Jump to content
IGNORED

Christian Domestic Discipline


calimojo

Recommended Posts

Ok, please know that this might be a disturbing topic.

On a recent thread about Ken A and his recommendation to restrain your wife's arms if she is misbehaving, or some other such misogynistic nonsense, I became curious about the Alexanders. I never heard of them before FJ, and have seen them mentioned so often, but I didn't know much about them

So while reading a thread about them on FJ, something was mentioned about Christian Domestic Discipline, which was yet something else I did not know about, so I read up on that and I literally just can't get it out of my head. (I am not saying that LorKen participate in this, but that this is an extreme vision of female submission)

I was so sad and so upset about this. I have a 21 year old daughter and I really feel like she is entering adulthood at a time when the future for women is shaky. Porn is nearly mainstream now, The Anti-feminists are gaining more of a following, the Extreme fundamentalism seems to be growing, Sharia Law is becoming more widespread etc.

What I found in reading up on CDD is a subculture of supposedly devout, fundamentalists who take the female submission theme to the next darker level. Legitimizing physical violence against wives of these men, usually in the form of Spanking, verbal humiliation and humiliating sexual punishment is apparently what this CDD movement is all about.

And, what is so sad, is that many of the proponents and blog writers on the subject are the women themselves, who have been so damaged by this, that they see it as a form of love. That a loving and Godly Husband must punish them or they are not doing their duty as the headship. In addition to bestowing spankings and other punishments when the women get 'sassy', they also engage in "maintenance" spankings on a regular basis as a way of making sure the wife knows the man is in charge, lovingly in charge. There are even special pantaloons that can be worn to maximize exposure or possibly pain.

So, obviously this is all very twisted and hopefully, is just a fairly small number of fringe patriarchal fundamentalists who are part of this culture. In truth I think most that are part of the CDD culture are a weird hybrid of people into BDSM and also fundamentalist Christianity, But, I just can't help but think of the continuum of submission in the patriarchal fundamentalist culture overall.

The idea of the male headship, espoused by the likes of the Duggars and Bates likely doesn't directly promote this kind of violence against women, but when you think about it, it really isn't all that far removed. And while I don't think that JB or Gil Bates have been physically abusive to their wives, I worry about the years of "training" that their daughters have been through. If, as infants they have been taught to submit to men, instantly obey, not complain and never to question authority, then I worry that this generation of children and young adults are sadly ripe to be taken further advantage of by more fringe elements of their culture all in the name of godliness, submission and obedience.

The young women that these girls will grow into will hopefully flee the culture altogether, but the ones who don't will be easy pickings by abusers. They will partner in their own abuse by believing that the more abuse they receive the more they are loved by their monstrous spouses. They will convince others that this is normal and something they should seek out.

I literally had tears in my eyes reading one of the blogs as a women wrote almost poetically about how the spankings have "released her" and made her marriage closer. One women who feared she wasn't being spanked often enough, even set up an extremely ridge set of housekeeping standards and convinced her husband to review it with her daily. If she misses the mark, then he will punish her for failing. She even said her husband doesn't really care to spank her, but agrees to it for her sake. All throughout her writing is exposition on how this is biblical and a man's duty and responsibility.

The young women of patriarchy are at serious risk as are the men of course who are being placed into their roles as well. The cute and quirky Duggars and Bates can seem harmless enough, but they are the lipstick on the proverbial pig. Legitimizing Patriarchy will open the floodgates for more and more women and children to be abused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of the couples participating in CDD actually are just into kink and need a jesusy label to attach to their kink.

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. In the world of spankophilia, it seems that there are more people (of both sexes) who would rather be recipients than givers--hence women like the one cited above who prodded her husband into something he'd rather not do.

As I've said elsewhere: People--own your kink. Make it safe, sane, and consensual. And, for the love of God, keep Jesus the hell OUT of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, that most of these people are into kink and use religion as a way to make it "ok", but my fear is that as the generation of Fundie kids growing up now begin to find their mates, etc, that their lifelong indoctrination into patriarchy, obedience and submission makes them so vulnerable. And as others are drawn (inexplicably, imo) to the Christian Patriarchal movement, that what is preached as submission to husband, will morph as in the language of Ken A into physical actions (holding arms, wrists, etc), to something worse and these young women who aren't doing it for their own kinky needs, will be convinced they have to put up with increasing physical and emotional abuse all in the name of God.

When I think of the Duggar girls for example, anyone who has seen the show knows they are raised to be obedient and submissive. How hard or easy would it be for some controlling jerk with a twitchy palm, a la Christian Grey, to see a pool of attractive and submissive women to pick from. All anyone has to do is be a decent actor, quote some scripture and kiss some JB butt and he could have his pick from the remaining girls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this. These kids, raised in "instant obedience" and fear of corporal punishment (and restricted choice in clothing and appearance), have no concept of physical or personal autonomy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. In the world of spankophilia, it seems that there are more people (of both sexes) who would rather be recipients than givers--hence women like the one cited above who prodded her husband into something he'd rather not do.

