mercy of some male relative and hope for the best?

I have the same questions about SAHD who have no brothers.

Surely having only a single child is not allowed   And if you are stick with no sons, I suppose adoption is required to fix that unfortunate situation.

[CyborgKin]

If you think they'll ever leave, watch Homeschool Dropouts: 

(Actually I think it was seeing that a few years ago that inspired me to look at FJ again.)

 

Sorry for the doublepost, I thought it would merge but I was too slow.

[Chocolatedefrauded]

Wow, that video is tedious. They all seem to be saying the same thing over and over. They are perfect Christians, the others are not. We homeschool right, the others don't. What is the point, really? Boring.

[Howl]

48 minutes ago, Chocolatedefrauded said:

They are perfect Christians, the others are not. We homeschool right, the others don't.

 

Quote

What is the point, really? Boring.

See first quote.  The Botkin spawn seem particularly humorless -- like all the fun has been sucked out of them and they are just husks of humanity, but the entire future of the Western world is on their shoulders, so zero time for frivolity. 

[nokidsmom]

21 hours ago, Howl said:

This!  The headship defines the acceptable emotions.  These women, probably since infancy, have a clear understanding of which emotions are acceptable in patriarchy and those that are not allowed. Women are to "Keep sweet no matter what," as Warren Jeffs would say.  

In addition, if something bubbled up from the depths and one or both experienced a change in belief,  their entire life up to that point (including their only source of income) would be exposed as a lie.   It would be a betrayal of family values, especially of their father's entire reason for being, break their mother's heart, blah blah.  They are in bondage on so many levels, it's painful to even contemplate from a distance. 

ITA on the bolded.   And furthermore, if by chance either of them have felt any smidgen of disappointment (assuming they could even identify it as such) in how their lives have gone thus far (being single when they wanted to be married for example), they have been thoroughly programmed to always seek the reasons why in context of patriarchy.   The idea that patriarchy (and their Daddy's version of it) might be the problem would require breaking out of that indoctrination that's so thorough it seems to me it would be impossible.

 

[crawfishgirl]

That was such a pretentious video - the Botkin family really is self-important in their own minds.  I didn't see any value in it.  Their youngest brother must have been around 13 or so when this was made, yet they made him one of the main spokespersons?  Wow.  I don't see how they can support that many people on worthless stuff like this, though I realize they have side jobs like that gun business.  They seem to have a nice lifestyle, so they are supporting themselves somehow.  For such a patriarchal family, it's funny how their most popular and widely-known products were made by the daughters.  

[nokidsmom]

9 minutes ago, crawfishgirl said:

For such a patriarchal family, it's funny how their most popular and widely-known products were made by the daughters.  

It's ironic, isn't it.   And another reason for Geoff to scare off the suitors, he needs those two to support his lifestyle and family.   

[Myfanwy]

A lecture huh. Well you got that right home-schooled boy, I most certainly feel lectured!

[CyborgKin]

New post up.  It's another chapter of additional material in the new version of the book.  Title is "My Christian Brother is Struggling With Serious Sin – Should I Say Something?"  Meanwhile, Katie Botkin has a new post poking at Doug Wilson, titled "Tamar, 1% temptress".

Guess which one of the two I've actually read yet

[Cartmann99]

34 minutes ago, CyborgKin said:

New post up.  It's another chapter of additional material in the new version of the book.  Title is "My Christian Brother is Struggling With Serious Sin – Should I Say Something?"  Meanwhile, Katie Botkin has a new post poking at Doug Wilson, titled "Tamar, 1% temptress".

Guess which one of the two I've actually read yet

Without reading the post from the Botkins, I'm going to guess that the serious sin is masturbation and not that their Christian brother is a rapist, child molester, or serial killer.

[CyborgKin]

The weird thing about their new post is that the word 'brothers' could be referring to male siblings specifically, or to 'brothers in the Lord' i.e. any other Christian at all.  They don't seem to define the term, and I think a lot of the passages they quote do have a more general applicability and meaning than male siblings.  And they also use the example of Abigail and David, where Abigail was a woman David married after her husband dropped dead, not his sister.  But in the post they never actually define what they mean, except to mention the context for families a few times, so it seems that they're thinking of just actual brothers.

 

Also they don't miss the opportunity to get their dig in at 'boring stupid computer games'. 

3 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

Without reading the post from the Botkins, I'm going to guess that the serious sin is masturbation and not that their Christian brother is a rapist, child molester, or serial killer.

Either way, they wouldn't come out and say it.

Quote

So let’s say you’re upset about the right thing – your dear brother is truly in his heart a lazy bum who doesn’t care about anyone but himself, and that grieves your righteous soul. Now what to do? If your reproof or admonition contains the words, “I’m sick of,” “When will you ever…” “For the last time…” “That’s it…” or “You jerk…”

I'm a terrible person

[Columbia]

I couldn't figure out why their new post made me uncomfortable until I got to the last sentence.
 

