Ken Explains it All - Lori & Ken Alexander - Part 3

[kaetrin]

As usual I am game...

1. There are so many circumstances that this can apply to and definitely, a full and complete discussion, many time son the subject is necessary, and maybe even with a counselor in some circumstances. I have two friends who married two sisters. Both sisters for some reason preferred sex once a month and I do not recall the details as it was years ago, but my sense what that it was not that pleasurable for them. Both of the friends were the opposite extreme... all about sex... so the mixture was lethal to the marriage, but being fine Christian men, both compromised on sex about twice a week.

I find it very telling that Ken not only picks frequency of sex as his example of this legendary marital impasse in which a single decision maker is necessary, but also that in this particular anecdote, the husbands are "fine Christian men" for putting up with the unsatisfactory "compromise" of 2x/week (before they had a "truly biblical" marriage in which compromise was no longer an issue because they got their own way all the time, I presume?), and the wives don't get any credit for having sex about seven times more often than they really preferred.

[SquirrelySquirrel]

I'm not a big cat person, plus my husband is allergic, so I can't speak for training them. But I've always had dogs. The meanest thing we've done is spray our dog with a spray bottle to break his habit of jumping on people. Even that was a last resort. Nothing else we tried (shaking can of pennies, stepping into his jump, turning our backs as he jumped, etc) worked, and we often have lots of kids at our house who should be able to walk in the door without getting jumped on, even though it was from nothing more than excitement. He really thinks he's one of the kids. :) And it's really worked. We rarely have to get a bottle out anymore, and just seeing it makes him stop. He came to us very neglected and still full of puppy energy, and we had to start at square one with a nearly two year-old dog. But mostly, just like a toddler, he wants our praise and approval. It may take a little more effort, but heaping the praise on for good behavior sure is a lot more pleasant for everyone involved.

And my heart goes out to all of you who have lost pets. We had to have our 13.5 year-old dalmatian put down last summer and I'm still a mess over it. It was by far the hardest thing I've done in my adult life.

[Helena]

I get where Ken is coming from. He's only regurgitating what I lived through for years. Fundies are creepy;overtly interested in sex and whether the woman is doing it wrong. Hint: She's always doing it wrong.

I had an abusive husband and when trying my best to be a godly woman and win him without a word and all that nonsense, I sought Christian counseling. Three different pastors, my father, a Lori-like counselor, as well as my mother were all intensely interested if I was giving it up or not and on what terms. That's all it boils down to in their world, despite their verbose claims otherwise. It will always come back to this. Know why? Because they are dogs returning to their vomit.

Ken will continue his regurgitation. He can't help it. It's an intrinsic trait across the board with fundies.

[Hane]

I'm wondering whether Ken thinks Google works like that trope in old crime dramas--keep the bad guy on the phone long enough for the cops to.be able to tap.the call!

How wonderful of.Ken to.predict how latraviata's son would have reacted to child abuse.

Time to file my nails and soak off the polish. Just a coat or two of.clear lacquer will.do for tonight.

[latraviata]

I'm not a big cat person, plus my husband is allergic, so I can't speak for training them. But I've always had dogs. The meanest thing we've done is spray our dog with a spray bottle to break his habit of jumping on people. Even that was a last resort. Nothing else we tried (shaking can of pennies, stepping into his jump, turning our backs as he jumped, etc) worked, and we often have lots of kids at our house who should be able to walk in the door without getting jumped on, even though it was from nothing more than excitement. He really thinks he's one of the kids. :) And it's really worked. We rarely have to get a bottle out anymore, and just seeing it makes him stop. He came to us very neglected and still full of puppy energy, and we had to start at square one with a nearly two year-old dog. But mostly, just like a toddler, he wants our praise and approval. It may take a little more effort, but heaping the praise on for good behavior sure is a lot more pleasant for everyone involved.

And my heart goes out to all of you who have lost pets. We had to have our 13.5 year-old dalmatian put down last summer and I'm still a mess over it. It was by far the hardest thing I've done in my adult life.

Ken and Lori Alexander are too shortsighted to understand that there are numerous non violent ways to raise children. They lack imagination and they are lazy. Good parenting requires effort, energy, creativity, empathy and common sense. The easiest and most primitive way is beat them up. Effective for the quick fix, but on the long term it is instilling fear, not trust.

