Lori - V-Day Causes Divorce - Now With Moar Ken! Part 2

[Koala]

Naive because as Happy Atheist always says assume everybody you talk to on the internet is an axe murderer.

I find this a useful philosophy: 1 out of every 2 people on the internet is an axe-murderer. If it's not you, it's the person you're talking to. Act accordingly to protect yourself.

:lol: I love it. Makes me laugh every time I read it.

[formergothardite]

He and Lori might actually be the most naïve people on the internet. :lol: OkayToBeTakei probably isn't an ax murderer who is going to come and kill my children in the night, but there is no way to know. It is just best not to put all your information out on the internet if you aren't okay with an ax murderer knowing it.

They also seem to be very naïve about abuse and the possibility that abused women would seek out websites like Lori's. I'm thinking that her blog would actually attract abused fundamental Christian women. When I look at women like Esther Shrader who has ben taught to be submissive her whole life, there is no way that at some point she hasn't thought, "I should stand up to him and not let him put our family in this situation.", since they don't have a church and travel a lot I can see her searching online for advice and ending up with Lori whose advice is to submit even if the husband is wrong and to "win him without a word." John Shrader is not one of those people who are going to be swayed that way. He is obsessed with getting to Zambia and shows little concern for the safety of his wife and children. In fact he seems to expect some of them to die in Zambia and he isn't upset about the idea.

Maybe just like people should approach the internet with the idea that everyone else is a ax murderer so use caution, they should approach her advice giving with the idea that the women reading her blog might be abused or might be married to a John Shrader, and use caution when giving advice. Especially advice you claim is from God.

[Koala]

***I have now lost count as to how many times I have quoted myself quoting you Ken. If you would like to divorce yourself from these comments or at the very least clarify them, this is your chance. I have a strong notion that you will ignore them completely instead of having the integrity to take them one by one and either reaffirm your position, or clarify.***

Ken wrote:

OK Koala, your chasing me out of your playground soon. I cannot compete with your cut and paste to make everything look like you want it to look. Mischarcaterizations at best, and an unwillingness to recognize that one can hold two thoughts in the brain at once and both be accurate.

Ken wrote:

Yes, Koala, you can put works on apiece of a paper well to serve your purposes,but have you ever thought of trying to serve fairness in your life, or at least fairness with me?

You know, the more I think about your assertion that you have been mischaracterized, the more irritated I get. You want fairness. Here's fairness.

You say I put words on paper? Here's your chance to tell me these are not your words.

You say you were mischaracterized, here's your chance to clarify.

Here's your chance set the record straight. If you ignore it then I will assume that these were indeed your quotes and you were not mischaracterized as you claim:

1)

Mom:

I had one that would never give in to anything, regardless of punishment, spanking did nothing but make her worse, time outs where a joke, finally I picked her up and threw her under a cold shower

Lori Alexander:

A spanking will work if it is hard enough

Mom:

Not with her, we tried hand, and although I was against it belt, wooden spoon, cane everything she would just keep going, I stopped after I thought I broke her arm...

Ken Alexander:

Listen I get the issue that we need to protect against abuse, but you know full well this was not an abusive mother.

Alright, there it is Ken. Are the words I attributed to you yours? If so, how did quoting them mischaracterize you?

2)

SSM

Repeal marital rape laws – not because men are just dying to rape women (they aren’t) but because these laws give women the mistaken impression that they have the right to refuse sex with their husbands.

Why: If we want men to have to marry in order to have access to sex – which is necessary if we are going to foster traditional sex roles and enhance family formation – they must have assurance that they will actually get sex after they marry. If a woman wants to live in a man’s house and eat of his bread, she had better be willing to serve him in this way (barring illness of course); if she refuses to give it to him, he should have the option to take what is rightfully his.

Ken Alexander:

I see a brilliant writer and advocate for submission in a Christian marriage, but you and your friends are giving Lori and me pause to reevaluate

.

Are the words I attributed to you yours? If so, how did quoting them mischaracterize you?

3)

SSM:

Consider asking your husband if he would be willing to spank you as part of foreplay.

Please don’t panic. Spanking is not a slippery slope that will lead to BDSM, disturbing fetishes or deviant sexual practices. I can promise you that from personal experience; you won’t be spanked one day and in leather restraints the next. Some people practice Christian Domestic Discipline, but that is actually not what I am recommending either. This is only to be about increasing your attraction to him by having him display dominance via consensual sexual aggression.

It is his decision if he would be willing to try this; this may be outside his comfort zone completely, and he may be feeling very mistrustful of you, but if he is willing to try it, you may not be sure of what to do. Here is one possible way to go: first, ask him to buy a wooden hair brush that has a very flat back (the curved ones tend to leave more bruises). The brush should be on your dresser.

He can sit down on the edge of the bed and tell you to bring the brush to him. Get it, and then kneel down on the floor in front of him and hand the brush to him. He can then pull you firmly but lovingly across his lap, either with lingerie on or no bottoms. It might be easier to have your legs supported on the bed, but your hands off the bed so that you are slightly off balance. He can then administer the spanking; he might want to know that he can swat fairly hard without causing bruises, but even if you do have a bruise the next day, you won’t die.

The number of strokes should be up to him, not you; he decides when the spanking is over (h/t 7man for that idea), not you. When he is done, get on your knees in front of him and say thank you to him. You should thank him because he is doing something that may be outside his comfort zone in order to help you, and you do not deserve it. He is doing this out of love for you, so show him the gratitude he so richly deserves.

Scripture to meditate upon: For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. Hebrews 12:11

(AFTER reading these quotes Ken Alexander said):

BUT SSM made very clear to Lori she is not an advocate of Domestic Discipline

SSM is teaching some sex training for a previous whore

Are the words I attributed to you yours? If so, how did quoting them mischaracterize you?

4)

Ken Alexander:

just because a wife is emotionally abused does not mean she should leave her man or take him to the elders, or separate.

Are the words I attributed to you yours? If so, how did quoting them mischaracterize you?

[formergothardite]

The casual treatment of emotional abuse is concerning. Especially since the emotionally abused woman is not even supposed to take the step of having the elders talk to her husband about his abusive behavior.

[OkToBeTakei]

He and Lori might actually be the most naïve people on the internet. :lol: OkayToBeTakei probably isn't an ax murderer who is going to come and kill my children in the night, but there is no way to know. It is just best not to put all your information out on the internet if you aren't okay with an ax murderer knowing it.

They also seem to be very naïve about abuse and the possibility that abused women would seek out websites like Lori's. I'm thinking that her blog would actually attract abused fundamental Christian women. When I look at women like Esther Shrader who has ben taught to be submissive her whole life, there is no way that at some point she hasn't thought, "I should stand up to him and not let him put our family in this situation.", since they don't have a church and travel a lot I can see her searching online for advice and ending up with Lori whose advice is to submit even if the husband is wrong and to "win him without a word." John Shrader is not one of those people who are going to be swayed that way. He is obsessed with getting to Zambia and shows little concern for the safety of his wife and children. In fact he seems to expect some of them to die in Zambia and he isn't upset about the idea.

Maybe just like people should approach the internet with the idea that everyone else is a ax murderer so use caution, they should approach her advice giving with the idea that the women reading her blog might be abused or might be married to a John Shrader, and use caution when giving advice. Especially advice you claim is from God.

In the still of the night. I hear the wolf howl, honey. Sniffing around your door. In the still of the night. :character-jason: HA!

Also FG. To people like you mention Lori is an older woman with experience. Although I'm not in the market for what she sells, manners upbringing and society lends respect to that combination. I was brought up that way, but also to quietly question other's motives. My 80 year old Catholic Dad has always been a true gentleman, quietly devout in his religion but nobodies fool. Wisdoms he has imparted. The word according to men is quite possibly very different to what God intended, everybody has an agenda and the bible can be a weapon in the wrong hands. Follow your heart but use your brain. He also says it is imperative to buy the most expensive gin you can afford if gin is what you must drink, that and lime, never lemon. Not sure why I added that, came to mind as also very useful advice maybe :lol:

[Koala]

Perfect example again. The fact that Daughter #1 struggled with a little weight and body issues because her desire was to be a top ballerina, that's the parents fault right? Like the world she is working in doesn't care?

She talked to me a number of times about her issues and I helped her work through them in a healthy way. She was never anorexic like others in her group, and always ate well... she just carried a little extra weight for a ballerina and we were OK with that, but we also wanted her to get to her dreams. I would say up to the age of 18 we may have mentioned or talked about weight 3-4 times and all related to her feelings.

I don;t get the blame here? Are parents to be blamed for all their kids issues, real and perceived? We never pushed ballet on her, and actually tried to pull her a bit away from it. So I don't get what you are referring to here.

Let's be very clear. Both of your daughters have documented their struggle with body image (one indicating that she was on the cusp of anorexia) on their blogs. One has indicated that her struggles began at a very early age and manifested itself as depression, sleeplessness, and poor eating habits.

I find it odd that you assert that she always ate well. It seems in direct contradiction to these statements:

Ken:

She was never anorexic like others in her group, and always ate well... she just carried a little extra weight for a ballerina and we were OK with that, but we also wanted her to get to her dreams.

Daughter 1:

In my early years of dance, my body became my obsession. I had not even hit puberty and I was worried that I was too curvy or not skinny enough. Not only did my image disorder cause insecurity, but it gave rise to a host of other issues: bad eating habits, depression, injuries, foggy thinking, sleepless nights, and more. Idolizing the way I looked never helped me. It did not improve my appearance or my performance.

Ken (please note that this was posted almost immediately after you asserted that she was eating well:

We knew she was snacking and loved chips. She did not like to eat meals, just snack. So we talked to her about her snacking issues.

These statements are contradicting Ken. They can't all be true.

If your first statement is true and your daughter was eating well, but naturally carried extra weight, then what did you talk to her about? What did you want her to do to get rid of it?

Lori went from having both of her daughters struggle with serious body image issue to giving advice on the internet as to how to handle your daughters weight. She neglected to mention the spectacular failure her advice had been when she employed it in her own home.

I find it ironic that you downplay this and absolve yourself from any responsibility regarding this matter, yet you attribute the success in their lives to the fact that you and Lori hit them with a leather strap (and yes I can quote you on that if you wish).

You refer to others (meaning more than 1) in her dance group battling anorexia. In my opinion this should have been a red flag for both you and Lori. Did you feel that if your daughter was suffering in the manner she describes (and you clearly attribute her issues to being a ballerina and not Lori's obsession with weight), that perhaps this was not a good hobby for her? Did you feel that if multiple dancers in her particular group were battling anorexia, that maybe you as parents had placed her in the wrong group?

Do you feel that after all of this Lori is still qualified to be (repeatedly) advising people how to handle weight issues with their daughters? Do you feel it is reckless that she neglects to mention that her application of her advice led to two daughters, who as adults blogged about having issues with body image growing up?

[Koala]

Free speech is fine... I am all for it. Responsible speech is what I am asking for.

No. Your assertion was that we weren't allowing freedom of speech. That is quite an accusation. Please substantiate it or admit that you falsely accused us.

[Curious]

I do not know that I feel victimized at this point having gotten to know you many of you a little better. I will say that I see a lot I consider unfair, and mischaracterizations, some out right lies. What got me onto the forum was really one main thing. It read some absurd speculation and accusations about me, about Lori and my family. How I abused Lori and that is why she writes what she writes. Like I am some Philips guy with is controlling and dominating and using God's word to force Lori into writing her blog. That I am the driving force behind her. Many nasty and untrue things were said about me. I know it is the Internet and I just need to suck it up if my wife is going to blog things that you all disagree with... Right?.

I'm still a few pages behind on this thread, so someone may have already said this.

Putting on my Capt. Obvious hat here regarding the bold. People here think those things about you, Ken, because of things that LORI POSTED ON HER PUBLIC BLOG (caps for emphasis, not particularly screaming).

It's not just that we disagree with what Lori says a lot of the time. It's how she portrays YOU, Ken, that makes people say those things that you disliked. So if you feel like you are getting the short end of the stick in that regard, it's something you need to take up with Lori. Frankly, she doesn't make you sound like a very nice person.

Words have meaning. You can't just blog any old thing on the internet (the world wide web, as it were) and expect not to get some push back when the things you are saying tend toward the extreme.

This bit is just an observation and some likely unwanted, free advice :) Reading through some of your posts and admittedly I've been skimming this thread, like i do most of them these days due to time constraints, I get the feeling that like most of the folks we follow, you really don't fully understand the full scope of the internet and how it works. This is not a slam on you. If you aren't online for making a living or as an integral part of a hobby, it can be complex. However, since Lori is using the internet as a platform for her "ministry," at least one of you should have a pretty firm grasp on netiquette and how the net works, in general, IMO.

[Curious]

Yes Polecat, Lori received and receives many comments and nasty statements, many of which came from this Forum according to Goggle. My guess almost all of the nasty people are part f this group. I remember reading years ago when she was getting the comments from this group and a few were saying. "that can't be from our group." Yes, your group perpetuates hate and nasty comments although I do find that many here seem quite responsible individuals which I appreciate.

Why do you continue to mischaracterize and falsely accuse. Show me where the abuse is in my family. Any abuse. You disagree with our approach to discipline, but to characterize this as abuse is to say that almost all parents are abusive/ 75% of parents still spank, and for a reason. It is a very effective and proven tool for raising great kids when done right.

I am curious how "google" is showing you that nasty comments are coming from FJ since we do not allow live links to Lori's site. Also, even if a person came to your site from FJ, the comment wouldn't show they were from FJ because FJ can't make comments. It is not a person. I also must point out that Quiverful of Snark is open to the PUBLIC, so much like anyone can read Lori's blog, anyone can read FJ and find their way to other places from here, while not being active, participating members OF FJ.

We already know there are a small group of disgruntled former members that like to go to blogs that we talk about and make comments saying they are from FJ, just to cause problems.

So all that to say, just because it may look like a comment is originating from FJ, doesn't mean that it's actually a regular, participating member of FJ making the comments. The majority of our members make their comments in our own sandbox and leave the people we follow to play in their own sandboxes (it's sort of the purpose of this forum, after all). We do have a few members that comment on various blogs, but by and large they tend to be civil even if they are disagreeing.

Disagreement does not mean someone is being victimized, trolled, etc. Sometimes disagreement is just disagreement ;)

[theologygeek]

I don't think this was your intention theologygeek, but your post rubs me the wrong way because it implies that women should only choose higher education and high paying jobs that "get you somewhere". Furthermore, it suggests that you should have your career picked out in your early twenties and that you can't deviate from that chosen life choice ever. Maybe Alyssa will continue teaching dance when she gets older, or maybe she will be a SAHM or go back and get a college degree. The choice to pursue professional dance may not be wise financially, and it is definitely associated with health issues - eating disorders and knee and hip problems - but I am really uncomfortable judging that choice, especially because it was something that Alyssa clearly wanted.

A professional ballerina's career is over in her thirties. She can do other things in the field, but she can't dance on stage. She will be replaced by someone younger, prettier, and thinner. My daughter had five years of dance. That was enough. I don't care what my kids do for a living, but I do care about sending my daughter off to a man who is going to analyze her body on an ongoing basis and bring up everything that needs correcting about her body. "Suzie, you're packing on the pounds in your ass. Get rid of that or you're out." I get to decide what to do with my money, and I'd rather put it into college or anything else than pay for her to get her body scrutinized by a man to the point where she might end up with an eating disorder.

[theologygeek]

Let's be very clear. Both of your daughters have documented their struggle with body image (one indicating that she was on the cusp of anorexia) on their blogs. One has indicated that her struggles began at a very early age and manifested itself as depression, sleeplessness, and poor eating habits.

I find it odd that you assert that she always ate well. It seems in direct contradiction to these statements:

Ken:

Daughter 1:

Ken (please note that this was posted almost immediately after you asserted that she was eating well:

These statements are contradicting Ken. They can't all be true.

If your first statement is true and your daughter was eating well, but naturally carried extra weight, then what did you talk to her about? What did you want her to do to get rid of it?

Lori went from having both of her daughters struggle with serious body image issue to giving advice on the internet as to how to handle your daughters weight. She neglected to mention the spectacular failure her advice had been when she employed it in her own home.

I find it ironic that you downplay this and absolve yourself from any responsibility regarding this matter, yet you attribute the success in their lives to the fact that you and Lori hit them with a leather strap (and yes I can quote you on that if you wish).

You refer to others (meaning more than 1) in her dance group battling anorexia. In my opinion this should have been a red flag for both you and Lori. Did you feel that if your daughter was suffering in the manner she describes (and you clearly attribute her issues to being a ballerina and not Lori's obsession with weight), that perhaps this was not a good hobby for her? Did you feel that if multiple dancers in her particular group were battling anorexia, that maybe you as parents had placed her in the wrong group?

Do you feel that after all of this Lori is still qualified to be (repeatedly) advising people how to handle weight issues with their daughters? Do you feel it is reckless that she neglects to mention that her application of her advice led to two daughters, who as adults blogged about having issues with body image growing up?

I didn't know that the dancer daughter had her own set of problems about weight and body image. I just thought the other daughter did. Idiot that I am was taking Ken at his word about Daughter #1. Lesson learned.

[Curious]

Why go to a personal blog and ask for advice and expect anything but her personal views?

At the risk of pointing out the obvious again....

Someone might go to a place looking for the answer they WANT to validate the action they either already are taking or want to take. So let's take the example of a child abuser. If the person is already a child abuser and they ask Lori for advice and she says "spank harder." She has just told them what they want to hear/validated their actions.

I'm not saying this is happening, of course. I'm just offering one example answer to your question.

[latraviata]

At the risk of pointing out the obvious again....

Someone might go to a place looking for the answer they WANT to validate the action they either already are taking or want to take. So let's take the example of a child abuser. If the person is already a child abuser and they ask Lori for advice and she says "spank harder." She has just told them what they want to hear/validated their actions.

I'm not saying this is happening, of course. I'm just offering one example answer to your question.

That's exactly what happens.

[Curious]

The reason you can't win here is simple. I've been here a while. Two things will happen. You may leave on good terms, time and life etc. and try to do that, some will say you have 'flounced.' You may leave in a moment of frustration after heated debate. 'Flounce.' Whatever you do you will not win I'm afraid. That is not because FJ is a bunch of unhappy, socialist feminists. It will be because the individual poster who says you flounced is the type who go 'neener' for their own gratification.

Didn't quote your whole post, but I was talking with my husband about Ken and this thread.

