Lori Alexander 16: Protecting Men's Jobs from the Assaults of Women

[onemama]

2 hours ago, TeddyBonkers said:

Okay, I'll play by Lori's rules. 

Lori: submitting to and obeying our husband is an important thing since it is repeated numerous times in the Bible

Are you aware, Lori, that "have the older women teach the younger women" is said only once in the Bible? By your logic, it must not be an important thing. 

Good point, TeddyBonkers.

By this criteria, over half of what Lori teaches is not even important.  

- Older women teaching younger women, the whole premise of her blog, poof! Unimportant.

- Wives obeying their husbands? Once. Unimportant.

- Wives winning their husbands without a word? Once. Unimportat.

- That thing about them being responsible for the eternal salvation of their soul is not even mentioned once.

- Women being weaker vessels? Once. Unimportant. 

Women being more easily deceived is implied twice, and you are a woman, Lori. You must have been deceived when you started that blog. Get a new set of cleaning cloths and get down to business creating a spotless home for Ken. As his submissive wife, you should understand by his hints that a spotless home is importat to him, as well as a good home cooked meal and the freedom to eat ritz crackers with fake cheese. 

 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

Lori is confusing the bible with her blog. It is her blog that repeats things numerous times. Same old topics. So she probably thinks because she repeats them there that it makes it important to God. 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

Lori's shares an article today about preparing your kids for what to do when they come across porn:

Quote

“Why do those women let people take pictures of them when they are naked?” we asked.
“Most of those women were molested when they were kids, by their uncles, their brothers, by friends, or even by complete strangers. They have no self-value. They feel worthless, and so they don’t guard their bodies. Instead, they sell their bodies for money to worthless men who are molesting other women and girls.” We all swallowed hard and shuddered.

You mean like Josh Duggar?  Is this what will become of his sisters now? I don't like scare tactic methods like this. Making all male relatives seem like the enemy. 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

Off topic but the one woman quoted in this article reminds me of Lori. She is about her age and says "10 minutes is just fine for me" when talking about how long men should last. Yup, 10 minutes and lube!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4280538/Do-women-really-want-chaps-longer.html

 

[Red Jumper]

Hi, first time poster here,

as always shocked by Lori's lines.

 

1 hour ago, AlwaysDiscerning said:

Quote

"Most of those women were molested when they were kids, by their uncles, their brothers [...]"

For the record: Above is re-quoting what AlwaysDiscerning quoted from Lori A. It is not a direct quote of AlwaysDiscerning's opinion. I just did not manage to quote it any better. Please pardon my technical skills; help is highly apriciated.

 

I wonder where she got this from. I thought that victims of abuse, molestation, rape, and so forth by family members would dread to offer their body to something anywhere near the line of the abuse they suffered? Am I wrong? Is it reasonable likely that some of them become sex workers? (I am strongly downgrading from Lori’s “most” on purpose because I will not believe this unless proven wrong by a non-fundie, non-crazy, at least somewhat reliable source)

If I keep the focus on involuntary participants in the porn industry (i.e. forced prostitution) I would say that the abusing person is likely to be the pimp / one of his henchmen. To me this carries the label “human trafficking” not the label “abuse through family members, caregivers or friends of caregivers”

 

1 hour ago, AlwaysDiscerning said:

Making all male relatives seem like the enemy. 

Interesting and very scary thought. I was already shocked by my reading that “sex workers = abuse victims”. With my childlike side of the brain this leads to the question “why do people watch poor victims? “

I am probably too sheltered thinking that the simple answer would have been enough for children: “sex workers = naked dancing. Watching other people naked is bad = porn is bad”. (that is if you believe that porn is bad) Unless this house of Lori’s has only seen porn with less than voluntary, consenting adults, there is no need ever for mentioning and therefore euphemize forced prostitution to children.

 

 

[Red Hair, Black Dress]

Today's blog post is ranting and raving about porn creating the downfall of society as we know it.  And why does porn exist?  Porn exists because women and girls have been molested, sometimes by family members.  This gives them low self esteem so they just naturally pose and film porn.

But...but... but.... didn't Godly Christian Command Man Ken tell us that molestation, even by a family member, was no big? That anyone molested just needed to get over it and move on ... because no big?

So if it's no big, why would it give anyone low self-esteem, which leads them to pose for porn ... because they have low self esteem ... from an event that is no big.

Besides, Godly Christian Command Man Ken also told us that even Godly Christian Men look at porn 2-3 times a month and it's no big.

