Bates Family Part 10

[nelliebelle1197]

@punkiepie Formerly IFB here, at least for my formative years. I very much disagree. It is different for everyone. I just woke up one day when I was 18 and realized I had made some horrible mistakes, trying to fill gaps with something that was not me. I just read Not Without My Sister about three sisters who left the Children of God at different times. Each girl's story was different from her sister's stories - one was sudden, one took years, another was gradual and relatively painless. (Not a great book, BTW).

[RoseWilder]

22 minutes ago, punkiepie said:

I'm not a Bates leg-humper, not at all! But, when the majority of your adult children display public behavior that contradicts, or doesn't align with, the beliefs/teachings that they were raised to have- it does speak volumes.  It also speaks volumes that their parents continue to support, and affiliate themselves, with these children of theirs who have publicly stated their different beliefs.

I think that Gil and Kelly are supporting their adult children because they have an image to uphold. They've worked very hard to present the image to the world that they are just loving, accepting Christian parents who aren't in a cult. They can't get in a public falling out with their children without tarnishing that image. 

It's kind of a shame that the Bates and Duggar children don't realize just how much power they have right now. They could make all kinds of huge changes right now and their parents would have to pretend to accept it or risk the public finding out just how unaccepting and cult-like they are. 

But I do agree with the rest of your post. The married Bates children have made some important steps away from their parents' beliefs. 

[punkiepie]

18 minutes ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

@punkiepie Formerly IFB here, at least for my formative years. I very much disagree. It is different for everyone. I just woke up one day when I was 18 and realized I had made some horrible mistakes, trying to fill gaps with something that was not me. I just read Not Without My Sister about three sisters who left the Children of God at different times. Each girl's story was different from her sister's stories - one was sudden, one took years, another was gradual and relatively painless. (Not a great book, BTW).

I don't think we are actually in disagreement. (Maybe we are, and I'm sorry if I'm misinterpreting what you mean!)  I definitely acknowledge that there are many different pathways to escaping fundiedom. What my main point is, is that once there is a chink, or crack, or hole in the armor of belief, it's only a matter of time before their whole wall comes crumbling down.  For you, it was an internalization that something was wrong. For me, it was a fiery hell for those who never had the chance to hear about Jesus; how could someone go to eternal torment if they never heard "the truth?" 

The timelines will always be different because everyone is born as a unique individual. Group-think is one of the essential tenants of keeping people immersed in false beliefs.  Stepping away from those long, family held group-beliefs, is the first step in freedom from fundamentalism.

  

[refugee]

2 hours ago, RoseWilder said:

I think that Gil and Kelly are supporting their adult children because they have an image to uphold. They've worked very hard to present the image to the world that they are just loving, accepting Christian parents who aren't in a cult. They can't get in a public falling out with their children without tarnishing that image. 

It's kind of a shame that the Bates and Duggar children don't realize just how much power they have right now. They could make all kinds of huge changes right now and their parents would have to pretend to accept it or risk the public finding out just how unaccepting and cult-like they are. 

But I do agree with the rest of your post. The married Bates children have made some important steps away from their parents' beliefs. 

Y'know, you might have something there. I became disillusioned with the Jeubs when I read how they'd thrown out their older kids (and then claimed that it was all a loving thing, helping the girls to achieve independence, or something like that). What are they now, four for four? (And I don't know how many more to go.) As each kid reaches adulthood, they just throw them away?

I regret the money we spent on the speech and debate materials they published.

[Kelsey]

I think Kelly is the better mother over Michelle BUT in the same way that it's better to be constipated at a job interview than have urgent diarrhea. Yeah, I'm awful with analogies.

I do have to say though that when people were given Alyssa shit on insta for being immodest, Kelly got pretty Mama Weasley, "not my daughter, you bitch" for a woman that is required to keep sweet, IIRC.

[elliha]

I don't think that Gil and Kelly are so shitty parents that they would easily cut off their child for not doing exactly as they do. They might not like what they do at all but I think that they will try to find a place where they can have at least some kind of relationship with them. I think that it is great that most of the older children show at least small differences from their parents, the younger ones will then not have to fight as much to make the same choices. If they want to take one more step they might have support from their siblings even if the relationship with the parents goes sour. 

