Maxwell Conferences

[mrsew]

I'm predicting that there will be a ton of questions for you mrsew - hope you can hang in there and answer them for us! Here are a few of mine:

1. Did you think Steve was on the creepy side? Did you ever suspect that he was mentally unbalanced in some way?

2. Did you ever get a chance to meet Melanie? What is her family like? Do you think Sarah could reach out to one of them if she wanted out?

3. Did you witness the Maxwells having fun?

4. Do you think Steve will let his daughters get married?

I've been following the Maxwell's since 2001 and am disturbed to say the least by the direction their family has taken.

1. I really was too young/clueless to pick up on that when I was physically around him, but I distinctly remember how controlling he was over Sarah's relationship with my sister. Bc it was long distance, they would exchange untold amounts of emails every day - and either Steve or Teri would read every single email (or letter) that was written. I mostly just remember thinking the kids couldn't do much of anything without their parents express permission. I do remember feeling like we were bothering them when we visited - especially Teri. Knowing what I do now, I think she was probably battling depression, but she (over Steve) was cold-ish and unwelcoming (I wouldn't say rude, but distant maybe?).

2. No, we never visited their church (or nursing home) and Melanie wasn't in the picture when our familes were together.

3. Fun? I suppose. I mean Sarah was allowed to go on vacations with us (which I don't think would ever be allowed of a Maxwell girl now) - we went hiking, boating, swimming. She and my sister would make crafty projects together and exchange them. The younger kids had a big playset/fort area in the backyard, but had to have permission to go outside and play. They didn't have as much freedom to have "fun" as normal children, but it wasn't like they were never allowed to do something because it was fun.

4. That's hard to say, just based on what I knew of him years ago. Sarah definitely had a strong desire to marry and talked about that frequently, I honestly am shocked that she's not married. It scares me to imagine the type of man that Steve is holding out for/waiting for his daughters to marry.

[sparkles]

Sarah's indoctrination must be complete then because according to her, all childhood memories are frightening and unhappy ones and she's ever so grateful now for Steve's "protection."

[Moonbeam]

Mrsew, thanks so much for your information. All of this makes me very, very sad. I am now more sad for Teri, even though I know she is an at least partial willing participant. I work with many women who are depressed and in controlling relationships. Many of them (and men) have physical manifestations of their depression and abuse, such as fibromyalgia or other chronic pain or health problems. I wouldn't be surprised if any of the Maxwell women developed these types of problems. The body often expresses what the voice cannot.

How did your family meet the Maxwell family? By the way, Steve does read here, in case you're concerned about your confidentiality/identity, etc. (Hi Steve!)

I went to a lecture Wednesday night by Dan Siegel, an amazing psychiatrist who has written a ton of books on neurobiology, brain science, parenting, therapy, etc. He was talking about how family activities and making healthy memories with your children affect them both emotionally and physically (empathy boosts the immune system, etc). Then I come over here and read this thread and think about the warped beliefs of this family and little they know and how they are spreading their poison to other vulnerable families. Then the snarky side of me thinks, well, at least I know there will always be a need for my profession (therapist).

[bionicmlle]

mrsew -- how long ago did sarah split the friendship from your sister? That must have been hard for both of them... If Sarah was old enough, do you remember there ever being any possible courtship opportunities? (I'm guessing around this time she may have been 22 or 23?)

[Sprocket]

1. I really was too young/clueless to pick up on that when I was physically around him, but I distinctly remember how controlling he was over Sarah's relationship with my sister. Bc it was long distance, they would exchange untold amounts of emails every day - and either Steve or Teri would read every single email (or letter) that was written. I mostly just remember thinking the kids couldn't do much of anything without their parents express permission. I do remember feeling like we were bothering them when we visited - especially Teri. Knowing what I do now, I think she was probably battling depression, but she (over Steve) was cold-ish and unwelcoming (I wouldn't say rude, but distant maybe?).