SMH. Wow.  This Godly Christian Command Man thinking is too hard for my woman brain to understand. I guess I just need to go be submissive and obedient somewhere.  I'll be in the kitchen scrubbing the floor with a toothbrush if anyone needs me.

 

 

[Gemini]

3 hours ago, AlwaysDiscerning said:

Lori is confusing the bible with her blog. It is her blog that repeats things numerous times. Same old topics. So she probably thinks because she repeats them there that it makes it important to God. 

That's not surprising, I mean She confuses herself with God often enough...

 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

Sorry should have clarified better the quote is from the article nor lori, but since it's on her blog she endorses it and just as well could have been said by her.

[Koala]

Ken is losing control of the direction Lori's blog is taking.  Lori refuses to put a muzzle of Dave, Trey, Ben, and all of her other newfound followers (did you see Dave's crazy comments yesterday??).

Now when Ken chimes in to mansplain things, he is soundly ignored, and often contradicted by Dave.  

Things have definitely taken an interesting turn...

[onemama]

Dave:

Quote

A man’s disobedience is between him and God. I wife’s disobedience is between her and her husband. A marriage can’t have two heads whether it is husband and wife or husband and God. The head of the marriage is the husband. Period. The head is not God sometimes and her husband sometimes.

Wives blaspheme the word (the Bible, I assume, or maybe Jesus) when they go straight to Jesus, not through their husbands:

Quote

 

The wife serves the husband, the husband serves the Word, the Word serves the Father. The word is blasphemed [Titus 2:5] when wives skip over their head and go straight to the Word.

 

Wives are to be slaves to their husbands and make them pretty much their little god: 

Quote

Men are to surrender themselves to be slaves to Christ, to align their hearts and desires to Him, to explicitly know and follow His ways. This is modeled for the church by wives who surrender themselves to be slaves to their own husband, to align their hearts and desires to him, to explicitly know and follow his ways.

Dave's ideas are getting more and more twisted.  And he calls Lori the "leader of this blog".  Consider that, coming from a man who believes women have absolutely nothing to say outside of their husbands' authority. Consider how Ken doesn't seem to like Dave all that much...

 

[BobTheWalrus]

On 03/03/2017 at 0:30 AM, Showtunesgirl said:

So from today's post: 

Um....I was unaware of that marriage contracts now stipulate that husbands must do certain household tasks. From all of the marriages I've observed, men usually volunteer to do tasks around the house as a way to serve their wives and families, or because the wife asks him to for whatever reason, not because there's some sort of figurative gun being held to his head. 

Also: 

Please show me a good dad who wouldn't want to spend more time with his children if given the opportunity, or would not consider taking care of his children's needs as one of his responsibilities. My dad has worked full-time almost my entire life, yet he made our lunches every morning in addition to his own before leaving for work, so that my mom would have enough time to get all three of us kids up, dressed, breakfast eaten, and out the door in time for school.  I highly doubt he felt doing that was a burden or that it should automatically fall under my mom to do. I am thankful that my dad has modeled what the sacrificial love of Christ looks like as a husband and father (albeit imperfectly), instead of believing what Lori & co. think a husband or marriage should be. I think I need to go hug my dad now.

Same with my dad, and he voluntarily and happily took us to the pool every Saturday morning, because he wanted to, not because my mum was forcing him to.  It's almost like she wants women to enable their workaholic husbands....

[Loveday]

Quote

A man’s disobedience is between him and God. I wife’s disobedience is between her and her husband. A marriage can’t have two heads whether it is husband and wife or husband and God. The head of the marriage is the husband. Period. The head is not God sometimes and her husband sometimes.

Quote

The wife serves the husband, the husband serves the Word, the Word serves the Father. The word is blasphemed [Titus 2:5] when wives skip over their head and go straight to the Word.

 

THIS is blasphemy. Dave has gone over the edge of the abyss with this one. If Ken allows this to go unchallenged, and continues to allow Lori to entertain Dave on her blog and FB page, his claim of being a 'command man' is a joke (well, more so than it already is). 

[laPapessaGiovanna]

1 hour ago, onemama said:

Dave:

Wives blaspheme the word (the Bible, I assume, or maybe Jesus) when they go straight to Jesus, not through their husbands:

Wives are to be slaves to their husbands and make them pretty much their little god: 

Dave's ideas are getting more and more twisted.  And he calls Lori the "leader of this blog".  Consider that, coming from a man who believes women have absolutely nothing to say outside of their husbands' authority. Consider how Ken doesn't seem to like Dave all that much...