As I've said elsewhere: People--own your kink. Make it safe, sane, and consensual. And, for the love of God, keep Jesus the hell OUT of it.

I'd like to add to the bolded: Please do not assume or say nonsense about women being naturally submissive, or men being naturally dominant, or whatever such bullshit.

(Mildly OT: I went to a conference on sex and relationships with my partner, and one of the presenters gave a 20-minute talk largely based on this premise. This was the day that I realized that if I spend too much time hearing someone say, "Women really like X" in my presence, when I am a woman and have no interest in X but cannot respond, I will eventually vomit. Truefax.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is about kink for most of these people. I think it is about a larger need for control and domination and is part and parcel of dominionism and these white men who feel like feminism and brown people have stripped away their mythic manhood. I guess what comes to mind is L'il Sproul and how a guest in his home was treated to his spanking of his terrified wife for some off handed comment.

Not everything is sexual. Abuse is not sexual. Domestic discipline is a way to take out your own inadequacy on your wife and call it consensual.

http://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2014/ ... more-10645

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the "Ken" who commented on that article was our very own FJ member Ken Alexander. The walls of text, support of patriarchy, and interest in spanking would indicate "yes". But he also claims he is from a developing country, but then slips and says he has decades of experience with "American homeschooling". His comments are from July 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this. These kids, raised in "instant obedience" and fear of corporal punishment (and restricted choice in clothing and appearance), have no concept of physical or personal autonomy.

Instant obedience and "breaking" the will also destroy any understanding of having boundaries, either your own or anothers. It is the perfect set up to create both the abused and the abuser.

Closed family systems that focus on instant obedience and breaking the child's will along with shunning of the outside world, home schooling and closed church systems rob these children of any vocabulary or outside frame of reference to understand what is happening to them.

The possibility of these kids growing up to have healthy relationships with a spouse or a child is almost nil. As they say in the Hunger Games, "May the odds be ever in your favor."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the "Ken" who commented on that article was our very own FJ member Ken Alexander. The walls of text, support of patriarchy, and interest in spanking would indicate "yes". But he also claims he is from a developing country, but then slips and says he has decades of experience with "American homeschooling". His comments are from July 2014.

I wondered the exact same thing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the "Ken" who commented on that article was our very own FJ member Ken Alexander. The walls of text, support of patriarchy, and interest in spanking would indicate "yes". But he also claims he is from a developing country, but then slips and says he has decades of experience with "American homeschooling". His comments are from July 2014.

The fact that he said off the bat that he is "opposed to wife spanking" leads me to believe no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the "Ken" who commented on that article was our very own FJ member Ken Alexander. The walls of text, support of patriarchy, and interest in spanking would indicate "yes". But he also claims he is from a developing country, but then slips and says he has decades of experience with "American homeschooling". His comments are from July 2014.

Now I'm going to have to go look, but wasn't he raised as a missionary kid, so he could be "from' a developing country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed the entire required submission thing is a turn off to me. Literally a turn off, as in guys that I'm interested in would talk about it and I would run for the hills. They say it so many ways (leading and protecting) but it's all the same story "do what I tell you no talking back because you're my child I mean wife". Essentially they are the boss of a woman vs their equal They don't realize how screwed up their dogma is because they are in a postion of power take for example the illustration with the umbrellas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but wonder how many men who practice CDD, also sexually abuse their daughters. They infantilize their own wives, with the dominance/spanking, and headship thing. It seems that the only thing that is different between being a face-shaving submissive daughter worshipping daddy between being a face shaving submissive wife worshipping hubby, is that the wife is also sexually enslaved to the husband. But when said wife is knocked up with baby number eleventy or unable to fulfill hubby for whatever reason, does the eye turn to those submissive SAHD's?

yes, Abuse, domestic and sexual is prevalent throughout society, but in many societies and cultures it is not encouraged or accepted, or set up like it is in patriarchy. In patriarchy, the man is praised for keeping his wife in control and people probably expect that he may have had to raise a hand, or hold a wrist or verbally humiliate in order to end up with such a creature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wife's (or child's, in the case of child abuse) whole concept of being right with God (or just being able to breathe freely and feel good about themselves) is tied up in being punished for being a sinful awful creature. So the woman or child can't feel any self-esteem until that debt of sin is paid with daily pain and shaming. It's a way for control freak husbands and parents to manipulate. It's tragic, it's difficult to recover from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when I first encountered the Pearls at a ladies meeting at church. We were also being taught that your husband was God's voice to you, you were to obey everything he told you. If he asked you to sin, then you were probably having a sin problem in your own life.

I remember trying to talk to the pastor's wife. She was going on about apologizing to her children for not being a very good parent and how much better she was going to be from now on.

I remember telling her that she was setting her daughters up to accept an abusive situation as normal. Closed mind, closed heart, nothing for me to do except leave that church.