2. No, we never visited their church (or nursing home) and Melanie wasn't in the picture when our familes were together.

3. Fun? I suppose. I mean Sarah was allowed to go on vacations with us (which I don't think would ever be allowed of a Maxwell girl now) - we went hiking, boating, swimming. She and my sister would make crafty projects together and exchange them. The younger kids had a big playset/fort area in the backyard, but had to have permission to go outside and play. They didn't have as much freedom to have "fun" as normal children, but it wasn't like they were never allowed to do something because it was fun.

4. That's hard to say, just based on what I knew of him years ago. Sarah definitely had a strong desire to marry and talked about that frequently, I honestly am shocked that she's not married. It scares me to imagine the type of man that Steve is holding out for/waiting for his daughters to marry.

Your father wouldn't happen to be a pastor would he? Steve mentioned that a friend of Sarah's (a pastor's daughter) had told her things that she should have never heard. But he could have been making it up...

[singsingsing]

Knowing Steve, something Sarah should have NEVER!!!! HEARD!! probably amounted to, "I think it would be fun to go to college" or, "Hey have you heard of this cool band, they're called The Backstreet Boys"...

[Anxious Girl]

mrsew -- how long ago did sarah split the friendship from your sister? That must have been hard for both of them... If Sarah was old enough, do you remember there ever being any possible courtship opportunities? (I'm guessing around this time she may have been 22 or 23?)

This makes me really nervous for Sarah and her siblings when Steve hits the bucket... :cry:

[Witsec7]

Sarah's indoctrination must be complete then because according to her, all childhood memories are frightening and unhappy ones and she's ever so grateful now for Steve's "protection."

Sarah's memory banks have been selectively purged, kinda like ZooZoo's.

[alisonwhit]

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions :).

[ChickeyMonkey]

For the record I would do it. But I also understand it would not be legal and would be totally comfortable with myself doing it.

I don't advocate anyone else doing it...

What about the static cling-type stickers? We get them from the Zoo every time they send us membership forms. Would that still count as defacement of private property?

[mirele]

What about the static cling-type stickers? We get them from the Zoo every time they send us membership forms. Would that still count as defacement of private property?

Not going to weigh in on the actual legality of this, but will just point out that some speed camera vigilantes got the police in Tempe fuming when they went and put Post-it Notes on the camera lenses and boxes over the cameras at one particularly busy intersection. Not destructive but the police were all, "If we figure out who these people in Santa suits were, we will prosecute."

Personally, I'd stick with money or fake money tracts. Or the good old "tract on the windshield" thing.

[treemom]

I agree with mirele in the fact that I dont doubt there would be a great legal risk...and like I said I do not advocate it. My willingness is based completely on personal feelings and not at all reasonable.

[mystikchick17]

mrssew, thank you for answering questions. The more I learn about this family, the sadder and sadder I am for the lives that Steve has ruined. If any of you have read the Quiverfull book by Kathryn Joyce (I read about it here and just finished it) - she's absolutely on the money. Any hint of dissent, especially from a woman towards a male headship figure is described not only as disobedience, but a lack of faith, evil, sinful, etc. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind now, after reading that book, that Mary has no idea (nor do any of the other kids) that it's ok to think some of what their dad is doing is wrong. They've been programmed to think that if they think something is wrong, the fault lies with them, and moreover, that especially as women, it is selfish and egotistical to have a sense of self. All must be subordinated to their male headship.

Of all the chapters in that book, it was the last one, on daughters, that made me the most sad, because they've never had a say in joining this lifestyle.

[thoughtful]

I just started reading this thread, and have gone through about half of it. Thanks for the recap, Sprocket, and for enduring that.

Steve had made individual "Daddy Tapes" for the kids to listen to and absorb as they played alone. I looked around the room, to see the reaction of the women and there was none that I could see. Was I the only one that thought that this propaganda that started in toddler-hood was creepy?

I didn't realize you'd mentioned this when I posted about them in the other thread. Did he make it clear in the presentation, as he did in the "Corner" post, that they were mini-sermons, not just loving Dad stuff?

If Steve wants to do this so much why doesn't he join an order of silent monks where all they do is work and meditate on the Lord?

