BOOK REVIEW: "The Power of a Transformed Wife"

[AlwaysDiscerning]

Two is correct. She made up the other daughters to present herself as more the perfect Christian homemaker, because ya know only have two is kinda looked down upon as not doing your job to fruitfully multiply. That was part of the scandal about her back in the day. When that was exposed, SHTF. 

 

[foreign fundie]

8 minutes ago, polecat said:

No, she has two daughters. The other three exist solely in her imagination.

Oh, so you can just add to your quiver in your imagination? How convenient. 

Anyways, the imagined daughters are better off than the real ones.

Btw, I have seven sons and eleven daughters. They all play harp, and we live on a homestead and make blueberry jam. I should go write a book about how to be a perfect mum and wife. With so many daughters we have plenty of hair brushes too.

I'll put it on Amazon when I am done (next week or so). Can you all bless me with five stars?

[Hisey]

Really? I thought she had five--a few were biological, and others were the children of relatives who couldn't care for them. She has shown pics of young girls of different ages.

[AlwaysDiscerning]

That was her crafted story as she had to do damage control to not seem like  a total liar. You can believe it or not. I don't. I think the pics were neighbor kids or her two real daughters friends. On the internet its so easy to say anything and have it believed. Just a few pics of kids proves nothing and easy enough to get. 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

Oh and after the whole thing blew up she didn't make any other references to the other kids and she has a new blog now. No talk or pics of them there or on social media. She'll mention the two kids, but that is it. 

[polecat]

12 hours ago, Hisey said:

Really? I thought she had five--a few were biological, and others were the children of relatives who couldn't care for them. She has shown pics of young girls of different ages.

 

No, she just pulled all of that out of her backside. A good deal of her life was simply imaginary, made up for the basement dwellers who followed her blog.

 

Man, I miss her. She was such a hot mess. Her new blog isn't nearly as horrifying.

[Lurky]

OMG, just escaped from the Sunshine Mary rabbit hole....  I need a drink! 

In the threads I'm reading, there are always some people suggesting SSM was trolling/pulling a Poe, and other disagreeing but I'm wondering, was there ever evidence either way?

[polecat]

1 hour ago, Lurky said:

OMG, just escaped from the Sunshine Mary rabbit hole....  I need a drink! 

In the threads I'm reading, there are always some people suggesting SSM was trolling/pulling a Poe, and other disagreeing but I'm wondering, was there ever evidence either way?

 

 

I think SSM created an imaginary life for herself to make up for the deficiencies in her real life. And I think she surrounded herself with desperately thirsty MRAs to make up for the lack of attention she got from her pathetic, cheating, abysmal excuse of a husband. SSM had (and possibly still has) a sad, hard life, and she took it out on other women all while creating this mythical, magical, perfect (and thoroughly false) life online.

She's moved, she's got an actual job, and she doesn't seem obsessed with being surrounded by all the nasty MRAs anymore. All indications point to her having found some fulfillment (and possibly happiness) in her real life. Lori should try doing the same.

 

(ALL just my opinion and my opinion only and I have absolutely no actual basis for thinking this other than way too much time following her blog and comments on her blog).

[Lurky]

@polecat I was particularly struck by how she seemed to be in a BDSM relationship, and using scriptural stuff about submission to justify a very different kind of submission.  Reading the threads, I was flipping between being sickened by her pro-rape, pro-domestic violence stuff, and boggling at her crazy.  I so hope it was all imaginary.

(I never understand women who parade around about how "submissive" they are, while piling on the passive-aggressive comments about their husbands on their blog)

[Koala]

What happens when you order the Kindle version?  Someone left a negative review.  Under her name it says: Format: Kindle Edition

Lori left her "important note" blather (which is odd, because she's been deleting it from other reviews she left it on).  

Anyway, someone replied:

Quote

Lori, this reviewer has bought the Kindle version, as clearly stated under her name.

Lori replied:

Quote

No, she didn't. It clearly states "verified purchase" if they actually bought it.

Their response:

Quote

Only three out of the 18 positive reviews were verified as well. And in your chat room you told your blog readers that it was fine to leave a review even if they had not yet read your book. As they were familiar with your work via your blog. So it's fine with you as long as the reviews are positive? This is very dishonest.

#1. Glad they called her on complaining that people who haven't read the book are leaving negative reviews, while simultaneously begging people who haven't read the book to give her positive reviews.  
 

#2.  Is it a verified purchase if they have "Format: Kindle" under their name?

#3.  As Lori spends her evening arguing with the internet, let us all take a moment to reflect on the following advice: 

Quote

 I don't want to debate my husband or others in a way that tells them that I am right and they are wrong. 

Quote

 Feminine women shouldn't be ones who argue cases and debate others.

 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

I was just noticing now too that she is commenting on Amazon again. On another review she is disputing the near rape claims that the reviewer mentioned. I am hoping someone can clear that up with direct quotes from the book if she did indeed talk about a near rape in the book. 

[usmcmom]

15 minutes ago, AlwaysDiscerning said:

I was just noticing now too that she is commenting on Amazon again. On another review she is disputing the near rape claims that the reviewer mentioned. I am hoping someone can clear that up with direct quotes from the book if she did indeed talk about a near rape in the book. 

As soon as I get home this evening, I can point out the page number and paragraph in which she describes this incident.

TRIGGER WARNING:

Spoiler

It is referring to her date at the drive-in during which the boy pushed her down on the seat and "wanted more than kisses."  I blelieve I even marked it with a trigger warning in my review. How Lori can't comprehend that most people would see this as "nearly raped" is beyond me. I think she chalks it up to "boys will be boys."

 

Once again we have FJ members expressing compassion for a woman when she can't even seen she needs it. 

ETA: I know there are others reading the book, maybe they can find the passage more quickly than I can. It is very early in the book; in the section where she describes her teenage dating experiences. 

[Koala]

I saw that review.  I have no clue about the book.  I haven't read it or reviewed it. 

The only thing I can figure out, is that maybe the reviewer is talking about Lori's account of her first date:

Quote

During the summer before my junior year in high school, my mom would take a bunch of us to the beach. There was one guy who always came with us who I had a huge crush on. I thought he was so handsome. I finally turned 16 at the beginning of September. My mom wouldn't let me date until I was sixteen. He asked me out on a date on my birthday. I was so excited! What a wonderful sixteenth birthday this turned out to be.

He took me to a drive-in theater. The movie had hardly began and he started kissing me. {I had never kissed a guy before this time.} Then he threw me down onto the front seat and laid on top of me. He wanted to have sex with me! I told him to take me home immediately. I will never forget that drive home. He was so mad that he hit the median in the middle of the road and our car almost rolled over. That was the last date I ever had with him! All that summer and spending time with him, I never could have imagined him taking advantage of me like he did. 

http://lorialexander.blogspot.com/2014/07/my-dating-life-and-meeting-ken.html

I don't know if that's what they're thinking of, or not...

[usmcmom]

1 minute ago, Koala said:

I saw that review.  I have no clue about the book.  I haven't read it or reviewed it. 

The only thing I can figure out, is that maybe the reviewer is talking about Lori's account of her first date:

http://lorialexander.blogspot.com/search?q=When+I+was+dating

I don't know if that's what they're thinking of, or not...

I believe that is it. She did not quote verbatim from the blog entry, but it appears she did not change any details when she shared it in the book. 

How strange that she would accuse this reviewer of lying when the book clearly contains this story. Is Lori blatantly lying?  Does she not even remember what she wrote for her own book?  Did someone else write the book, using Lori's blog content and Lori is unaware of what was included????  HAS LORI NOT READ HER OWN BOOK??? This is Lori...there are so many possibilities. 

[polecat]

Is she really such a rape apologist that when it nearly happens to her, it's STILL not almost-rape? I could maybe see excusing it away if it were Ken (just because she wouldn't WANT to see her husband as a rapist) ... but this is some dirtbag to whom she owes no loyalty, no love, no anything. WHY would she need to excuse his behavior? It's disgusting. And then to vilify someone who shows her compassion. smh.