I said Ken was up against a hydra, because defending a blog with so many posts means so many topics. Submission, spanking, the defense of the Pearls, Sunshine Mary, the medical stuff (I don't read the blog enough to have even remembered that was one of her deals...) He can't possibly keep up with the many heads of our critique of Lori's blog. And many of the people here are well schooled on internet debate, unswayed by logical fallacies and skilled at using quote buttons.

I'm not sure, even now, what his motivation was to come here. To threaten us with punishment for illegal use of the net? To convince us that lori is nice and so is he? To come as a voice in the wilderness and convert the evil heathens? Since I don't know his motivation, I don't know if he feels he is "winning" or not. I suspect he is as surprised as we are that he is still here.

I am amazed the thread has lasted this long. Usually threads wind down and die a natural death. But online debate is addictive, so maybe Ken is finding that to be the case... (someone is WRONG on the internet...)

I'm giving Ken props at this point. He's last 5 days longer than I expected and he has yet to tell any of us that we are going to hell (at least as far as I have seen). He even seems to use humor once in while. Pretty refreshing compared to what we normally end up with when someone comes to visit ;)

[Koala]

I am going to do my best to clean up the mess you made when you listed instances of me mischaracterizing you. Bear with me....

Koala:

As the parent of a daughter I have been approached about dance, pageants and the like. We said no because we were concerned about that very issue. We feel that it's highly inappropriate to place a child in a situation where they will be judged on the basis of their looks, or where they are in a situation that body image issues are a given. It doesn't make a hill of beans to us whether the child wishes to be in that situation or not. As parents we can see around corners that they can't always see around and it's our job to protect them.

So we are bad parents for allowing Alyssa to dance in ballet… her choice, her request, and her mom’s huge 5 day week driving to get her there. We did not have your wisdom Koala. You prove again you are smarter than us, but you also don’t acre about your child’s ambitions or desires.

I am going to assume that you are not suggesting what I said in this particular quote was a mischaracterization, because not once in the comment do I refer to you. Period. I speak as to my experience as a parent and my particular views on this topic.

Now I will answer your questions:

1) If your daughter struggled as much as she said she did, and if you as parents attributed her struggles to ballet, then yes I think you made a poor decision in allowing her to continue. My children are both soccer players, and if it caused them to battle depression I can assure you that they would be removed immediately.

You say I don't care about my childrens' ambitions or desires and that couldn't be further from the truth. However, (and this is a big however), if their ambitions or desires were leading them down a dangerous path then I wouldn't hesitate for a second to intervene. As a parent it is my job to encourage them in pursuits that will benefit them, and steer them away from pursuits that will not.

Koala:

Did you or Lori not notice that your daughter was eating poorly and depressed? Because I find Alyssa's words sad when you look at what Lori has to say:

It doesn’t work that way. We knew she was snacking and loved chips. She did not like to eat meals, just snack. So we talked to her about her snacking issues. You are the ideal parent. What would you have done? The fact that she turned out just fine means nothing to you. Mischaracterization. You do not know the facts.

First of all, this is a direct contradiction to the statement that you made in your previous post:

She was never anorexic like others in her group, and always ate well

Now to answer your questions:

1) I will spare you my repeating what I would have done, because I have already told you

2) Many people turn out well in spite of unfortunate times/events in their childhood. That does not make the events necessarily beneficial, nor does it excuse them if they were preventable.

I am unable to decipher your copy /paste job regarding the "perfect Alexanders", but I can assure you that I don't think you or your family is perfect. I think you may think you are, but I assure you that I don't concur.

Koala

For a supposed leader, it's amazing all of the things Ken didn't/doesn't know about.

I stand by this statement. Why do you feel it's a mischaracterization? Do you believe you are Lori's leader and the leader of your home? Do you not agree that there are a lot of things you don't know?

Koala

He didn't know when his daughter was struggling with depression and body image issues (but he damn sure noticed it when she put on an extra 5 lbs)

Mischaracterization: How about 2-3 1-2 hour talks about these things and helping her through it?

Ken, here is the quote that my statement was based on:

Her body image issues had nothing to do with her parents except we found out some of this stuff way too late.

It was long after Alyssa left home that she told us she would go to class and as they warmed up the teacher would single out girls and bring them aside to talk to them about their weight if she saw them gaining weight.

So either you knew and felt that having conversations with her was sufficient, or you did not know until she had already left home. If you knew, and you felt she was eating well then why did you later say you confronted her about an extra 5lbs.?

Koala

He didn't know that SSM was in favor of all kinds of nasty little things that would make their upstanding church friends go

Mischaracterization: Just because I do not frequent SSM’s bog I am a bad leader? The kids are all gone, who would you like me to control and watch over their internet activity? Lori says she does not read the comments … so is this on the blog or comments much because they are crass at times?