Yeah, the silent part would be ideal. :D

One thing that always struck me about the Maxwells—and it's a major factor, I think, in what makes them more dangerous—is that unlike many fundies, their hate is well hidden. Outwardly, they seem wholesome, godly and generally harmless. They're handsomely packaged to appeal to on-the-bubble fundies

Absolutely.

I question the wisdom of using cards that say "Freejinger is watching you" also. I think it serves to reinforce that the world is out to get them and that they all need to hunker down. Plus, if one were on the receiving end, it would freak a person out (and cause them to go running back to daddy as protector?). I understand the need to put Steve on notice, but I think the greater good is helping the children know there are options and a softer approach would be more successful. Flies, honey, vinegar, and all that.

I'm also ill-at-ease about the "freejinger was here" stuff. We are individuals, not a hive vagina. :D And I think it can just come off as creepy or juvenile, and be dismissed as "oh, them," and not help anyone.

ust one thing for FJ-ers who might attend future conferences and want to leave messages like your dollars - in addition to writing 'Freejinger is watching you' and the URL, would it be a good idea also to say something about how many of us sympathise with the 'children' and would be happy if they left the cult? I think that if we just say 'Freejinger is watching you' then they can easily just dismiss us as being of the devil (particularly as the 'children' have been taught explicitly that the outside world is literally evil), whereas if we say something about how some FJ-ers are sympathetic to those caught in the cult of Steve, then it might make things sink in a bit more?

I would go further -- leave off the Freejinger part altogether, and just have a message and link to something that explains without snark. They still might think it is "of the devil," but it is probably more likely to reach them than our mix of seriousness, snark, same-sex kissing and silliness (oooh, alliteration!).

Confronting Steve as an individual, talking to the adult children about alternatives, warning church officials and the community, all seem fine to me.

When I first read the description of treemom's confrontation with Steve and conversation with his daughter, my inner worry-wart (who was planted there by both nature and nurture, and with whom I've been fighting for decades! :( ) screamed, "Was that wise? Could Freejinger get sued?!"

But then I thought about it. First of all, Alecto was there, and I assume she would be the first to warn against anything that would cause legal problems for FJ.

Secondly, I set aside the obsessive way in which fundies are discussed here, which, I can see, can make us seem like a bunch of stalkers.

I imagined a scenario in which I was walking down the street, and someone approached a vulnerable friend or child, buttonholing them and preaching ideas that sounded benign but that I knew were dangerous.

I imagined what I would do if I was still working in a school system, and, in a meeting, heard that Gothard's Character First crap was going to be taught.

I imagined what I would do if a friend told me she was going to try Shepherding a Child's Heart or To Train Up a Child for her children.

I would speak up.

Yes, the people who have gone to Maxwell presentations have entered a building to listen and/or confront. But it is a public space, and Steve is putting himself and his damaging ways into their communities.

So I told my inner worry-wart to shut up. :D

But I do think it is better to confront/warn as individuals, not as "Freejinger."

Off to read the rest of the thread . . .

[Sola]

Sarah was best friends with my older sister for over 10 years - she came on family vacations with us several times. She usually would fly but her family drove her half-way and met my parents the first time, so they could meet my parents. We also visited them as a family twice. My parents didn't "drink their koolaid" (my Dad preferred to make his own), my mom was SO not into scheduling, etc, so our families were really never besties.

I definitely remember they were more lax with the older kids, but when our families were together the younger children were never allowed to be with my siblings without an adult or older sibling present. Steve made a BIG deal about this.

Once my sister left home for college (my family was becoming more 'liberal' and the Maxwells were becoming more conservative than ever) Sarah slowly started weaning her friendship with my sister, and eventually wrote her a long letter explaining why they could no longer be friends.

Feels like a lifetime ago - I wish their family would change and move away from legalism but honestly if it hasn't happened by now, I can't imagine that it ever will. Along the same line, I don't see any of the kids ever leaving or changing before Steve passes away. Christopher always seemed to be the most "liberal" of them, and I had a wild thought that maybe one day he would be the one to start a change in the family but seeing who he has chosen to marry that seems much less likely now.