[alba]

Is she really such a rape apologist that when it nearly happens to her, it's STILL not almost-rape? I could maybe see excusing it away if it were Ken (just because she wouldn't WANT to see her husband as a rapist) ... but this is some dirtbag to whom she owes no loyalty, no love, no anything. WHY would she need to excuse his behavior? It's disgusting. And then to vilify someone who shows her compassion. smh.

Yes to all of this. Moreover, what was the point in including a story about being assaulted like that only to downplay it?

[Hisey]

I think she thinks there is a stigma attached to being called a "near rape victim". I don't think she ever thought of herself as one, and her immediate reaction is defensiveness.

I think she just thought of the guy as being a guy (though an ungodly one, given his behavior). He has ten times the amount of testosterone "coarsing" through his body, after all. While she didn't like how the date turned out, I don't really get the sense she viewed his behavior as criminal.

[Koala]

3 hours ago, usmcmom said:

How strange that she would accuse this reviewer of lying when the book clearly contains this story. Is Lori blatantly lying?  Does she not even remember what she wrote for her own book?  Did someone else write the book, using Lori's blog content and Lori is unaware of what was included????  HAS LORI NOT READ HER OWN BOOK??? This is Lori...there are so many possibilities. 

It's really strange, because it's not even like she acknowledges the incident, but clarifies that she didn't feel it was a "near rape".  She just acts like the reader is a liar, and she has no clue what they're talking about.  That has to be intentional.

I think Lori will lie when it suits her, for sure.  Telling her readers that her daughter gave up dancing to be a wife was just a flat out lie.  There is no twist of the mind in which Lori could have deluded herself into believing her daughter gave up dancing.

I also think she feels she is here to set the rules, not live by them.

A mere 5 months ago she said the following:

Quote

Women shouldn't be arguing over issues that have no eternal significance like organic or not organic, vaccinations or no vaccinations, public school or homeschool, sleep training or co-sleeping, spanking or not spanking, etc.

This is laughable, because Lori's blog is a study in debating these very issues.  We have all seen Lori argue her readers into the ground, before giving up and deleting their comments all together. 

One might argue that she had decided to turn over a new leaf, but just yesterday she started an argumentative post about homeschooling vs. public school on FB.  As predicted, she's in the comments arguing with anyone who dares disagree with her.

It's like she doesn't even acknowledge that her own rules apply to her.

 

[IntrinsicallyDisordered]

I don't think Lori views herself as arguing.  She thinks she is just stating the facts/word of god, no matter how many times she says it or what she says it in response to.  It's everyone else that's arguing in her mind.  i don't think she understands what arguing is.

The near-rape thing has the distinct flavor of gaslighting - writing it in her book, then claiming it isn't there.  Or she just has the pathological need to disagree with everyone that doesn't kiss her ass, no matter what they are saying.

 

Continued thanks for the detailed review!

[molecule]

Although it's clear to all of us here that Lori is describing near rape, it wouldn't surprise me if she genuinely doesn't see it that way--so she could actually think the commenter was making that up.

I'm a little younger than Lori, but not by a whole lot. When I was in high school, when a guy tried to go farther than I wanted to, it never occurred to me to think of it as an attempted sexual assault. In my world view at the time (and in Lori's still), all guys wanted was sex. My friends and I always kind of expected them to try something--or at least we tolerated it when it happened. It was our job to draw the line. If a guy stopped when we said stop, well, that's the way it was supposed to be.

I'm not saying that the view I had then was right, but it was a different time. Rape meant a stranger attacking and having sex with a woman. Attempted rape meant a guy attacking you and trying to have sex with you and then being stopped by force or trickery. A guy trying to have sex with you was "making a pass." A guy who stopped when you said to stop was being a gentleman.

If I wrote about such an incident in a book, I could see myself not understanding someone describing it as near rape because I myself wouldn't remember it that way. I was sexually assaulted as a young woman, and it wouldn't have occurred to me to be critical of a guy who honored a "no."

So I actually do understand why Lori might not think she wrote about a near rape.

That said, she was incredibly ungracious in her reply:

Quote

I have never been raped or even "near raped" and this is why your review has no credibility. You did not read my book.

I hope that people who don't know about her read the comments and see how awful she is to people. It's kind of like watching Nicole Naugler digging herself a hole when she responds to comments on her Facebook page.

[desertvixen]

I'm sure Lori doesn't acknowledge it as a near-rape because I don't think that anything except dragged-in-bushes-by-big-stranger (weapon optional) counts as RAPE to her.  Lori doesn't strike me as the type who gets date rape (unless it's to talk about how the woman could have avoided it if she'd been modestly dressed in her own home).

ETA: Had to go chime in on the review with chapter and verse.  Waiting to see the reply.

[molecule]

9 minutes ago, desertvixen said:

I'm sure Lori doesn't acknowledge it as a near-rape because I don't think that anything except dragged-in-bushes-by-big-stranger (weapon optional) counts as RAPE to her.  Lori doesn't strike me as the type who gets date rape (unless it's to talk about how the woman could have avoided it if she'd been modestly dressed in her own home).

I think you are exactly right. "Date rape" only became a phrase in the early 80s, so it simply wouldn't have been on Lori's radar. And since we know how much she is "always learning," she still thinks that only "rape rape" counts as rape.

[polecat]

2 hours ago, molecule said:

Although it's clear to all of us here that Lori is describing near rape, it wouldn't surprise me if she genuinely doesn't see it that way--so she could actually think the commenter was making that up.

I'm a little younger than Lori, but not by a whole lot. When I was in high school, when a guy tried to go farther than I wanted to, it never occurred to me to think of it as an attempted sexual assault. In my world view at the time (and in Lori's still), all guys wanted was sex. My friends and I always kind of expected them to try something--or at least we tolerated it when it happened. It was our job to draw the line. If a guy stopped when we said stop, well, that's the way it was supposed to be.

I'm not saying that the view I had then was right, but it was a different time. Rape meant a stranger attacking and having sex with a woman. Attempted rape meant a guy attacking you and trying to have sex with you and then being stopped by force or trickery. A guy trying to have sex with you was "making a pass." A guy who stopped when you said to stop was being a gentleman.

If I wrote about such an incident in a book, I could see myself not understanding someone describing it as near rape because I myself wouldn't remember it that way. I was sexually assaulted as a young woman, and it wouldn't have occurred to me to be critical of a guy who honored a "no."

So I actually do understand why Lori might not think she wrote about a near rape.

That said, she was incredibly ungracious in her reply:

I hope that people who don't know about her read the comments and see how awful she is to people. It's kind of like watching Nicole Naugler digging herself a hole when she responds to comments on her Facebook page.

 

 

I think you and Desert Vixen may be right. 

[quiversR4hunting]

She is talking about wishing her mom gave her more boundries on dating. Page 15 of the book has the drive-in date account. Can I post a picture of the page?

Page 16 Lori says 

Quote

Even though my sister's and I all married Christians and we're technically "virgins" when we got married,

I agree with others, she doesn't see the drive-in as a near rape. 

[Koala]

I thought her big thing was to get this book out while her mom could still read it? Why am I not surprised that she seized the opportunity to critique the parenting skills of a terminally ill woman??  My god...

Lori, for god's sake try to be a comfort to your mother.  She knows she's made mistakes.  If you can't forgive her and not rub her face in them, just walk away. Don't waste the precious time she has left reminding her of them.

That's a horrible thing to do to a person.

Also, the fact that she married as a "technical virgin" is kind of on her.  She wasn't allowed to date until 16 (a reasonable age to begin dating if you ask me).  What was her mom supposed to do, lock her in the house until Ken rode up on his Horse of Truth to declare for her?