Kicking a cat, well that doesn't surprise, the same primitive reaction.

[latraviata]

I'm wondering whether Ken thinks Google works like that trope in old crime dramas--keep the bad guy on the phone long enough for the cops to.be able to tap.the call!

How wonderful of.Ken to.predict how latraviata's son would have reacted to child abuse.

Time to file my nails and soak off the polish. Just a coat or two of.clear lacquer will.do for tonight.

Initially I got mad, now I come to think it, the man is so incredibly ignorant and complacent. If my late son could respond to this, he would pour me a nice glass of wine and say, maman, he is an idiot, not worth it.

[Mice]

Initially I got mad, now I come to think it, the man is so incredibly ignorant and complacent. If my late son could respond to this, he would pour me a nice glass of wine and say, maman, he is an idiot, not worth it.

And your dear son, child of a wise and wonderful woman, would be completely correct. Do have that glass of wine, and I'll join you and we can drink to the memory of your bright child.

[SunnyAndrsn]

And your dear son, child of a wise and wonderful woman, would be completely correct. Do have that glass of wine, and I'll join you and we can drink to the memory of your bright child.

Cheers, Latraviata. Your son sounds great, may he rest in peace.

[Ken]

This is the silliest comment I have ever heard you write: Now I know you must be toying with me. I had answers written to your other questions which I deleted. What a waste to respond.

It is so sad it bears repeating:

Third, how on earth do you manage to assume that the husbands would have had the noblest of intentions, while the wives would have had the worst? "Look beyond the immediate to the longer term"?? Give me a break. We are talking about a situation of a horny husband who wants to have sex with his wife despite the fact that she clearly doesn't want it. Leaders do not have sex with subordinates. Psychiatrists do not have sex with patients as part of treatment. In fact, if sex happens in either of those situations, it's usually cause for immediate dismissal. Also, if a wife is clearly not comfortable with sex, why would you automatically assume that she's taking control and not making any effort - especially if she is not part of the conversation?

What an idiotic statement. This man is her husband. The one she married and gave every indication in the world she would be wife to him which includes sex! Sex is generally considered part of a marriage contract... not a contract with your psychiatrist.

(Leaders do not have sex with subordinates. Psychiatrists do not have sex with patients as part of treatment.) What a mind full of illogic...

I done with this waste of time.

[JenniferJuniper]

I done with this waste of time.

[formergothardite]

My two questions keep getting ignored.

[latraviata]

And your dear son, child of a wise and wonderful woman, would be completely correct. Do have that glass of wine, and I'll join you and we can drink to the memory of your bright child.

My younger son aka Rigolo, was everything Ken isn't. Gentle, compassionate, intelligent and laconic, with a great love for animals and children and a profound aversion to anything that has to do with religion.

[latraviata]

Promise?

[latraviata]

My two questions keep getting ignored.

You weren't actually expecting a coherent response, were you??

[Koala]

I am sick, so my time here tonight is limited, but I just had to chime in and tell you Ken that as a mother I am repulsed that you had the gall to imply that you know how Lat's son would have reacted if she'd intentionally brought him pain. It's obvious she takes great comfort in the fact that she never spanked him, and that their family values were/are above that kind of interaction. To imply that he would have thought in such a way, when it's clearly not how she (the person who actually raised him) wants him to be represented has just about left me speechless.

You need to learn boundaries. You should have stopped at "I am sorry for your loss". Really.

Lat...I hope this is appropriate. I really didn't want to speak on your behalf, but I was livid when I saw that he'd spoken on behalf of your son. There is an excerpt from a book that I've always loved, and I immediately thought if it when I read Ken's comment.

I intend so to treat my children, that they can come to my grave and truthfully say: 'He who sleeps here never gave us a moment of pain. From his lips, now dust, never came to us an unkind word.†~Robert Ingersoll

I know you are living every mother's worst nightmare, and that the order of things seems to be all wrong, but heaven forbid any mother has to sit in your shoes, I think it would be a comfort if they could say they never purposely brought their child a moments pain. You can say that, and you can take comfort in it.

I know I am rambling...I hope I haven't offended you or overstepped my bounds...

[dairyfreelife]

As usual I am game...