The older Bates children are still pretty young and they also have plenty of chances of developing from now on too. They are not set in their ways by now, I am 33 soon 34 and I am not the same as I was when I was 23 and I hope that I have developed further by the time I am 43. The fact that they have at least made some independent choices is encouraging and I think they will keep developing. I don't think development must mean that they stop being fundie but that they can still broaden their horizons. 

[actuallyjessica]

5 hours ago, Kelsey said:

I think Kelly is the better mother over Michelle BUT in the same way that it's better to be constipated at a job interview than have urgent diarrhea. Yeah, I'm awful with analogies.

I do have to say though that when people were given Alyssa shit on insta for being immodest, Kelly got pretty Mama Weasley, "not my daughter, you bitch" for a woman that is required to keep sweet, IIRC.

When/where exactly was this?

[nokidsmom]

9 hours ago, feministxtian said:

Instead of making WAGs now...how about everybody step back and wait 5-10 years. For the oldest 4 Bates kids, they've been on their own for what? Max 3 years? They are still figuring out how to be adults. Now, in 10 years if they're all the same uber-fundie...then talk shit. Until then...just chill. 

Given how much young fundie adults are treated as children in their parents' home until the day they get married and then are allowed to live their own lives such has it is, the differentiation that ormally take place during the teenage years is delayed if it happens at all.    They end up doing it around 10 years later instead.    These kids have a lot more to figure out in navigating life on their life on their own in addition to sorting out their beliefs IMHO.  Erin in particular has had to experience a serious dose of reality while adjusting to being an independent married adult.  

 

[for_the_Kitties]

1 hour ago, actuallyjessica said:

When/where exactly was this?

I think it was more of a: "Our adult children make their own choices, but respect our rules when they visit" 

I do not recall a "stop bullying my daughter!" or "leave alyssa alone!" type comment...
IIRC, Kelly was defending Alyssa's choices as her own but not agreeing with her decision to bare her shoulders. She gave the vibe that she respects her adult kids enough to let them make their own adult choices. 

[MissBitters]

It's great if Kelly and Gil respect their children's decisions on things like clothing, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if one of their children was openly gay (not speculating, just thinking of an extreme scenario in their worldview). I suspect they would not be so gracious...

[FormerlyFundyLite]

On ‎2‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 2:04 PM, refugee said:

My mom broke a wooden spoon on my brother's backside, at least once, and maybe more than once). 

 

On ‎2‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 2:14 PM, OnceUponATime said:

we must be related. That happened a few too many times in my family too.
And having the wooden spoon break while you were getting spanked was apparently the kids fault, which always resulted in more lashed.
 

Hi cousins! My mom had terrible aim, so she broke several wooden spoons on me--or more accurately on the seam of my jeans. I distinctly remember flexing my glutes because it would hurt less (I'm not even sure that actually makes sense, but that's what I thought at the time). She eventually wised up and switched to nylon spoons which aren't as likely to break, but stung a lot more.

[refugee]

10 minutes ago, FormerlyFundyLite said:

 

Hi cousins! My mom had terrible aim, so she broke several wooden spoons on me--or more accurately on the seam of my jeans. I distinctly remember flexing my glutes because it would hurt less (I'm not even sure that actually makes sense, but that's what I thought at the time). She eventually wised up and switched to nylon spoons which aren't as likely to break, but stung a lot more.

It does make sense. I remember reading a bio of Harry Houdini that talked about how he could harden his abs, I think it was, and take a punch in the gut without apparent effect. In the book, his death was attributed to some guy who asked him if it was true, and then punched him hard without warning, so he didn't have time to firm up the muscles. I don't remember the details, but the punch did some kind of internal damage and he died of complications.

[elliha]

3 hours ago, MissBitters said:

It's great if Kelly and Gil respect their children's decisions on things like clothing, but I can't help but wonder what would happen if one of their children was openly gay (not speculating, just thinking of an extreme scenario in their worldview). I suspect they would not be so gracious...

I think they would be devastated. I think they would remain in contact as long as the child didn't bring their partner to their house which I am not sure the child would think was OK. I sincerely hope that they would be able to at least have some contact with some family members though. I am not sure the siblings would be totally OK with it but hopefully at least one would be OK enough that they could still have some family. I hope that their fame at least would play in the at present imagined gay child's hands by someone outside the family reaching out and giving them at least some support. No, a gay child would probably be one of the worst things that could happen from the parents' perspective.

[FormerlyFundyLite]

2 hours ago, refugee said:

It does make sense. I remember reading a bio of Harry Houdini that talked about how he could harden his abs, I think it was, and take a punch in the gut without apparent effect. In the book, his death was attributed to some guy who asked him if it was true, and then punched him hard without warning, so he didn't have time to firm up the muscles. I don't remember the details, but the punch did some kind of internal damage and he died of complications.

Actually, I'm not sure it has anything to do with the pain per se. I think the Houdini thing is more a matter of him using his abs to protect his internal organs (just like you mention not happening for his final punch). There's not much to protect (vitally speaking) back there--bones take care of the organs in that vicinity.

[QuiverDance]

I cannot even imagine what it would take for me to hit my children with an object.  I only recall being spanked once as a little kid. Apparetly, my parents abandoned the idea that it was effective.  Of course in the 70s it was acceptable.  One of my earliest memories was watching, crying, when my father's first cousin spanked her son with a set of keys.  Just watching what happened to that kid was traumatic for me.  I'll never forget it.  

[Whoosh]

Just now, QuiverDance said:

Of course in the 70s it was acceptable.

I am glad you mentioned this.  Whether we like it or not, I can say that most kids I knew were spanked at least occasionally.  Today we often judge people harshly for acknowledging that they may have spanked in the past.  I think we can recognize that, while that reality isn't viewed as a good thing by most people today, the reality is that times were very different.

[QuiverDance]

I always say that our parents had it easier because they could  use the threat of physical violence to make us behave.    

[HarryPotterFan]

12 hours ago, Kelsey said:

I think Kelly is the better mother over Michelle BUT in the same way that it's better to be constipated at a job interview than have urgent diarrhea. Yeah, I'm awful with analogies.

I do have to say though that when people were given Alyssa shit on insta for being immodest, Kelly got pretty Mama Weasley, "not my daughter, you bitch" for a woman that is required to keep sweet, IIRC.

I disagree, I think you are amazing with analogies. 

 

[nokidsmom]

37 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

I am glad you mentioned this.  Whether we like it or not, I can say that most kids I knew were spanked at least occasionally.  Today we often judge people harshly for acknowledging that they may have spanked in the past.  I think we can recognize that, while that reality isn't viewed as a good thing by most people today, the reality is that times were very different.

It was different.  We were spanked occasionally and not only was it typical, my parents were rather careful about when they did it.  There were degrees of discipline and spanking was the ultimate.  However once attitudes towards it changed, my parents were flat out embarrassed and ashamed over having done it.

[EmmieJ]

41 minutes ago, QuiverDance said:

I cannot even imagine what it would take for me to hit my children with an object.  I only recall being spanked once as a little kid. Apparetly, my parents abandoned the idea that it was effective.  Of course in the 70s it was acceptable.  One of my earliest memories was watching, crying, when my father's first cousin spanked her son with a set of keys.  Just watching what happened to that kid was traumatic for me.  I'll never forget it.  

Same here (re hitting my child with an object).  I only spanked my little guy 2-3 times in his entire life, and those were swats to a diapered butt.  Even so, his expression hurt me to the core of my soul and I realized that I was hitting my child and breaking his trust in me, and I stopped.  I cannot even fathom hitting him with a spoon, a rod, a set of keys(!), or anything.  I find that behavior so repulsive and the exact opposite of what a loving parent could or should do.  It is not necessary to use physical violence to raise a thoughtful, caring, loving child to adulthood.

