Courtship Rules

[HereticHick]

What confuses me is that courtship/dating with a purpose is supposed to be about "emotional control" yet the Bates kids all started their courtships with multiple proclamations of "I Love You" everywhere.

So basically, you fall in love with each other and THEN you start courting? That makes no sense.

[salex]

One thing I hope someone is teaching them--male and female--is that the wedding night is often not the best time in the world for sex, especially first time sex for both partners. Back in the early 80s, I worked in the wedding industry and various of the wedding magazines and planning books would include that little tidbit.... you've just come off of a stressful week, you have just been through a ceremony that is by definition life altering and you are likely very tired from the reception/traveling/whatever.... so waiting until the next day is not a crime... you are not breaking some sacred rule of marriage if you don't consummate the moment you can.

That said, the guy who is writing all the "marry them off young" stuff seems to suggest that love comes after marriage, and is not needed before. I have heard from at least one other guy that any true christian man and any true christian woman can be in a happy and successful marriage if they just follow the rules..... which means marrying for love is not needed.... toss that in with voddie whatshis name saying that maybe your unhappy marriage is the cross God has given you to bear and learn from and these people come across as the worst people in the world!

[Coconut Flan]

I heard that spiel of any true Christian man and woman could marry and make a happy marriage in a sermon once. It was during the visit around the churches time of my life. I never went back as that was an obvious untruth. I later found out it wasn't even believed by most of the ministers on staff.

[ljohnson2006]

I think the persons involved should be allowed to decide which route they go. Courtship shouldn't be forced upon anyone. It's definitely forced upon the Fundies.

[sunshine]

So, this whole courtship vs. dating thing among fundies as always fascinated me since I heard about when Smuggar and Anna courted. Every fundie families have their own standards on what a courtship is, obviously from the Bates who allow touching and wooing during courtship to the MaxHells who avoid touching at all costs to the Kellers who allow hand holding after engagement. Pecan Thief proposed to Priscilla around the same time his older brother, Adam, proposed to Valerie (Mueller) and I noticed a huge difference between the two couples in courtship and engagement. Compared to Pecan and Adam, Adam and Valerie avoided touching until wedding day whereas David and Priscilla held hands during engagement. It seems that the Waller brothers' sister held hands to her now husband during engagement too which made me wonder why Adam and Valerie chose a stricter path. After looking at the Mueller's family website (muellermice.blogspot.com), I saw that her other siblings had a "no touch" courtship and engagement. Being curious, I shot an email to Valerie and just asked her questions about her viewpoint of courtship. First off, she's super friendly and sent a pretty length email to explain everything but her responses were just so bizarre of what a typical fundie would say. Because it's a private email, I'll just summarize what she said in the email:

Courtship vs Dating

Dating is short time, not parent centered, may or may not lead to marriage and is usually just fun activities with no commitment. Courtship is long-term, Christ-centered, heavily parental involvement, marriage minded, fun activities with accountability. From a girl's perspective, a courtship takes off a lot of pressure since it puts her father in between her and the potential suitor as an extra layer of protection. She claims that there is still some pressure but because her father is along with her, it's not as stressful since he's able to shield her from unwanted suitors.

Why the no-touch courtship and engagement between her and Adam

Because touch is very stimulating for both men and women, she and Adam chose to not touch until their wedding day when her dad placed her hand into Adam's. All of her married siblings chose this path to remain fully pure until the day of the wedding. One of her sister's questioned if avoiding touch is necessary and whether hand holding is okay during engagement so she asked her Godly friends who touched before marriage. Much to her surprise, ALL of them ended up kissing before their wedding day. Her sister realized the importance of not touching until wedding day so her family has stuck by that guidance since. Yes folks, hand holding can lead to kissing, so be afraid. :roll: . However, that does not mean each couple have their own viewpoints on the whole "no touch". Adam and Valerie did not touch at all until their wedding day, except while passing food and their hands would touch (however, the contact was not prolonged, not repeated and avoided as much as possible), however, her sister Julie and now husband, Brian, would playfully bump into each other's shoulders and high-five each other, which the parents were fine with. So, hand holding leads to kissing but high-fives are okay? I thought touch was stimulating Pa and Ma Mueller?! Valerie did mention that some couples can hold hands by God's grace, like Davilla, but it just means the temptation is intensified with each touch. Hmm, whatever happened with "thou shalt not judge"? Sounds very judgmental :naughty:

How he put the ring on her finger

Most proposals, the guy will place on the lady's finger, however, Valerie's proposal was different in that Adam did not place the finger on her ring but rather she did it herself. :pink-shock: . Allow me to explain behind their reasoning: at the age of 16, Valerie and her dad signed a covenant, stating that she will submit to her father until her wedding day, seek her father's counsel and guidance during the courtship process, and remain pure until the wedding day. After signing the covenant, her father gave her a purity ring to wear on her left ring finger, which she has always kept on since then. When her other sisters were in a courtship, they moved the purity to their right ring finger and removed it completely after engagement, however, Valerie did not want to do that. She said that her submission to her father did not stop after the engagement, but rather, after he gave her to Adam, therefore, she wanted to continue to wear the ring on her ring finger until the wedding day. When Adam proposed, Valerie said "yes" and then explained the importance of her purity ring, to which Adam respected, so instead of him putting the ring on her finger, she did it herself. She wore the engagement ring during engagement pictures and each time, Adam would place the ring on her finger. The only difference is that he avoided touch that was not necessary. Valerie further explained that when a guy places the ring on the lady's finger, the touch should not be prolonged. When her brother was getting ready to propose to his now wife, his now FIL said that he could place the ring on her finger but to just try not to touch her. What...the..fuck..?! It's not like she's going to party in his pants if touch occurs! These people and their fear of touching before marriage :angry-banghead:

Accountability and Chaperones

Talking on the phone and texting were not chaperoned, HOWEVER, phone calls were in an open area so people could listen in (which they did not) and parents had full access to their phones and emails. Going out was always chaperoned, of course, no surprise there. For emails, the parents were always CC'd, but you know, accountability is key because you never know when an email can go from Jesus to sex. It can happen folks! No texting, email, and phone calls were allowed during the "pre-courtship" phase and nobody was allowed to know about this phase, however, after courtship, texting/emails were encouraged, and phone calls were limited to 1 hour 2x a week, with 1 call focused on Bible talk and prayers. After engagement, phone calls were unlimited and were highly encouraged. During courtship phase, no terms of endearment were allowed (sweetie, honey, dear, love) and that flowers were okay but red roses should be given after engagement (since it signifies love). Umm, if you're mind and heart is already saying "I LOVE YOU!", how does that work?! How are flowers are okay but God forbid a red rose is given? Wouldn't bringing flowers stir up unnecessary emotions that should not occur until after engagement?! I don't understand these people and their reasoning behind no terms of endearment and red roses until after engagement. If I could not say "I love you" to my boyfriend but my mind is already saying it, doesn't it defeat the purpose of having that rule? If you tell yourself to not think in those terms, how the hell can you say "I love you" after engagement when you have avoided complete emotional attachment beforehand?! And seriously, red roses are to only be used after engagement?! The fuck?! My boyfriend has bought me so many flowers of various kinds yet each time, it's made me feel all warm and giddy whether they were roses or carnations! Red roses do not stir up emotions, Muellers, buying your lady flowers does! If you don't want any emotional attachment prior to engagement, leave out the flowers and gifts to avoid it all. :angry-banghead:

I respect their decision and all but seriously, this is taking it to the extreme and half of those rules contradict one another (then again, most fundies viewpoints make no sense to begin with). Avoiding touch altogether stirs up emotions and stimulation whether they see it or not. Anything in moderation can be done but to just avoid it all and think that everything will be okay is also wrong. At some point, parents need to let go and allow their children to make decisions on their own, without the parents guilting or scaring them into making the choices that they want. Valerie was 30 when she was courting Adam, yet, she had to have her father screen Adam and had to pray about it with his wife before bringing it up to Valerie. Even though Valerie and Adam were 30/31, respectively, they could not be left alone due to fear of giving into temptation. I understand parents have fear of their children doing things that they should not at an early age but it's the parents who should talk to them and guide them into making right choices and not just avoiding those topics until the "time is right". At the end of the day, parents need to trust that their kids will make right choices and if they don't, hope that they will learn from it and avoid repeating the bad choice.

Even though the Bates family have chaperones and all, I do give them credit for allowing their children to just enjoy the "dating" aspect of courtship and be a couple instead of avoiding any emotional attachment prior to engagement. This whole "no touch" thing still makes no sense no matter how many differing explanations I get. Anything these fundies say about the importance of not touching just seems to contradict their guidances and it makes me want to do this every time :angry-banghead:

This could be the reason why she is married in her 30 and not 20s or even 18. She raised the bar and that shrunk the pool of available men for her.

[docmom]

I heard that spiel of any true Christian man and woman could marry and make a happy marriage in a sermon once. It was during the visit around the churches time of my life. I never went back as that was an obvious untruth. I later found out it wasn't even believed by most of the ministers on staff.

I believe this is what Rev Moon believed when he married his followers en-masse. In the end, all regligious fanatics seem to come down to the same ideas- repress women, control the young, everyone else is wrong and they're all out to get us.