Wow, I don't know what to say. Sarah tasted ordinary life and had it taken away from her. Steve-O must have done a real hatchet job on Sarah's mind. She now says that she regrets having friendships outside the family. What on earth has he said to her for her to think that.

[mystikchick17]

Wow, I don't know what to say. Sarah tasted ordinary life and had it taken away from her. Steve-O must have done a real hatchet job on Sarah's mind. She now says that she regrets having friendships outside the family. What on earth has he said to her for her to think that.

I highly doubt it's just a matter of what he said. I suspect it's been a long process of deliberate psychological indoctrination, possibly coupled with some physical abuse. Sarah seems like a very trusting, naive person and it wouldn't take much for a kid who was eager to please Mom and Dad and who felt easily afraid of things to be completely fear-stricken by thoughts of disobedience and sin.

[YPestis]

This is incredibly sad to hear that Sarah once had a semi-normal life. At one point, she had friends, socialized with outsiders, went on trips with nonMaxwell people. She even mentioned sleepovers with neighborhood kids.

From the Maxwell books, the family started their path down fundie craziness around the mid to late 80's. Teri's depression was also becoming obvious around that time. They family initially followed standard fundie stuff like homeschooling, banning TV, surrounding kids with churchy stuff. Then Steve started removing outside activities from their lives. Sarah was probably slowly pulled from her past relationships, convinced that it was to protect her purity and maintain a better relationship with God. She now writes happily how her younger siblings never had friends outside the family. I think it's telling the extend of the family's isolation that simple social conventions like having friends is considered a bad thing because Steve said so.

I don't think physical abuse is used with Steve. Teri has posted that while they don't disapprove of the Pearl's ideas, they don't utilize physical discipline on their children. They could be lying, but the Maxwells have never shied away from honestly stating far more unpopular choices in their lives so I'm apt to believe the family does not employ physical discipline. Besides, one does not need to physically intimidate people to make them listen. I actually feel it makes people more likely to not listen and to run off if you have to convince people through beatings than if there were only soft words to persuade them. It's why I think Steve and Teri's child rearing strategies is so insidious. It doesn't feel forced. Every decision they talk with their children about, then replace with something more 'wholesome' giving it the appearance of benevolent parenting. It's also what makes their message so manipulative. They have outward appearances of this wonderful family who love each other, only they are bound together by fear of the outside, and convinced of their righteously because they are so isolated from anything nonSteve.

[Guest Anonymous]

I don't think physical abuse is used with Steve. Teri has posted that while they don't disapprove of the Pearl's ideas, they don't utilize physical discipline on their children. They could be lying, but the Maxwells have never shied away from honestly stating far more unpopular choices in their lives so I'm apt to believe the family does not employ physical discipline.

When did Teri post that they don't use physical discipline - do you have a link please?

From reading through the blog and corners I got the strong impression that they did spank when the children were younger (but I don't have links at my fingertips). They also sell a "consequences' chart alongside an example of their own personalised version, which had a mixture of non-physical consequences and consequences that were symbolised by a set number of wooden canes - which I took to mean the number of strokes a child would get.

[HoneyBunny]

When did Teri post that they don't use physical discipline - do you have a link please?

From reading through the blog and corners I got the strong impression that they did spank when the children were younger (but I don't have links at my fingertips). They also sell a "consequences' chart alongside an example of their own personalised version, which had a mixture of non-physical consequences and consequences that were symbolised by a set number of wooden canes - which I took to mean the number of strokes a child would get.

How very Singaporean of them.

[Witsec7]

It's a rather good question to ask them during a Q&A, if there ever is a Q&A again.

[Arete]

I was also under the impression they did not use physical discipline on their own children. I have followed them almost 7 years, so to be honest, I don't have specific posts, just a general impression. I wouldn't swear to my impression in a court of law.

ETA- What Expdd said.

[Guest Anonymous]

I was also under the impression they did not use physical discipline on their own children. I have followed them almost 7 years, so to be honest, I don't have specific posts, just a general impression. I wouldn't swear to my impression in a court of law.

ETA- What Expdd said.