If you are indeed your wife's leader you are a poor one indeed if you did not realize she was promoting the blog of a woman who promotes marital rape. I stand by that statement. You have asserted that you would not allow her to read here, which implies that you assume responsibility for at least some of her internet usage. Endorsement of a blog that promotes marital rape is a pretty big thing to miss, no?

Koala

He didn't know that asking Lori to whisper in his ear that she had been a "naughty girl" had some rather suggestive connotations.

Mischaracterization: Ok… so what is the point? Because I do not kow this I am a poor leader?

This is not me mischaracterizing you - this is me implying that I believe you are lying.

Koala

He sure as hell doesn't know how to utilize the quote button

Mischaracterization: My quote buttons only just started working, and my edit buttons still don’t work. But that makes ne bad leader?

It makes you very difficult to read- coupled with your numerous typos, damn near impossible.

Koala

One would almost think that he'd be better off focusing on figuring out what the hell is going on around him instead of hanging around with us and trying to be Lori's "head"

The only thing you may have right in the whole set of comments.

Good, because I stand by it ;)

Koala

The fact that you continually feign ignorance about some of the suggestive things you have said leads me to believe it is the former.

False accusation: Is is not only possible I did not know, I had no clue. How do you find out these things? Remember, we try go avoid sin. And sex stuff is generally considered sin around here.

It is possible, but not probable. Lori reads all manner of filth on SSM's blog, so I don't for a min. buy your assertion that that pair of you live in blissful ignorance.

Koala

Yes to all of this, but particularly the bolded. It would never occur to either of us to label something as trivial as basketball and sex as sacred- so sacred in fact that you'd rather leave your very ill wife to deal with 4 children than put your ball down and go home where you belong.

Mischaracterization with no facts: IF I said basketball and sex were sacred find it… and it would have been “tongue in cheek.†Your issue with you husband lasted a few weeks or months. My wife had chronic illnesses. If I did not get out and do some exercise I could not be in a good mental, emotional or physical shape to help her. For you and another to harp on my basketball playing is so out of touch with reality. An absurd accusation.

Formergothardite addressed this better than I ever could have, so allow me to quote her:

Formergothardite:

I was the one who brought up basketball. I brought it up because you were going on about how men have the hardest job because they would have to die for their wives. I pointed out that the actually chances of them having to die for their wife(at least in America) are pretty much slim to none so this is pretty meaningless. Lori expects women to sacrifice, submit and endure their husband not making them a priority for YEARS. You wouldn't give up basketball that you played 3-4 times a week when you were actually home, which wasn't a lot since you traveled most of the year. So who has to make the greater sacrifice, the woman who submissively takes emotional abuse and neglect for years and years with the hope that eventually her husband will love her and make her a priority or the man who claims "I'll die for my wife." when what she needs is for him to give up his fun activities to be at home with her, but he doesn't? This is just pointing out how absurd the claim that men have the harder job when women are expected to submissively endure unhappiness for years while men don't have to do give up their sacred activities as long as they claim they will die for their wives.

I have a daughter with severe special needs, so the time of my husband and I having to sacrifice our "sacred" things is going to last a very, very long time. I do think that both spouses need to work together to figure out a way for them both to be able to stay in good shape both mentally and physically, but there have been long periods when this just wasn't possible because we were both needed at home to support each other. I personally think that if one spouse is traveling most of the year that it is very selfish of them to then go hang out with their buddies to play basketball 3-4 nights on the weeks they are home. If a woman was in this situation where her husband wanted her at home but to stay in shape mentally and physically she felt she needed to do something outside the home 3-4 nights a week, Lori would tell her to submit to her husband and figure out another way, wouldn't she?

The entire point was that the claim of "I'll die for my wife" is fairly meaningless and women are expected to sacrifice more. I used your basketball as an example because to give that up would have been a great sacrifice to you. Lori didn't need you to die, she needed you to give up basketball and figure out another way to get in shape mentally and physically.

Koala

Hmm...it's probably because as lawful pointed out you have a higher daily avg. post count than we do! Wow! How does someone who has to be the head for not only himself, but a 55 year old woman as well make it??? That's to say nothing of your job, which you are of course very successful at! 11.6 posts per day!

Mischaracterization: How can you blamed me for responding to 11-12 questioners each day and blame me for not using the quote button and you are so confused by my writing. As I first posted I answered all in one long post. You scolded me, so I asked for help and a nice person help me find the quote button which often does not show up in my browser, and if I put my cursor over the right hand corner is shows up “Reply with quoteâ€. So I reply with quote and you take offense at how many replies I make which correspond to the number of times questioned. I know this is a dig, but also a prime example of using something against me without sharing all the facts that you know I am the ne responding to many questioners.

I was not blaming you for anything. I was pointing out that while you made passive aggressive jabs at us for having the time to work and post here, you seemed to be finding plenty of time to post here yourself. In fact, you were posting so much you feared it would effect your business (which you tried to blame on us...I can quote you if you wish of course).

[Koala]

Responsible people should be able to separate out the difference between differing opinions and ideals that a blogger posts, and who they are as a person.

Are one's ideals and opinions not a large part of who they are as a person?

Lori and I are good, kind, generous and thoughtful people who just have a different worldview then you do.

This is your opinion of you and Lori.

Our world view is not new and is help by billions around the world.

How can you possibly assert that billions hold the same world view as you and Lori? Please site a source for this assertion.

I get that you hate our world view, but to hate us and write hateful things to and about us, is not decent human behavior... even if you think it is fun. You certainly would not condone it if a Fundie Forum was saying these things about you and trying to promote it in the Googgle SEO:

Lori is a hateful horrible specimen of humanity on Valentine's Day or any other day.

I start to feel bad that they are married to such assholes, but then I remember they "teach" that being a douchelord should be normative and how dare any woman expect different.

~ Yes that is me they are talking about with no facts as to what I do for Lori.

I'm going to have to give you a virtual high-five for introducing me to the term "douchelord." I'm going to make a sincere effort to work it into my regular rotation of insults.

Oh and: Lori Alexander is a fucking monster on Valentine's Day

So clearly, Lori and SSM are selfish bitches if they ask to be appreciated and treated with respect. Or something.

Just remember that karma is a bitch, and you and your kind have it coming in spades. FUCK YOU AND LORI!

I will end on that one… but I bet the list is mile deep and not just with me and with Lori. I will no repost all of the libelous lies told about me, and name calling.

There is a good reason why the owner of this Forum needed to take it private, perhaps behind a LLC or Nonprofit. The fear of being sued over what was being said is a real fear, I get it. They cannot control the irresponsible people who get onto the Forum and refuse to police the comments.

I did not make a single one of those statements and if you are asserting that I did, then I would highly suggest you quote me doing so.

[OkToBeTakei]

Ken says

I will end on that one… but I bet the list is mile deep and not just with me and with Lori. I will no repost all of the libelous lies told about me, and name calling.

libel

1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion.

Well good luck with that one.

[Koala]

Most men are built to follow along.

Then perhaps the husband should submit and allow the wife to be the head, no? ;)

[Koala]

It does, and she is highly responsible in sharing God's Word,

Much of what Lori shares is the word of Lori.

if they ask her a question she has a certain responsibility to give her ideas.

What is this notion based on? I would venture to say that her larger responsibility is acknowledging when she isn't equipped to give advice, or being willing to assert that she does not know enough about a given situation to offer advice.

You put too much "what if" in her answers and pay the 1% card that someone might be damaged by the advice.

Have you missed Lori's "hit harder" advice to the abusive mom? Do you know who would have been damaged by Lori's advice if that woman had taken Lori's advice? An innocent child.

Why go to a personal blog and ask for advice and expect anything but her personal views?

Confirmation bias. Google it.

She is not representing herself as a psychologist or some great authority or guru.

No, she's just representing herself as someone speaking on behalf of God. You yourself say she is sharing God's word, but I would suggest that the line between God's word and Lori's often gets blurred on Lori's blog.

Most of the greatest feminists who got many here to follow them were nobodies who wrote a book. Dang it! I may have just proved your point that sharing opinions and advice can be dangerous in leading weak minded people the wrong way.

Who are these feminists? Who here has claimed to be following a particular feminist?

That is your fear with Lori's advice, right?

My fear of Lori's advice is that she is often patently unqualified to give it. I further fear that one day an innocent child will be harmed when her abusive mom "hits harder".

[Koala]

Correct, most husbands are poor leaders because their wife will not follow. When she decides to follow, he steps up to the plate and becomes much more of a leader.

Per my husband (who said it better than I could have): "A poor leader blames their followers. A good leader inspires in people a desire to follow." <----He wanted me to be very clear that he is not playing into your notion that one person should lead a marriage while the other follows. He is simply addressing your assertion as to the makings of a leader.

[theologygeek]

I don't think this was your intention theologygeek, but your post rubs me the wrong way because it implies that women should only choose higher education and high paying jobs that "get you somewhere". Furthermore, it suggests that you should have your career picked out in your early twenties and that you can't deviate from that chosen life choice ever. Maybe Alyssa will continue teaching dance when she gets older, or maybe she will be a SAHM or go back and get a college degree. The choice to pursue professional dance may not be wise financially, and it is definitely associated with health issues - eating disorders and knee and hip problems - but I am really uncomfortable judging that choice, especially because it was something that Alyssa clearly wanted.