1. There are so many circumstances that this can apply to and definitely, a full and complete discussion, many time son the subject is necessary, and maybe even with a counselor in some circumstances. I have two friends who married two sisters. Both sisters for some reason preferred sex once a month and I do not recall the details as it was years ago, but my sense what that it was not that pleasurable for them. Both of the friends were the opposite extreme... all about sex... so the mixture was lethal to the marriage, but being fine Christian men, both compromised on sex about twice a week.

Fine Christian men...also, if it was not pleasurable to them, they should have tried to work on maybe finding ways to try and make it work. See a counselor to figure out the real issues.

Fast forward years later and both wives began to enjoy sex more, or found other ways to sexually please their men. The issue as it turned out was passed down from their mother and her view on sex.

And what about the men pleasing their wives...

Here would be my point: I think that these two couples lost out on 15-20 years of love making and the husbands were deprived not because there was not a real problem which needed to be worked through, but because they did not have a Biblical marriage. Ina Biblical marriage the husband will always look out for the best interest of his wife, but as the leader in the relationship he may look beyond the immediate to the longer term, and make requests that the wife would willingly try to honor. In these marriages the wives took control over the sex life and guarded it, not sharing equally or willing to explore how to move beyond the impasse. For 15+ years it was simply "no interested" and these Christian husbands could do nothing but try to love them anyway. If these two had had Lori mentoring them I believe they would have found the place they are now with sex much faster.

and it took them 15 years to finally decide to find out the real issue, that's not the wives fault alone, it's both their fault if you want to point fingers. And sorry, but no, husbands do not always look out for the best interest of their wives and this is so insulting to women I don't even know what to say. Women never think long term, she won't make good requests, and those husbands were being just good Christian men to deal with it, pardon my language but that is total bullshit. Honestly, they don't need you and Lori, they need a real qualified therapist.

So there is no pushing or pulling in Biblical marriage, but the when the structure is set up that the husband is to be sensitive to his wife's psyche and needs, and she the same for him, the movement to the middle should be much easier... not harder. The husband predisposed to love sacrificially, and the wife predisposed to be submissive, get much faster growth and results than a 50-50% marriage.

evidence for this please because I am not buying it at all, sorry. When both couples decide to love sacrificially, that's when you get real results.

Where this goes wrong, as will be pointed out by the FJ group is when the husband is not a sacrificial lover of his wife... but certainly this went wrong anyway when the wives were unwilling to explore sex, or other means of satisfying their husbands.

2. I think I answered this one above, but it would be about leadership in moving the issue to a resolution. If he is nagging her, manipulating her to have sex, then it is all wrong. If he is reminding her that he needs sex 2-3 times a week, and explores other satisfying measures, this is the nature of compromise, but it is compromise lead by a loving husband. Any Christian wife is free to simply say "no" to a certain frequency to sex, but she must then deal with the Biblical admonitions on the subject. A godly husband will be patient and kind, but that does not mean he has to give up on what he believes is fair or appropriate. REMEMBER! A Christian wife CAN choose at any time not to be submissive, but then she has to deal with the Lord on the subject. It is not the end of the world, and I was a husband who patiently (most times) waited for my wife to decide that submission is a good thing, especially when marriage to a loving husband.

So if they say no or don't choose submission, they are not being good Christians and they'll answer to god for their sin.

3. Definitely a) spiritual and emotional bonding, but also b) a release of physical needs. One does not exclude the other. I wish it was always about a) but realistically in today's fast world of responsibilities, time seems so short that too many couples cut to the b) with little or no intention to fulfill a) in what they are doing. This applies to wives and husbands... get the physical taken care of fast so we can move on. Yet, sex is a great bonding tool God has given to help develop and keep strong connections emotionally and spiritually in terms of oneness It is amazing how great make-sex can be, and amazing how a relationship often overlooks many smaller issues when two become one, and enjoy it together.

Men and often women, have real physical needs when it comers to sex because of their chemical make up. If sex is not a regular part of that marriage one often sees the spouse finding other godless outlets for their natural desires. Yes, they are responsible for their porn, or affairs, or whatever, but a spouse depriving another is not being helpful to maintain the marriage bed as pure.