 

 

8 minutes ago, Loveday said:

 

THIS is blasphemy. Dave has gone over the edge of the abyss with this one. If Ken allows this to go unchallenged, and continues to allow Lori to entertain Dave on her blog and FB page, his claim of being a 'command man' is a joke (well, more so than it already is). 

Does anyone else think maybe Dave is a long con troll who is giving Lori a lot of rope and waiting for her hanging herself with it?

[onemama]

@laPapessaGiovanna, I hadn't thought about Dave being a troll, but he could be. He is pushing really hard with his frequent and long comments, his flattery of Lori, his very extreme views and I don't think he can possibly have spent thousands of hours in the last three years researching the role of women in the home and the church. If he's providing for his family, going to church and spending ample time on blogs writing long comments, I don't think it's possible.  I do think Submissive is a troll.  Read this. Doesn't it sound like she's making fun of Lori?

Quote

To subject all things we must begin addressing our lords properly… thus saith the scripture in 1peter3:6.

maybe you should ask mr. Pearl how serious he is about the word? Because if he really took the bible seriously then this is something that belongs under submission in all things.

If she's for real, she's very messed up.  Our husbands... our lords???? wow.

[Loveday]

31 minutes ago, laPapessaGiovanna said:

 

Does anyone else think maybe Dave is a long con troll who is giving Lori a lot of rope and waiting for her hanging herself with it?

I'm really starting to wonder. 

@onemama I think you're right about 'submissive.' 

[Red Hair, Black Dress]

2 hours ago, Loveday said:

The wife serves the husband, the husband serves the Word, the Word serves the Father. The word is blasphemed [Titus 2:5] when wives skip over their head and go straight to the Word.

Thanks Loveday for being brave enough to read Dave.  Let me parse this thing...... a woman is not to go straight to the Word, because that is blasphemy.  This means that a woman is not to read the Bible for herself or I suppose pray.

Soooooo .... the only way a woman can hear the Bible is if 1) her husband reads it to her or 2) he tells her what it says.  And I suppose the only way she can pray is if the husband leads her in prayer.

This is completely, toally, utterly, nuts, also blasphemy. This is so nuts that I was tempted to think I'd misunderstood Dave.  But upon reflection decided no, Dave really is nuts.

LIke I said in Lori Part 15, Dave is moving toward saying he speaks for God.  Give it a little while and he'll claim he is God.

I still feel really sorry for Dave's wife and children. 

 

[onemama]

46 minutes ago, Red Hair, Black Dress said:

Soooooo .... the only way a woman can hear the Bible is if 1) her husband reads it to her or 2) he tells her what it says.  And I suppose the only way she can pray is if the husband leads her in prayer.

Why is he posting on the blog of a woman who isn't his wife? 

And why is that woman (Lori) learning from a man who isn't her husband?  She says he favorite Bible teacher is Michael Pearl. Wouldn't it be blasphemy for her to be learning from Debi's husband instead of her own? 

[Emilycharlotte]

To be honest, my first thought was that Submissive must be someone from FJ, because she keeps working in those Ken-like questions ("Shall we not...", "Can it not be said...") that were discussed here just recently.  If she is a troll (and I think she is) she's an awesome one; when she expressed doubts about Michael Pearl's commitment to the Word, I nearly choked.  

Also, I never thought about Dave being a troll, but it's a happier possibility than thinking he is real. 

[KDA]

I'm not sure what to think of either submissive or Dave. I've been sure that they're both real, and they both do genuinely believe their twisted versions of "Christianity" but now I don't know. If they're real, I sure hope they haven't been bred from (although I think I read that submissive is a home-schooling mum). 

[EmiGirl]

I think Dave might be Mormon, although he hasn't said anything about the special magic underwear.  His view on women sounds an awful lto like Mormons. Only men hold the priesthood and can pray and interpret Scripture.they're also responsible for his wife's salvation. 

[usmcmom]

1 hour ago, EmiGirl said:

I think Dave might be Mormon, although he hasn't said anything about the special magic underwear.  His view on women sounds an awful lto like Mormons. Only men hold the priesthood and can pray and interpret Scripture.they're also responsible for his wife's salvation. 

I misread at first and thought you were saying "I think Dave might be a MORON," and was going to give it an up vote based on that alone. 

I agree with both versions of your comment.  