[socalrules]

As a normal teenage girl, I had all kinds of impure thoughts even though I had not so much as kissed a boy. It is completely normal. Fundies seem to think that as long as you don't touch, all hormonal urges are repressed. Sometimes I think that if they could give their kids a pill to suppress all sexual urges they would buy a lifetime supply. By attempting to suppress and shame the natural urges of their children, they are actually offending the God they proclaim to follow so stringently.

[ADoyle90815]

I heard that spiel of any true Christian man and woman could marry and make a happy marriage in a sermon once. It was during the visit around the churches time of my life. I never went back as that was an obvious untruth. I later found out it wasn't even believed by most of the ministers on staff.

I've also heard that from the LDS/Mormon church as well, but the truth is that the Mormon divorce rate is about the same as the national average.

[anti-antichoice]

As a normal teenage girl, I had all kinds of impure thoughts even though I had not so much as kissed a boy. It is completely normal. Fundies seem to think that as long as you don't touch, all hormonal urges are repressed. Sometimes I think that if they could give their kids a pill to suppress all sexual urges they would buy a lifetime supply. By attempting to suppress and shame the natural urges of their children, they are actually offending the God they proclaim to follow so stringently.

I can attest to that phenomenon too. As a girl who hit puberty really early I was having sexual thoughts before I was fully aware of what they were. Fortunately I went to school and had regular interactions with males outside of my family so I had a societally acceptable outlet for those feelings, but I shudder to think what it's like for young girls in these mega-families who really only interact with men they're related to on a regular basis.

But then again, maybe that's why they're so scared.

[DGayle]

That said, the guy who is writing all the "marry them off young" stuff seems to suggest that love comes after marriage, and is not needed before.

I read a blog post by someone, I wish I could remember who, who had just gotten married. The page had a blue background and her husband looked a bit like a hillbilly. What stuck out to me was her saying that not that she and her beloved, or some other pet name, were married, they could start getting to know each other.

[DGayle]

As a normal teenage girl, I had all kinds of impure thoughts even though I had not so much as kissed a boy. It is completely normal. Fundies seem to think that as long as you don't touch, all hormonal urges are repressed. Sometimes I think that if they could give their kids a pill to suppress all sexual urges they would buy a lifetime supply. By attempting to suppress and shame the natural urges of their children, they are actually offending the God they proclaim to follow so stringently.

I know more than a few women, and men, turned on by watching Magic Mike. I wonder what the fundyspanation is for how impure thoughts happen even when you aren't in the same room as someone.

[Georgiana]

What confuses me is that courtship/dating with a purpose is supposed to be about "emotional control" yet the Bates kids all started their courtships with multiple proclamations of "I Love You" everywhere.

So basically, you fall in love with each other and THEN you start courting? That makes no sense.

Well, the Bates basically date but just don't call it that. It's because they have the pre-courtship "getting to know you" phase, in which you have singled one person out for special attention, but you're not yet courting (aka dating).

Then "courtship" is when you express formally your intent to move towards marriage with that person, and is when you can express emotions like love to that person (aka a committed relationship/engagement depending on your couple. Kelly has also mentioned that it can be skipped if the couple wants)

Then "engagement" is when you actively plan the wedding.

So really, the Bates don't do anything different than the norm, they just call it different names.

To go off that, one of my friends is married to a Muslim man. When they moved in together, they had to have a Muslim wedding so his family/friends wouldn't freak out. Then they got married legally and in a Catholic ceremony a couple years later. So I think they did sort of what the Bates do: have a normal relationship but call it different things for their religious community.

[Letgo]

What confuses me is that courtship/dating with a purpose is supposed to be about "emotional control" yet the Bates kids all started their courtships with multiple proclamations of "I Love You" everywhere.

So basically, you fall in love with each other and THEN you start courting? That makes no sense.

That type of expression is definitely NOT okay among some groups. I've read about courtships that ended but no one suffered any hurt because no one expressed any emotion. At least that is what they claim. Hearts are protected, you see, because all emotion is held in check until the wedding. As if no one has any feelings until the "I do" is spoken. Then they are in love immediately, I guess. I think the Maxwells and other families have mentioned hearts being protected because there was limited or no physical contact, limited emotion, and no alone time. Peter Bradrick says he never told his wife, Kelly, that he loved her or that she was beautiful because it would "insert an emotional element" and he wanted to withhold that until he had made a commitment to her. I think there is a belief among some that purity is violated if emotion is allowed. If you feel love then you might also feel lust. Plus, some believe that love is simply a choice. God brings the one He has for you, and you marry and love that person. Simple, end of story. A decision, no emotion needed.

In their blog, Kelly Bates mentioned something about courtship protecting Zach and Sarah from additional hurt when it ended. They at least acknowledge and allow emotion during courtship, as do the Duggars. I'm glad that in spite of the restrictions on courtship and engagement they can enjoy normal feelings and express them-verbally at least!