I agree with you and Ken on the ballet issue. It may have weight issues because it can involve being lifted by others and does show the body more. I am not saying it's a good thing, but blasting Ken and Lori over allowing their daughter to dance, something she wanted very bad and loved to do, seems in very poor taste. If I ever have a daughter and she wants to dance, I would allow her to do so. I did dance myself for a few years as a child/young teen and enjoyed it for the most part. I am sorry, but I can't judge them for their decision to let their daughter pursue higher level dance and professional dance. It is not cheap to pursue that and she was lucky to have parents with the means to support her dreams in this. No snark on that subject. There's many issues/concerns to address here with Ken, but I just don't see how the daughter being a professional dancer and allowing her to do that bad at all.

[latraviata]

Per my husband (who said it better than I could have): "A poor leader blames their followers. A good leader inspires in people a desire to follow." <----He wanted me to be very clear that he is not playing into your notion that one person should lead a marriage while the other follows. He is simply addressing your assertion as to the makings of a leader.

He is right.

I would like to add, that nations have leaders, companies have leaders.

A marriage should not have a 'leader' a marriage is a union between two equals. Leadership within a marriage causes an unbalanced growth. When one of the partners has to adjust her/his personality to serve and submit to the other, one can't speak of a marriage or a healthy relationship. Demanding people to alter their personality and give up their autonomy induces a very unhealthy, insincere and toxic situation is humanly impossible and it means one of the partners is forced to play a role.

[Angharad Crewe]

I agree with you and Ken on the ballet issue. It may have weight issues because it can involve being lifted by others and does show the body more. I am not saying it's a good thing, but blasting Ken and Lori over allowing their daughter to dance, something she wanted very bad and loved to do, seems in very poor taste. If I ever have a daughter and she wants to dance, I would allow her to do so. I did dance myself for a few years as a child/young teen and enjoyed it for the most part. I am sorry, but I can't judge them for their decision to let their daughter pursue higher level dance and professional dance. It is not cheap to pursue that and she was lucky to have parents with the means to support her dreams in this. No snark on that subject. There's many issues/concerns to address here with Ken, but I just don't see how the daughter being a professional dancer and allowing her to do that bad at all.

This isn't a dream. http://obsessed.koolhost.com/35.html It's a nightmare. If your boss told you that you got too fat (say 95lbs to 115lbs) and either you lost weight or got fired, you'd run to the lawyer. It's okay in the ballet world but not okay in other workplaces. Fat shaming isn't allowed in the Zsu thread (not that I thought it was considered fat shaming but some did), but it's okay for your own child to be fat shamed. And if you don't think your professional ballerina daughter won't get fat shamed by her boss because she put on 20lbs, then I have some nice land to sell you in Florida. A man telling a girl who gained 20lbs to lose weight or she's fired is not acceptable at all.

[dairyfreelife]

I agree with you and Ken on the ballet issue. It may have weight issues because it can involve being lifted by others and does show the body more. I am not saying it's a good thing, but blasting Ken and Lori over allowing their daughter to dance, something she wanted very bad and loved to do, seems in very poor taste. If I ever have a daughter and she wants to dance, I would allow her to do so. I did dance myself for a few years as a child/young teen and enjoyed it for the most part. I am sorry, but I can't judge them for their decision to let their daughter pursue higher level dance and professional dance. It is not cheap to pursue that and she was lucky to have parents with the means to support her dreams in this. No snark on that subject. There's many issues/concerns to address here with Ken, but I just don't see how the daughter being a professional dancer and allowing her to do that bad at all.

This isn't a dream. http://obsessed.koolhost.com/35.html It's a nightmare. If your boss told you that you got too fat (say 95lbs to 115lbs) and either you lost weight or got fired, you'd run to the lawyer. It's okay in the ballet world but not okay in other workplaces. Fat shaming isn't allowed in the Zsu thread (not that I thought it was considered fat shaming but some did), but it's okay for your own child to be fat shamed. And if you don't think your professional ballerina daughter won't get fat shamed by her boss because she put on 20lbs, then I have some nice land to sell you in Florida. A man telling a girl who gained 20lbs to lose weight or she's fired is not acceptable at all.

[formergothardite]

I haven't been reading any feminists books. :? It shows how disconnected Ken is that he thinks we all became feminists because we read books. Some were raised to believe that having a penis does not automatically make you a better leader or better at a job. Some of us who were not raised that way have gotten to this point through many steps. I doubt books converted most of us.

I'm not afraid that Lori's blog will turn people into believing in submission. I'm of the opinion that people who come to her for advice already believe in submission. I'm afraid that women will submit to abuse and convince themselves that they deserve it and lie about being happy because "feelings aren't important" and that children will get hurt.

Ken has lasted much longer than I expected. If Ken is only used to having these sorts of discussion in real life it can be a shock to the system to have them online at a place where you don't have the delete button to make people go away. In real life most people aren't going to have a conversation like this because it isn't socially acceptable. Especially if you are dealing with co-workers.