 

[Koala]

After some thought, I think Dave is doing Lori's readers a great service.  Same goes for Trey and Jeff, but Dave gets most of the credit.

He has spelled it all out for Lori's readers.  Women, he says, are slaves to their husbands.  They were not created in the image of God, and they are to practice absolute blind obedience to their masters husbands.  While he's on the subject, he'd like to see the "physical disciplines" of marriage brought back (so would Ben, and Ken and Lori want to give him the "Christian liberty" to do it, as long as he passes their "test" ).    

Meanwhile, Ken  has very clearly told his wife's readers that if it had been anyone else, Lori would have edited their comment, or deleted it all together.  But it's Dave, who likes to tell her she's beautiful, soooo....

Lori's response?  A resounding "Amen!" to pretty much every vile word that Dave types.

Dave and Trey have given Lori the courage to confirm for her readers that even "getting the shit beat out of you" is not grounds for divorce.  When confronted with readers claiming abuse, Lori now soundly ignores their claims, and persists in telling them they must win their husband without a word.  She has even gone so far as to imply that the wife is responsible for the husbands salvation, and by leaving him, she is damning him to hell by "taking Jesus out of his home".  

Because of her obsession with these men, she is contradicting herself much more frequently, sometimes all in the same day.

Lori's female readers are admonished for expressing any concerns over the sudden influx of men, and the seemingly endless discussions about sex in mixed company.    The men, on the other hand, are given free reign to say anything that crosses their filthy, basement dwelling minds. If it's particularly vile and filthy, Lori dedicates an entire post to them (to "give them a voice" she says).

The handwriting is on the wall, and can no longer be easily missed.  Long time female readers have stopped commenting, and more often than not, Lori's comment section is mostly her and the guys.   She won't be able to get nearly as many women to fall for her "message", now that she has shown her hand.  

Ken is apparently too cowardly to put a stop to any of it, or stand for....anything.  The damage is done, and there is no way to clean up this mess.  No matter how many pages he writes about "difficult wives" and the "reasonable husbands" who suffer them, Ken's voice has been drowned out by much louder "command men"...and his command wife, who probably told him to keep away from her blog and her precious male readers.

It's an unraveling.  Lori's "ministry" is no longer to women.  She is proudly preaching to the MRA choir now.

[polecat]

On 3/4/2017 at 10:16 AM, Red Jumper said:

I wonder where she got this from. I thought that victims of abuse, molestation, rape, and so forth by family members would dread to offer their body to something anywhere near the line of the abuse they suffered? Am I wrong? Is it reasonable likely that some of them become sex workers? (I am strongly downgrading from Lori’s “most” on purpose because I will not believe this unless proven wrong by a non-fundie, non-crazy, at least somewhat reliable source)

 

As loath as I am to agree with Lori on anything (and I would qualify this by saying that "most" is almost certainly a stretch), sexually abused girls tend to reach puberty earlier than other girls and are likely to exhibit sexually precocious behavior. Promiscuity is not uncommon in abused girls either. It's a way to take back control of your sexuality -- because when someone robs you of that control so early, to then be promiscuous by choice is a pretty powerful thing. It might not make sense on the outside, but internally, it does. Not ALL girls respond that way, and some do shy away from all sexual encounters, the way you would expect. But promiscuity is by no means uncommon. There is also a link between child sexual abuse (and also physical and emotional abuse) and sex work. Again, though, not all but certainly some, and it is a significant link.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/11/sex-abuse-triggers-early-puberty-and-its-problems

http://www.medicaldaily.com/does-childhood-sex-abuse-lead-promiscuity-later-or-only-myth-317060

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2254224/

 

 

[Koala]

From the Amazon reviews:

Quote

It's hard to read all the negative reviews because I think they're completely missing the point. In no way does Lori ever say to be a robot, a doormat, have no opinions, etc. 

Umm, yeah. She kind of does.

Lori Alexander:

Quote

We are so selfish, always protecting ourselves and our rights instead of becoming like Jesus, sacrificing our lives for others, and yes, even becoming a doormat for others.  

Lori Alexander:

Quote

 If He was a doormat for us, the least we can do is to be a happy, privileged doormat for our family.

There are others too, but I think that's more than enough to illustrate that Lori absolutely does tell women to become doormats.

[Red Jumper]

@polecat Thank you for the insight ! This is the very reason I'm here: Get insight and wisdom.

Now please me I am off to read through all your linked material