I know I will get whacked for something I wrote, but you have your answers. I am responding from the head and heart on a fast basis, so to whack me over this is really unfair. I do not have time to proof read let along make sure I have communicated what I really mean to say... so give a little here. It is not like I have written books on this subject before... just giving a thoughtful opinion.

And actually, we can disagree with you and no, it's not unfair. You are just as free to disagree with me the same way.

[latraviata]

I am sick, so my time here tonight is limited, but I just had to chime in and tell you Ken that as a mother I am repulsed that you had the gall to imply that you know how Lat's son would have reacted if she'd intentionally brought him pain. It's obvious she takes great comfort in the fact that she never spanked him, and that their family values were/are above that kind of interaction. To imply that he would have thought in such a way, when it's clearly not how she (the person who actually raised him) wants him to be represented has just about left me speechless.

You need to learn boundaries. You should have stopped at "I am sorry for your loss". Really.

Lat...I hope this is appropriate. I really didn't want to speak on your behalf, but I was livid when I saw that he'd spoken on behalf of your son. There is an excerpt from a book that I've always loved, and I immediately thought if it when I read Ken's comment.

I intend so to treat my children, that they can come to my grave and truthfully say: 'He who sleeps here never gave us a moment of pain. From his lips, now dust, never came to us an unkind word.†~Robert Ingersoll

I know you are living every mother's worst nightmare, and that the order of things seems to be all wrong, but heaven forbid any mother has to sit in your shoes, I think it would be a comfort if they could say they never purposely brought their child a moments pain. You can say that, and you can take comfort in it.

I know I am rambling...I hope I haven't offended you or overstepped my bounds...

Thank you Koala and your words are very comforting, more than you know.

I am going to google that Ingersoll book, thank you for bringing that to my attention!

Beautiful words!

In fact that is what a decent, loving parent tries to achieve and I am not pretending to be a perfect mother, I am not.

[dairyfreelife]

There's not any words I feel I can give you latrav for your losses, so I hope a hug will suffice. :hug:

[latraviata]

There's not any words I feel I can give you latrav for your losses, so I hope a hug will suffice. :hug:

I love a good hug! Better than spanking......

[lipstickgoalie]

How is that an illogic statement Ken? It is against any ethics rule in the book for a psychiatrist to have sex with a patient. It is equally unethical for a minister, priest or rabbi to have sex with a congregant. It is also unethical for a teacher to have sex with a student even if that student is over the age of consent. Why? It is an abuse of power. It isn't idiotic. It's the truth.

There are many reasons that a woman would not want to have sex. Depression, pain, exhaustion. Those are just a few. Lady parts are complicated. Sometimes they don't cooperate and even with supplementary products to assist it can be a messy uncomfortable act that can leave a woman feeling dejected and embarrassed. All because something that should work correctly doesn't. And it is equally embarrassing to be grilled about why you don't want to have sex. Which contribute to the problem.

Sex is not an obligation asshat. Any man who pressures his wife to have sex when she says she isn't interested is not a real man. Badgering someone into having sex is abusive and coercive and can be considered rape.

And haven't you promised to leave us before? I will believe it when I see it.

[Jezebel]

I am responding from the head and heart on a fast basis, so to whack me over this is really unfair. I do not have time to proof read let along make sure I have communicated what I really mean to say... so give a little here. It is not like I have written books on this subject before... just giving a thoughtful opinion.

For someone with such "thoughtful" opinions, you do a remarkably ineffective job of presenting them.

I would imagine that, if there was deep and sincere thought behind them, you'd be able to express them clearly. It's easiest to get across a message you truly believe in because you've had to think about why you believe it in the first place. But the comfortable set of beliefs one adopts to prop up their fragile ego inevitably results in rambling, evasive, half-baked screeds.

You can't even take responsibility for your own words, Ken--why should anyone take them (and you) seriously? You post and post and post, and it's so many words words words, And you repeat the same irrelevant points ad nauseam while refusing to answer direct questions, and you've admitted to not even reading replies to you--yet we're supposed to be gracious and understanding of the sloppiness of your responses when you do deign to explain yourself? Somehow we're unfair for expecting you to show up for an argument with the ability to hold your own position in an intelligent, well-reasoned manner, and you want us to play nice and go easy on you?

You have got to be kidding.