7 years ago Jessie would already be 11 and Mary 9. Most fundies spank very early on and are proud that they no longer 'need' to spank by the time a child reaches middle childhood. Their recommendation of pro-spanking resources is what suggests to me that they spanked when the children were young.

I also seem to remember an FJer reporting back from the conference last year that in Steve and Teri's joint session, Steve clapped his hands together when talking about consequences, as if to mimic the sound of spanking.

If anyone is intending to attend the Q and A, I would also like to hear Steve's response on that issue.

[Sprocket]

I didn't realize you'd mentioned this when I posted about them in the other thread. Did he make it clear in the presentation, as he did in the "Corner" post, that they were mini-sermons, not just loving Dad stuff?

Teri was the one who told us about the "Daddy Tapes". She was explaining her schedule and said that the little ones were learning alone time. During that alone time, Steve had made individual "Daddy Tapes" for them to listen to as they played. She said that they were messages to the individual child about whatever Steve felt that the child needed at that time. I'm sure it was a sermon, but that's not how Teri presented it.

I'm also ill-at-ease about the "freejinger was here" stuff. We are individuals, not a hive vagina. :D And I think it can just come off as creepy or juvenile, and be dismissed as "oh, them," and not help anyone.

[

quote="triplet3]ust one thing for FJ-ers who might attend future conferences and want to leave messages like your dollars - in addition to writing 'Freejinger is watching you' and the URL, would it be a good idea also to say something about how many of us sympathise with the 'children' and would be happy if they left the cult? I think that if we just say 'Freejinger is watching you' then they can easily just dismiss us as being of the devil (particularly as the 'children' have been taught explicitly that the outside world is literally evil), whereas if we say something about how some FJ-ers are sympathetic to those caught in the cult of Steve, then it might make things sink in a bit more?

[YPestis]

When did Teri post that they don't use physical discipline - do you have a link please?

From reading through the blog and corners I got the strong impression that they did spank when the children were younger (but I don't have links at my fingertips). They also sell a "consequences' chart alongside an example of their own personalised version, which had a mixture of non-physical consequences and consequences that were symbolised by a set number of wooden canes - which I took to mean the number of strokes a child would get.

I think it was in their...forum when they had it? This was a number of years ago. I remember a post where Teri was asked about spanking and what the best way to go about it. Teri wrote that while her family do not utilize physical punishment, they don't condemn it either. She mentioned using a plumbing line (aka Pearls) if they wanted to spank and even specified the diameter. Then shortly after that post, she took that line about the type of spanking implement, saying that Steve didn't want to have that on their forum (liability, perhaps?). All that was left was that spanking was fine and to be careful not to be overzealous. That's all I saw. At that time, they still had elementary school aged children and they said they do not spank. They may have spanked the children as preschoolers but since about 75% of the American public do so, I didn't count that against them for being fundie. Fundies are more apt to spank older children, and with tools, methinks.

I always figured the "wooden cane" just symbolizes the severity of the consequences, and not the number of spanks. There was a couple other mention in their blogs/forums that they do time-outs and such. I think there was even a mention in their books. No where has there mention of spankings. Obviously, I can't say for certain how they discipline their children. However, if they did spank, especially spank the older kids, I always think they would say so. After all, for a Christian audience, it is far more controversial to ban sports and outside friendships than the admit to spanking.

Honestly, I was rather surprised when the Maxwells said they did non-corporal punishment. They seem so fundie that I was sure Steve kept a collection of leather belts or something. However, Steve seem to have an aversion to physical violence of any kind. He even wrote that he would not allow his kids to play with toy guns.....

[thoughtful]

Teri was the one who told us about the "Daddy Tapes". She was explaining her schedule and said that the little ones were learning alone time. During that alone time, Steve had made individual "Daddy Tapes" for them to listen to as they played. She said that they were messages to the individual child about whatever Steve felt that the child needed at that time. I'm sure it was a sermon, but that's not how Teri presented it.

Thanks. Interesting that it wasn't made quite as clear that they are mostly about fixing some perceived flaw in the sinful child.

Sneaky Maxwells are sneaky.