Ironically the pastor and his wife divorced within a year or two, he married some other woman and set up a new church somewhere else. The wife? She went into the world, stopped going to church, and got all involved in community theater.

50 Shades of Gray went to church. Sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet they spank their kids too, in the same way, which is creepy. Sure, if two people decide that they want spanking to be a part of their sex life, fine (as long as all parties are fully consenting and are allowed to ask for it to stop at any time). But don't spank your kids too, its creepy and wrong to use something on your child that people use in sex (spanking, anyway, some people get off to wearing diapers and being treated like a baby, but if you type in your chosen parenting method into a search engine and get mostly sex stuff, youre doing something wrong). It is wrong for someone who gets off to spanking their partner to spank their kids as where the hell is the difference.

You can tell Michael and Debi Pearl get off to the idea of spanking, a lot of fundies seem to speak of spanking their children as such a pleasurable, almost sexual thing. Debi, Mike, buy a paddle and a ball gag and have fun....just leave the kids out of it. The other fundies should too, I always imagine that the PP should get Zsu a sexy policewoman outfit and repurpose that paddle cause hes been a baaad boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet they spank their kids too, in the same way, which is creepy. Sure, if two people decide that they want spanking to be a part of their sex life, fine (as long as all parties are fully consenting and are allowed to ask for it to stop at any time). But don't spank your kids too, its creepy and wrong to use something on your child that people use in sex (spanking, anyway, some people get off to wearing diapers and being treated like a baby, but if you type in your chosen parenting method into a search engine and get mostly sex stuff, youre doing something wrong). It is wrong for someone who gets off to spanking their partner to spank their kids as where the hell is the difference.

You can tell Michael and Debi Pearl get off to the idea of spanking, a lot of fundies seem to speak of spanking their children as such a pleasurable, almost sexual thing. Debi, Mike, buy a paddle and a ball gag and have fun....just leave the kids out of it. The other fundies should too, I always imagine that the PP should get Zsu a sexy policewoman outfit and repurpose that paddle cause hes been a baaad boy.

I agree. You can actually google "natural consequences" and "positive parenting" at work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that he said off the bat that he is "opposed to wife spanking" leads me to believe no.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was our Ken. He tends to say what he thinks you want to hear but later lets his true feelings slip out. He has actually never advocated spanking Lori- just restraining her and otherwise punishing her. It was Lori, on SSM's blog, who said she'd rather Ken spank her than take away her dishwasher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised if it was our Ken. He tends to say what he thinks you want to hear but later lets his true feelings slip out. He has actually never advocated spanking Lori- just restraining her and otherwise punishing her. It was Lori, on SSM's blog, who said she'd rather Ken spank her than take away her dishwasher.

She actually said Ken said he'd give her the choice. They have also said that they got a "twig" from their back yard and spanked each other with it to see if it hurt :evil-eye:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a side note, I have also discovered a fb post where Lori appears to admit inflicting pain on her babies as young as 5 months:

reader:

I don't know what a five moth baby can do, to deserve a tiny bit of pain. people need to learn more about baby brain development.

Lori Alexander:

It did nothing to the Pearl's 5 children or my 4 children's brain development. They are all very intelligent adults who all walk with Jesus and were never rebellious.

reader:

Oh my goodness... I have a six-month-old right now. I cannot imagine giving her anything but hugs and kisses and snuggles! What can a baby that age even do that could be considered naughty? They can't even crawl yet! If she does, say, grab something she shouldn't, then it's my job to simply redirect her, not hit her! For heaven's sake!

Lori Alexander:

They can bite you while nursing...they can wiggle around while you change their diaper...most of mine were crawling and starting to get into things they shouldn't. A tiny bit of pain and that all stopped. It isn't called hitting, it's called training. The small amount of pain was always for a purpose, a good purpose since they are too young at that age to reason with.

reader:

Use safety precautions and you wont have to spank a 5 month old. Patience is a virtue that the Bible praises so no I'm not gonna spank for wiggling during a diaper in infancy I will have patience bc I am the adult with more control of my emotions and actions.

Lori Alexander:

Then don't but it worked great for us! And a five and six month old aren't considered infants anymore.

reader:

anyways ,I don't think that is necessary to spank a five month baby with a switch or anything.

Lori Alexander:

Then, Sonia, don't do it but it sure made child raising a lot easier for us and my children were not harmed emotionally or physically in any way from it.

reader:

I can't understand why someone would smack a 5 month old! What on earth does a 5 month old know about right or wrong? I am so puzzled and sad!

Lori Alexander:

Even a 5 and 6 month old can be trained to know right from wrong. They are very smart and learn very quickly. Mine sure did! One or two smacks on the hand and they never touched an electrical outlet again. They were very happy babies in spite of several smacks!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, the ole "my babies were so happy because I spanked them" garbage.

Codswallop.

Makes me wanna hug that mom that had the misfortune to cross paths with someone like Lori.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.