That said, I could throw in my own biting-cat anecdotes, but I'll just say this on the subject: Of course Lori would see nothing wrong with kicking a cat, after ascribing false motives to it (claiming it was a "mean" cat, as if the attack was against her, personally).

This is a woman who gave birth to four babies, then went on to beat each of them in turn for showing age-appropriate behavior. She could have, as part of her "always learning," decided to learn something about child development. I mean, you give birth to babies; doesn't it make sense to understand their experience of the world, their emotional needs, and how to gently shape their behavior in a developmentally-appropriate, non-violent way? But no. She hit them, and if that didn't work she just hit them harder. You two had a leather strap on hand to use specifically for inflicting pain upon your children--because evidently, neither of you cared enough to learn how to do otherwise.

Do you maybe get an inkling of why we find you two so despicable? (I doubt it, but I'll ask anyway.)

And Lori still hasn't seen fit to learn, and she's now encouraging other mothers to inflict pain on their children, rather than bother with learning how kids tick. She was positively gleeful when your son force-fed your crying, terrified granddaughter. What a lovely family legacy! Such a loving family! :(

So given that her own children weren't even worth understanding or relating to on their own terms, I would hardly expect her to try understanding a cat's inappropriate behavior and how to gently correct it. Children are willful, cats are mean, the answer will always be "hit them, and if they don't stop hit them harder." Why strive for understanding, when instilling fear through violence takes so much less effort?

[lipstickgoalie]

I love a good hug! Better than spanking......

Latraviata, you have so much grace. I am so incredibly sorry about the unkind and unthinking words Ken spewed at you. I don't know what else to say beyond I am sorry. If I ever find my way to the Netherlands again I would love to have a walk and a long talk with you and to give you a big hug. Also chocolate and/or cheese. I really liked the cheese when we were last there. I hope that doesn't sound weird. You are on the top 5 of Jingers I would like to meet for real one day. I don't often mix my online and regular life but there are some exceptions I am willing to make.

[lilith]

I am sick, so my time here tonight is limited, but I just had to chime in and tell you Ken that as a mother I am repulsed that you had the gall to imply that you know how Lat's son would have reacted if she'd intentionally brought him pain. It's obvious she takes great comfort in the fact that she never spanked him, and that their family values were/are above that kind of interaction. To imply that he would have thought in such a way, when it's clearly not how she (the person who actually raised him) wants him to be represented has just about left me speechless.

You need to learn boundaries. You should have stopped at "I am sorry for your loss". Really.

Lat...I hope this is appropriate. I really didn't want to speak on your behalf, but I was livid when I saw that he'd spoken on behalf of your son. There is an excerpt from a book that I've always loved, and I immediately thought if it when I read Ken's comment.

I intend so to treat my children, that they can come to my grave and truthfully say: 'He who sleeps here never gave us a moment of pain. From his lips, now dust, never came to us an unkind word.†~Robert Ingersoll

I know you are living every mother's worst nightmare, and that the order of things seems to be all wrong, but heaven forbid any mother has to sit in your shoes, I think it would be a comfort if they could say they never purposely brought their child a moments pain. You can say that, and you can take comfort in it.

I know I am rambling...I hope I haven't offended you or overstepped my bounds...

I know those words were for Latraviata, but thankyou. They are exactly what I needed to hear right now. I had just yelled at my youngest son (who is driving me insane) and they reminded me to apologise to him for yelling and to try to keep calm. Thankyou.

[latraviata]

Latraviata, you have so much grace. I am so incredibly sorry about the unkind and unthinking words Ken spewed at you. I don't know what else to say beyond I am sorry. If I ever find my way to the Netherlands again I would love to have a walk and a long talk with you and to give you a big hug. Also chocolate and/or cheese. I really liked the cheese when we were last there. I hope that doesn't sound weird. You are on the top 5 of Jingers I would like to meet for real one day. I don't often mix my online and regular life but there are some exceptions I am willing to make.

I would love that too! You are always welcome and I have a guest room!

[latraviata]

I know those words were for Latraviata, but thankyou. They are exactly what I needed to hear right now. I had just yelled at my youngest son (who is driving me insane) and they reminded me to apologise to him for yelling and to try to keep calm. Thankyou.

Good for you! We are not perfect mothers none of us are! At least we recognise our flaws and shortcomings and that's quite something.