"Return of the Daughters" review

[danvillebelle]

So, if a young woman goes out on her own(I guess to college or into the work force) and is sexually assaulted, she will bring DEVASTATION to the family line. This type of thinking would be harmful to any rape victim. Not only was she assaulted but she, according to Geoff, brings devastation to the family and its future. What a screwed up way to view victims of a sexual assault.

That little gem was one of the many pebbles that started the avalanche that made me kick all this crazy shit to the curb.

I was like, hold up there Geoff - my boyfriend drugged and raped me when I was 15, and *my children* have to somehow pay for that? Fuck you with a porcupine you bloviating douchebag. :nenner: :nenner:

[SamuraiKatz]

So, if a young woman goes out on her own(I guess to college or into the work force) and is sexually assaulted, she will bring DEVASTATION to the family line. This type of thinking would be harmful to any rape victim. Not only was she assaulted but she, according to Geoff, brings devastation to the family and its future. What a screwed up way to view victims of a sexual assault.

Oh Geoff, nothing like a little victim blaming to set the tone. No wonder the Botkinettes remain unwed...

Thank you Marian!

[Marian the Librarian]

Thanks for the thanks, everyone!

One correction - it was Doug Phillips is a Tool who included the example of Dinah in his seemingly never-ending sermon...not that it really matters much, since both men think pretty much alike. Sorry if this is nitpicky... :embarrassed:

It was...interesting, to say the least, to take on this little project. The talk went on and on, but the conclusions I reached are quite succinct:

Botkin = undeniably, certifiably, batshit crazy.

Phillips = the tooliest of tools.

[debrand]

Thanks for the thanks, everyone!

One correction - it was Doug Phillips is a Tool who included the example of Dinah in his seemingly never-ending sermon...not that it really matters much, since both men think pretty much alike. Sorry if this is nitpicky... :embarrassed:

It was...interesting, to say the least, to take on this little project. The talk went on and on, but the conclusions I reached are quite succinct:

Botkin = undeniably, certifiably, batshit crazy.

Phillips = the tooliest of tools.

I never thanked you for sitting through that. Thank you!

Several years ago, I remember reading an article on LAF that stated that women's vows don't have meaning because husbands/fathers can take away the women's right to make vows. I can't find that article now.

[louisa05]

When I worked at Christian school, there was a new teacher one year whose husband came in insisting that he should sign her contract because women can not sign one for themselves according to the Bible. Her name was also not on any bank account and he expected the school to direct deposit her salary into his accounts. The admins had to explain to him that it is not legal for them to have someone else sign her contract or for them to pay her salary to someone else.

[salex]

So, if a young woman goes out on her own(I guess to college or into the work force) and is sexually assaulted, she will bring DEVASTATION to the family line. This type of thinking would be harmful to any rape victim. Not only was she assaulted but she, according to Geoff, brings devastation to the family and its future. What a screwed up way to view victims of a sexual assault.

Isn't this the same logic that brings about honor killings.? It always amazes me how the same people who want state laws against sharia law also want to implement their own version. And how many people seem ready to get on board. Why do so many men hate/fear women so? Sorry about weird SENTENCES AS ON PHONE.

[Rhetorica]

FWIW, I was perusing CBMW's website and noticed that Jasmine Baucham has been writing articles over there: cbmw.org/women/womanhood/see-im-a-grown-up/

Here's her bio which has some interesting contrasts with ROTD--she's teaching school and getting her master's degree in something other than cookie-baking. As others have pointed out, she does seem brighter than many. Too bad she's not been able to make the most of her abilities!

Jasmine Baucham is the oldest of Voddie and Bridget Baucham’s eight children. She is a homeschool graduate, holds a BA in English Literature, and is currently pursuing an Master of Arts(Biblical Studies) at Reformed Theological Seminary in Houston. Jasmine currently serves as a fifth grade teacher at a classical/university model school in Houston. She is the author of Joyfully at Home, and loves living at home where she continues to learn from her mother, enjoy her siblings, and assist her father and others in research.

[mockingbird]

Random question but did they detail what they "research"? It never seems like they use legitimate historical sources (judging from the fact that they skew everything to fit their ideals) and what else is there, besides the Bible? I mean you only need to read a book so many times before you kind-of know the general location of the passage you're looking for... not something you'd need a research assistant for...

[Rhetorica]

Random question but did they detail what they "research"? It never seems like they use legitimate historical sources (judging from the fact that they skew everything to fit their ideals) and what else is there, besides the Bible? I mean you only need to read a book so many times before you kind-of know the general location of the passage you're looking for... not something you'd need a research assistant for...

Great question. I assumed it would be things like reading the Communist Manifesto or something.

While not directly related to that kind of "research," I was reminded of a couple instances of religious or quasi-religious studies. Just this year there was a scandal when a major sociology journal published a study that found negative outcomes for children in same-sex families. The study has major flaws in its methodology, but seems to have been mysteriously fast-tracked for publication. As anyone familiar with academic publishing knows, it can take months and months to get an article published, but this one sailed through in six weeks. The sociologists I know were very upset about it. I haven't read the study, but I'm sure it was presented as secular, although I can't imagine secular forces were behind it. http://www.salon.com/2013/04/20/journal ... y_partner/

The other thing that comes to mind is that my husband used to work with a guy who basically fabricated studies on demand for "Christian" writers. If some crackpot needed a study to reference, they'd pay him to write an article they could reference as evidence. I always wished my husband could grill the guy for more information about how it worked. Who published his work? Did he fabricate things out of thin air? What writers were referencing him? But he never had a chance for a follow-up interrogation.

So, yeah, it seems to me that a lot of conservatives/fundamentalists active in the their contrived "culture wars" twist poststructuralism/social constructionism into some kind of nihilism and then use that as a basis for justifying their own cherry-picking of data. It's intellectually dishonest on so many levels.

[FloraKitty35]

The Botkinettes have the same Manson girl look in their eyes, only Daddy Geoff is their Charlie. :ew:

[Marian the Librarian]

Marian, chiming in with thanks. I could only go about 5 lines, but that was enough to slap me upside the head with their bold hypocrisy and irony. If their devoted followers had their speech transcripts to think about, would they be so eager to fall in step???? you're doing a great service. :popcorn2:

Here's my absolute favorite quote from the whole thing, courtesy of Doug:

The great all time historic Satanic conspiracy deception.

Post count title, anyone? :lol: