Shraders in Zambia - Welcome to Poisonwood, Stephen- Part 3

[shraderfriend]

You must have forgotten to hit "submit" -- in general, the policy at FJ is that people need to stand behind their words, and whatever they post will not be removed.

As for the issue of posting under pseudonyms, that is because, as others have said, we understand how the Internet works. I am one of the oldest people posting on this thread -- I was born when television was a new fad and the Internet was not even on the horizon. And yet, even I know not to have an Internet presence under my real name unless I want to be open to whatever reactions I get.

The Shraders, Duggars, Mark Driscoll, Doug Phillips, etc. are no more private than the Kardashians, and no more entitled to having everyone ignore the things they do that are worrisome or shocking.

I have a feeling you are stereotyping the people here. But I have been reading and posting here for years, and I think the picture is a lot broader than you imagine. Here is a list, off the top of my head, of the knowledge and worldviews that might lead FJers to be concerned about John Shrader:

- worrying when children are in danger - this may be the biggest issue for most people.

- having experienced being ripped off, controlled, or otherwise hurt by the style of religion that John espouses.

- recognizing that many of the Zambians John encounters are already Christian, and in no need of converting.

- recognizing that many of the Zambians John encounters, Christian or not, are in no need of converting.

- having experienced mission work, including in Africa, and being able to recognize how badly John is doing things.

- having traveled to Africa, and being able to recognize how badly John is doing things.

- being Christians, happy in their faith, who are concerned about the obnoxious, culturally insensitive, heretical, etc. things that others do in the name of "Christianity."

- being concerned about patriarchy, and women being wedged into lives that are damaging.

- having learned to spot a scam.

- having learned to be careful where their charity dollars go.

- having learned to spot a clueless, naive fool (and we do have some differences of opinion about where John falls on the purposefully scamming/just a disorganized idiot spectrum).

And I'm sure I'm missing dozens of reasons why the various members of FJ who have posted on this thread would naturally think "WTF is wrong with this guy?" when reading the details John Shrader makes public about himself, his "mission," and his family.

Thanks for the list.

worrying when children are in danger - this may be the biggest issue for most people. I agree with your there. I just don't see the danger that these children are facing. So is it going to Africa that poses the danger? Why is that ok for the kids born there and not for white American kids who want to go there and help? What makes us (Americans) better than those children?

having experienced being ripped off, controlled, or otherwise hurt by the style of religion that John espouses. Which style of religion is it that John is espousing?? Who is he ripping off, controlling or hurting?

recognizing that many of the Zambians John encounters are already Christian, and in no need of converting.

- recognizing that many of the Zambians John encounters, Christian or not, are in no need of converting. Those are just personal opinions about the need or lack of need for the people in that region.

- having experienced mission work, including in Africa, and being able to recognize how badly John is doing things.

- having traveled to Africa, and being able to recognize how badly John is doing things. So far reading his reports I have not seen him doing badly. Some things may have not gone how it was planned but things have been working out well on the mission so far. He may not be doing things perfectly or even how I or some others may do them does not equal "badly".

being Christians, happy in their faith, who are concerned about the obnoxious, culturally insensitive, heretical, etc. things that others do in the name of "Christianity." I think all Christians feel that way, they just disagree on what is heretical, obnoxious or insensitive.

being concerned about patriarchy, and women being wedged into lives that are damaging. I guess I have never been truly a witness to those sorts of things.

having learned to spot a scam. Teach me that one, because I get taken by them all assuming the best in everyone.

having learned to be careful where their charity dollars go. I agree there. I do not see what that has to do with John or anyone else being talked about here. Now we are getting to personal opinions it seems where people on here think they know best where money should be given.

having learned to spot a clueless, naive fool (and we do have some differences of opinion about where John falls on the purposefully scamming/just a disorganized idiot spectrum). I absolutely see no purposeful scamming with John and if he is so disorganized how does he always seem to "get whatever he wants" which I have seen complained about.

You are right that I have been stereotyping in the same way that this forum stereotypes the people they are discussing. I partially do it because it is hard to respond to so many people that are posting. But you all seem to think horribly about people who home school or practice courtship or have wives that are stay at home moms or wear dresses etc. All of those things are done at varying degrees on the spectrum by people. My biggest issue with many of those type people is that they sometimes have a tendency to look down on others and think they are so much better while they live a joyless life but smile on the outside to put on a show and their kids grow up and say I am out of here. But there are many that really are happy and kids turn out happy because they are sincere in their love toward God and others and know that nothing they can do can make God love them any more or any less. I feel terrible for those Christian home schoolers out there that are working so hard to be the perfect family or people. It is as if they try so hard out of some sort of duty rather than love. I have met some that actually sit up at night worrying they did not do enough to show their love for someone and plan to do more the next day. When it is laborous it is not love. But they do it because they feel they have to do things to earn God's love. It's crazy. Those people need help, but I have not seen that from the Duggars or Shraders.

[shraderfriend]

Is it normal thing for you to lie so you can understand other people? Not lying about people who it seems were nice to you isn't having to keep your guard up or even having to carefully construct all your words, it is just being a decent human.

Do you actually know what happened to the plane or has nobody pressed John on the subject?

No it is not normal. I was wrong.

I have no idea about the plane. You all probably know more about the plane than me. I know he learned to fly and someone donated the plane or something like that. I really don't care about the plane myself.

[formergothardite]

There are people here who are homeschoolers, stay at home wives, stay at home moms, and wear only dresses. So we don't all seem to think horribly about people who do that. It comes down to choice and if parents are homeschooling because it is in the best interest of their children or if they are doing it because they think public and private school is bad.

Can you honestly answer and say that John would be okay with Esther wearing pants, putting the kids in school and going out to get a job? Has John made it public that he feels that these things are okay? Is she homeschooling, not working, and not wearing pants because she has been told that is what God wants or is she doing it because she has been given the options to do otherwise and actually chose that path?

If you have not seen how patriarchy is damaging to women then you have closed your eyes as much as Ken has.

[shraderfriend]

I cannot honestly answer anything for John because I have no idea what he believes about those things. I can only answer for myself on those. I do believe that it is best to home school, we chose that long before we were in church. Our main reasons were, schools in our town were aweful, AND why would we want to send them away they are only kids for such a short time. My wife worked up until our first was born and she did not want to leaver her and go to work.

As far as pants go, my wife came to that on her own. She just felt more modest in longer dresses and my three girls like wearing dresses as well. I do think it is better and it makes them feel better to wear them. I don't mean they feel better than anyone else, they just feel more like girls and like being more modest. If they chose to wear pants, it would not bother me. Like any dad, there would be some guidelines as to what is appropriate to wear. They will have to make their own choices in life.

We have never had an issue with others wearing pants of sending kids to public school.

[shraderfriend]

Since a child rapist can only hurt your child in this life, but an atheist could lead your child away from Jesus and condemn them to eternal hell fire, would you prefer to have a rapist as a neighbor rather than an atheist? What should the government do to protect your children from the eternal harm that can be caused by atheists?

Back the previous set of questions first, is Jessa getting married? I though Jill was.

anyway, I would choose the atheist. An atheist cannot lead my child or anyone else to do anything. The only thing they can do is give them options, they still have to make a choice as to which way to go. I do not know why Christians are afraid of an atheist, they can not force you to believe like them any more than a Christian can. It is not ebola, it is not something to catch. It must be a conscious decision to go that way. Now the child rapist can force his way against the will of the person. I have seen plenty of people choose to become atheist even in good christian homes with christian neighbors.

[formergothardite]

I cannot honestly answer anything for John because I have no idea what he believes about those things. I can only answer for myself on those. I do believe that it is best to home school, we chose that long before we were in church. Our main reasons were, schools in our town were aweful, AND why would we want to send them away they are only kids for such a short time. My wife worked up until our first was born and she did not want to leaver her and go to work.

As far as pants go, my wife came to that on her own. She just felt more modest in longer dresses and my three girls like wearing dresses as well. I do think it is better and it makes them feel better to wear them. I don't mean they feel better than anyone else, they just feel more like girls and like being more modest. If they chose to wear pants, it would not bother me. Like any dad, there would be some guidelines as to what is appropriate to wear. They will have to make their own choices in life.

We have never had an issue with others wearing pants of sending kids to public school.

You have claimed in the past that John wasn't against public school, so I was assuming you knew his stance on things like this. From knowing him and his ministry, do you get the impression that he would be perfectly okay with Esther wearing pants, putting the children in school and getting a job?

Why do I send my children off to school every day? Because it is in their best interest. Keeping them at home to homeschool would be great for ME, but I have to do what is best for them. If your children reached highschool age and asked to go to school would you allow it if you were in an area with good public schools?

Why do you think it is better for your daughters to wear dresses? Having gone through a dress only stage growing up I can assure you that it wasn't always better for me or made me feel better.

Can you see how it comes down to choice? Patriarchy removes choice from women and harms them.

[Curious]

I suppose this is my cue for a first post on FJ? XY-type person here: Wife watches the 19K show, although I don't have enough nausea meds to get through an episode. I ended up here after she made a comment about something one of the kids had done and I was curious.

Since then I've been on an anthropological expedition through old posts- having lived in Lynchburg VA I'm well acquainted with fundy, but the window into FUNDY has been quite interesting.

Welcome. Now that you've started posting, you can't go back to lurking it's a (unwritten) rule ;)

[ViolaSebastian]

worrying when children are in danger - this may be the biggest issue for most people. I agree with your there. I just don't see the danger that these children are facing. So is it going to Africa that poses the danger? Why is that ok for the kids born there and not for white American kids who want to go there and help? What makes us (Americans) better than those children?

These children are in Africa without being immunized. They are not being given anti-malarials in a country in which malaria kills about 8,000 people a year--50% of them children. That right there is outright medical neglect.

And in answer to your question, no, it isn't any more or less acceptable that its happening to white American children. And frankly I am insulted that you are implying that I care more for white American children than I do children of any other race or nationality.

Oh, and you mentioned John "helping?" I actually laughed out loud, which I rarely do. In what way, exactly, is John helping Zambians?

[Curious]

Those people need help, but I have not seen that from the Duggars or Shraders.

Well to be fair, it's probably much easier for them since they really don't do all that much to actually educate their children based on all evidence we have seen so far ;)

[shraderfriend]

Why would going off to school be in their best interest? I am curious what it is that it better for them there than at home? I was in public school throughout my schooling years and I am not sure what the up side was. I enjoyed it and played sports, was a captain of the football team and so on. But I don't see that it really did much good for me. My wife on the other hand hated it at school and graduated at 15 just so see could get out of it and go on to college. She hated the cliques the back stabbing and so forth. I enjoyed that I could play sports and I never had a problem with the cliques because I never really had a "group". I just bounced wherever and talked to everyone. But neither one of us saw real benefits to being there.

I was just looking at the definition of Patriarchy to try to see what you are saying. I do not see the problem with the husband as head of the household as a Biblical principle. I guess what I have never encountered is the women not having choices part. Maybe I have seen a few that believe that the wife is to follow blindly whatever he says. But maybe one or two people like that.

[formergothardite]

White American children with no skills and who should be in school cannot be helping the children in Africa. John who has no skills and who has to use a lot of funds to support his many children isn't helping Africa. He imported lots of things, so he isn't even helping the local economy. If John wanted to save souls, there are plenty here in America. Bet he wouldn't get a Troupie and plane, if he stayed here, though. John is helping himself, not anyone else.

If the parents in Africa who have children at risk could choose to give them immunizations and remove them from the dangerous areas, I'm sure they would. All the money spent on the plane, the Troupie, and the fight lessons could have done a world of good in actually helping people.

[Curious]

Why would going off to school be in their best interest? I am curious what it is that it better for them there than at home? I was in public school throughout my schooling years and I am not sure what the up side was. I enjoyed it and played sports, was a captain of the football team and so on. But I don't see that it really did much good for me. My wife on the other hand hated it at school and graduated at 15 just so see could get out of it and go on to college. She hated the cliques the back stabbing and so forth. I enjoyed that I could play sports and I never had a problem with the cliques because I never really had a "group". I just bounced wherever and talked to everyone. But neither one of us saw real benefits to being there.

I was just looking at the definition of Patriarchy to try to see what you are saying. I do not see the problem with the husband as head of the household as a Biblical principle. I guess what I have never encountered is the women not having choices part. Maybe I have seen a few that believe that the wife is to follow blindly whatever he says. But maybe one or two people like that.

What would you think about a man (headship) asking his submissive wife to lie on tax forms? She should do that because she is submissive to the man in all things or what?

[ViolaSebastian]

I found this on the UNICEF website looking up malaria facts about Zambia, and I found this interesting:

Further, 89 percent of pregnant women received at least one dose of malaria preventive medicine and more than 70 percent received two or more doses.

Esther, pregnant in Zambia, received zero doses of malaria preventive medicine.

[formergothardite]

Why would going off to school be in their best interest? I am curious what it is that it better for them there than at home? I was in public school throughout my schooling years and I am not sure what the up side was. I enjoyed it and played sports, was a captain of the football team and so on. But I don't see that it really did much good for me. My wife on the other hand hated it at school and graduated at 15 just so see could get out of it and go on to college. She hated the cliques the back stabbing and so forth. I enjoyed that I could play sports and I never had a problem with the cliques because I never really had a "group". I just bounced wherever and talked to everyone. But neither one of us saw real benefits to being there.

I was just looking at the definition of Patriarchy to try to see what you are saying. I do not see the problem with the husband as head of the household as a Biblical principle. I guess what I have never encountered is the women not having choices part. Maybe I have seen a few that believe that the wife is to follow blindly whatever he says. But maybe one or two people like that.

The teachers at school have years of training on how to educate children, I do not. My youngest has multiple special needs and there is no way that I could provide her with the education she needs. She has teachers, therapists and a psychologists at her school who work together to create an education plan just for her. They are also equipped to teach this education plan. I am not. And if you and your wife don't have years and years of college education and experience, neither would you be. The question is, would even enter your mind to put a child with multiple special needs in public school. Would you automatically assume homeschooling would be better or would you look at things with an open mind?

Have you read places like Homeschoolers Anonymous? There are plenty of former homeschoolers who were miserable, hated it, longed for school, and whose parents wouldn't even consider it because they just automatically thought that homeschooling was better. I know people who cried when their parents pulled them out of school and then their education suffered because the parents just couldn't teach them the level they were being taught in school.

Do you know Ken Alexander? He too claim that there was only one or two cases patriarchy hurting women. This is also the man who says that men should grab their wives, slam them against the wall and restrain them there to "discipline" an unruly wife. His hero is a man who cut his wife off from money, transportation, friends and family and locked her in a secluded cabin till she learned to submit.

ETA: We did also look into homeschooling before she started school to see if that was going to be in her best interest, it was pretty clear that with homeschooling she would not get the therapy, education and daily social interaction that she needs. We have also looked into homeschooling our oldest during middle school since the middle school is not the best school. Our children are individuals and have individual needs, what is in the best interest of one might not be in the best interest of another.

[gustava]

I'm trying to decide on a winter nail polish color. Any suggestions?

[shraderfriend]

The teachers at school have years of training on how to educate children, I do not. My youngest has multiple special needs and there is no way that I could provide her with the education she needs. She has teachers, therapists and a psychologists at her school who work together to create an education plan just for her. They are also equipped to teach this education plan. I am not. And if you and your wife don't have years and years of college education and experience, neither would you be. The question is, would even enter your mind to put a child with multiple special needs in public school. Would you automatically assume homeschooling would be better or would you look at things with an open mind?

Have you read places like Homeschoolers Anonymous? There are plenty of former homeschoolers who were miserable, hated it, longed for school, and whose parents wouldn't even consider it because they just automatically thought that homeschooling was better. I know people who cried when their parents pulled them out of school and then their education suffered because the parents just couldn't teach them the level they were being taught in school.

Do you know Ken Alexander? He too claim that there was only one or two cases patriarchy hurting women. This is also the man who says that men should grab their wives, slam them against the wall and restrain them there to "discipline" an unruly wife. His hero is a man who cut his wife off from money, transportation, friends and family and locked her in a secluded cabin till she learned to submit.

I have never heard the name Ken Alexander. I am sure there are many cases of abuse among idiots that take things to far. I am just personally saying I have not seen it. The people you are mentioning sound like crazy people like Michael Pearl and his group. By Patriarchy I simply mean that the husband is head of the house and the leader of the family. What you are talking about is just plain crazy people doing disgusting things. If submission is forced, than it is not submission it is torture and abuse. I have never heard anyone teach that husbands are to "discipline" am unruly wife. From my experience if my wife is unruly, guess what, it is usually my fault. I did a bad job at leading and she has reason to be leary of future decisions. The husband does have to have a role in earning the submission of others.

I am glad you looked at all of your options for your daughter and decided to go with what you felt was the best thing for her.

[Curious]

I have never heard the name Ken Alexander. I am sure there are many cases of abuse among idiots that take things to far. I am just personally saying I have not seen it. The people you are mentioning sound like crazy people like Michael Pearl and his group. By Patriarchy I simply mean that the husband is head of the house and the leader of the family. What you are talking about is just plain crazy people doing disgusting things. If submission is forced, than it is not submission it is torture and abuse. I have never heard anyone teach that husbands are to "discipline" am unruly wife. From my experience if my wife is unruly, guess what, it is usually my fault. I did a bad job at leading and she has reason to be leary of future decisions. The husband does have to have a role in earning the submission of others.

Shraderfriend, I say this in all seriousness, before you decide why we say the things we do and feel the way we do take a little time to actually read some other threads in this forum. You seem to think Patriarchy is something vastly different than what it is in practice.

Here are a few threads, I suggest you start with, unfortunately they are pretty long, but they include the people we are talking about actually coming here and responding to us, as well.

Or actually you can find a lot of good links if you just read this recent blog post I made here: http://www.freejinger.org/blog/2014/10/ ... xceptions/

Edit: I decided to add a couple more links on second thought: Jeub Daughters: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23449

Our intoduction to CM: viewtopic.php?f=95&t=20840&p=684475&hilit=Cabinetman#p684475

[formergothardite]

Do you automatically assume homeschooling is in the best interest of all your children? How would you react to s child wanting to attend school?

You can't see how it is harmful to girls to raise them to believe that lacking a penis means they aren't capable of leading a family. That God doesn't think they can and should be leaders? You don't see how this can have a negative impact on girls?

[shraderfriend]

I will check it out. I see that there are differences of definitions on the term. I do not consider myself part of any group. My family came to our conclusions on these issues before we ever heard of Gothard, Maxwells, Phillips or Pearl or any other. I don't want to use the word "principles" because Gothard has hijacked it. But I believe that the bible does teach us (i cant get around saying it) basic principles that if we incorporate them we will see good things. The Principles we saw from ATI were not principles but rules, lots of rules and step by step things we must do to get results. Those are not principles, those are doctrines for a lack of a better term. On the other hand a principle is more of a general truth that can be applied in any situation in many ways in which if you follow it in any given situation you will walk away from that situation better for it even if it is not comfortable. For example, a principle could be "honesty is the best policy" that I believe you could find generally taught in the Bible. Had I followed that principle on this forum, I would not have to back pedal and apologize for things posted. I could have found a better way to learn more about why you all feel the way you do. Instead I was not concerned with that at the time and thought I could just clear it up later. So now, I get to feel ashamed and embarrassed that I did it. Basic biblical principles when applied will give peace when applied. When people make principles in to laws or create their own laws as to how to apply a principle, we get crazy overlords.

[anniebgood]

I'm trying to decide on a winter nail polish color. Any suggestions?

I got a lovely bronze glitter gel manicure the last time. Now that November is looming, I'll go for an oranger one like Juice Bar Hopping from OPI.

I have an app from OPI on my iPhone and iPod and it's great for showing the stylists what colors I want.

[Munasa]

I got a lovely bronze glitter gel manicure the last time. Now that November is looming, I'll go for an oranger one like Juice Bar Hopping from OPI.

I have an app from OPI on my iPhone and iPod and it's great for showing the stylists what colors I want.

Nathan Maxwell taught you about that - right?

[longtimelurker6]

God forbid girls shouldn't "feel like girls". :roll:

[RachelB]

I'm trying to decide on a winter nail polish color. Any suggestions?

Soulstice Nail Colour in Troy. I was wearing it today and a friend described it as "charcoal gray with rainbow sprinkles." It looks like a glitter polish but is smooth in texture. The overall effect is somewhere between charcoal and bronze, depending on ambient light.

[formergothardite]

You know what, it greatly annoys me that SF accused us of not caring about children in Africa when he defended John "joking" about how the starvation in Africa was going to help him lose weight.

[treehugger]

There's a whole lot that's offensive about Johnny Boy and his friend. Probably the most offensive IMO being that John has to go and proselytize to the Zambians (many of whom are already Christians) because their religion and version of Christianity isn't good enough. Talk about a "white saviour" complex. In case you are wondering, Shraderfriend, that isn't a good thing.