Quote

And if we don’t learn now how to respond to men’s sin in the Spirit instead of in our flesh, armed with wisdom, with grace, with boldness, and with God’s words ready on our mouths… we could find ourselves in some very bad places with other young men (as we’ll discuss later in the book).

This attitude is the same one they had in their talk on bad relationships ("Good Girls and Problem Guys.") It basically boiled down to "if you see a man in a place of sin you should call it to his attention." I'm sure this is what they thought Lourdes should have done when Creeps McGee started molesting her. Like they expect that simple words (from a woman, nonetheless), will stop a sexual predator.

[CyborgKin]

It reads like a threat.  "Respond to men's sin in the right way, or else something bad will happen to you and it'll be your fault"!

[GenerationCedarchip]

The Botkin video/posts just make me sad. In the VF circles I came from (which are really just reformed now - lots of movement away from VF going on), there had been comments about the Botkin sisters for some time, but they're definitely getting louder and more plentiful. As time goes on,  it seems like these poor women have been kept more and more cloistered away even from other very conservative Christian families.  I personally know some folks who had ties to the Botkins, among others in VF, and they have mentioned the family basically going incommunicado in recent years. They're obviously bright women and the isolation just seems quite sad to me. 

[hoipolloi]

1 hour ago, GenerationCedarchip said:

I personally know some folks who had ties to the Botkins, among others in VF, and they have mentioned the family basically going incommunicado in recent years. They're obviously bright women and the isolation just seems quite sad to me. 

It IS sad.

This reboot or whatever it is seems to be aimed at the true believing VF leg-humpers, of whom there are still a number -- just look at who's on whose FB friends' lists.

If other gullibles are sucked in, that's gravy. Hard to imagine though that this is bringing in any actual money.

 

[Palimpsest]

Homeschool Dropouts has always made me feel very optimistic, which was hardly the Botkins' intent.  If we believe their "statistics,"  about 98% of the second generation are not impressed with their own education and are going to tell their parents to shove their homeschooling ideas where the sun don't shine.   From memory (I'd rather have a root canal than watch the whole thing again) "Only 2% of my friends are planning to home school!" and "Mass defections among my peers!" and "Millions of homeschooled people will be sending their children to government institutions!"  

Yippee!

I believe the term 'flat affect" could have been coined for the Botkinettes but it is also rather obvious  in those videos that they are reading from a teleprompter.  One profoundly hopes that they occasionally show more animation off camera.

 

 

[Denim Jumper]

I got such a kick out of the solemn faces and ominous music.

[Howl]

6 hours ago, GenerationCedarchip said:

The Botkin video/posts just make me sad. In the VF circles I came from (which are really just reformed now - lots of movement away from VF going on), there had been comments about the Botkin sisters for some time, but they're definitely getting louder and more plentiful. As time goes on,  it seems like these poor women have been kept more and more cloistered away even from other very conservative Christian families.  I personally know some folks who had ties to the Botkins, among others in VF, and they have mentioned the family basically going incommunicado in recent years. They're obviously bright women and the isolation just seems quite sad to me. 

Sounds as though Geoff is circling the wagons.   Given Geoff Botkin's fairly extreme beliefs, he might be heading off  and over the edge in terms of End Times.  Wonder what he thinks of Trump?

[Lurky]

On 25/02/2017 at 9:13 PM, Cartmann99 said:

Without reading the post from the Botkins, I'm going to guess that the serious sin is masturbation and not that their Christian brother is a rapist, child molester, or serial killer.

Bear in mind that for a lot of these families, there's no difference in the sin level between masturbation and sexual abuse etc - it's all the same level of Satanic, and as long as they've repented of their sin, it's wiped clean (if they 'fall', and do it again, they just need to repent again, and no one should judge them etc etc - while if someone is abused, and can't forgive and forget, they're the REAL sinner in the scenario.)

[CyborgKin]

On 28/02/2017 at 11:08 AM, Howl said:

Sounds as though Geoff is circling the wagons.   Given Geoff Botkin's fairly extreme beliefs, he might be heading off  and over the edge in terms of End Times.  Wonder what he thinks of Trump?

Geoff hasn't posted since December but here's what he did write related to Trump then:

https://westernconservatory.com/articles/trumps-first-and-most-critical-war

Isaac posted some stuff in January http://isaacbotkin.com/2017/01/the-takeaway-from-2016-and-what-it-means-for-2017/

since then he's posted about gun shows, WWII paintings, and just most recently how to build a filesharing and backup system   I couldn't find anything particularly botkiny about that last post.