[QuiverDance]

45 minutes ago, EmmieJ said:

Same here (re hitting my child with an object).  I only spanked my little guy 2-3 times in his entire life, and those were swats to a diapered butt.  Even so, his expression hurt me to the core of my soul and I realized that I was hitting my child and breaking his trust in me, and I stopped.  I cannot even fathom hitting him with a spoon, a rod, a set of keys(!), or anything.  I find that behavior so repulsive and the exact opposite of what a loving parent could or should do.  It is not necessary to use physical violence to raise a thoughtful, caring, loving child to adulthood.

Similar here.  I regret having tried spanking to discipline, but I did try it a couple of times.  It did NOT work, and it felt horrible.  Parenting is a lot of trial and error.  Spanking for me was definitely error.  I am so glad my kids have reached ages where reason works.  I really hate being a disciplinarian, and I'm lucky that a threat of punishment (I will take the iPad for x amount of time) is always enough.    

[vienna]

17 hours ago, punkiepie said:

As a former IFBer, I cannot overstate how monumental it is to go against any of the beliefs/teachings one was taught and raised upon.  It may seem insignificant to many and  most people- to start wearing pants, disavow religious affiliations, or obtain a job that isn't one of the pre-approved occupations. But, these are huge, monumental, big deals!  Not only does the adult child risk alienating their parents, and remaining siblings living in their parent's home, but they risk causing a split or rift between their family and their religious affiliations.  I can't tell you all how often parents are taught that if they "train up [their] child in the way he should go" and that when they are "old, [they] will not depart from it." (Prov. 22:6) Which basically means, any wrong doing on the part of your child means that you, as the parent, did not raise your child correctly. 

I'm not a Bates leg-humper, not at all! But, when the majority of your adult children display public behavior that contradicts, or doesn't align with, the beliefs/teachings that they were raised to have- it does speak volumes.  It also speaks volumes that their parents continue to support, and affiliate themselves, with these children of theirs who have publicly stated their different beliefs.

Think of it like a glass or mirror or window shield; they are all incredibly hard and difficult to break when solid. But once you have, even a tiny crack in it, it becomes very easy to break or shatter. These tiny differences many of you think are insignificant, are actually enormous chinks in their belief systems. 

 

Thank you so much for this comment. I could not agree more!

On another note: It sickens me that the Duggars are back on TV.

14 hours ago, Kelsey said:

I think Kelly is the better mother over Michelle BUT in the same way that it's better to be constipated at a job interview than have urgent diarrhea. Yeah, I'm awful with analogies.

I do have to say though that when people were given Alyssa shit on insta for being immodest, Kelly got pretty Mama Weasley, "not my daughter, you bitch" for a woman that is required to keep sweet, IIRC.

Do you have any screenshots of this Kelly defending her "inmodest" daughter? I would love to read it.

[HermioneSparrow]

Spanking was common when I was little (90's), my mom spanked me once and I still remember being horrified and scared of her for a very long time, weeks ago I told my mom how scared I was and she apologized to me. A few days after the spanking I broke a little lamp on her bedroom and I remember hiding under my bed and crying because I thought I was about to get spanked, I was only five. Needless to say, I will NEVER EVER spank my future kids.

[sockinshoe]

Baby steps are important, and even laudable. However, being less IBLP doesn't mean the kids aren't still embroiled in a hideous patriarchal mentality. Yes, Alyssa wears pants, but her father in law is "Taliban Dan" and her support of him speaks more about her beliefs than the clothes she wears. Similarly, Zach and Whitney may have kissed before marriage, but, in his run for local office, his platform was nothing if not utterly patriarchal. Pants, premarital kissing, and piano teaching are small things. There's still a lot of evil ideology in those kids, and I don't think we can ignore that. Especially since they are trying to make it the law of the land.

[DaisyD]

28 minutes ago, sockinshoe said:

Especially since they are trying to make it the law of the land.

This! I honestly don't give one single fuck what they want to believe for themselves. When they start trying to force others to follow their rules, that's when i take issue.