Lori Alexander 20: Evil and Hateful as Ever

[Curious]

On 5/31/2017 at 9:46 AM, AlwaysDiscerning said:

 Josh commented that fat shaming is good and that his mom called him fat everyday and he appreciated it looking back.

 

My dad (via adoption) spent much of my childhood fat shaming both my mom (bio) and I.  For whatever reason, I never internalized this and it pretty much became white noise to me by the time I was a teenager.

My mom, who developed MS, when I was a freshman in high school started to internalize it around the time she started losing function, I think in fear that my dad was going to leave her.   I don't think he actually WOULD have left her, mind you, but I think he used that particular fear she had against her.

My mom essentially starved herself to death after my dad passed away.  I suspect these things were connected, but we will never know.1

[Koala]

2 minutes ago, onemama said:

I think Lori's blog needs a warning sign: reader beware, the contents may lead to fear, insecurity, despair and loss of your faith.  

I totally agree.

It's almost like she's bragging.  

"Well I go through EVEN WORSE things, and I'm fine!"  So snotty.

[louisa05]

Random thoughts:

A friend and co-worker at Christian school was eventually fired because of admitting to using medication to control bi-polar disorder. 

Our previous priest at my Catholic parish was not fired or punished for a depressive episode. He was given a leave of absence for treatment and came back when he was ready. He uses anti-depressants now and is very open about it and is doing well. I know another priest during my time at Catholic school who was having issues with anxiety. He too was given a leave of absence to get appropriate medical intervention. 

I just wanted to point out that some churches do understand and handle mental illness as a medical issue. 

Lori is an ass. A bony little ass, so I suppose that part makes her happy, but an ignorant nasty ass nonetheless. 

On a lighter Lori note, today's post is more snark worthy. So here is the lighter snark: I would never look at someone's un-fluffed pillows and declare their home "filthy". Does she not know what filthy means? And now she is admiring a waitress for fluffing pillows? Isn't the waitress evil for having a job? And what kind of restaurant has pillows laying about? 

 

 

 

[EowynW]

Thinking about Lori's salad today. There are so many ways to have a low calorie meal. Today I was in a rush so for lunch I had: 

Onion & cucumber (from my garden), with a tomato, mozzarella cheese, pepperoni, fresh basil & oregano (from my garden) with a dash of zesty Italian dressing and then water with fresh mint and stevia, also from my garden. It made a heaping bowl and I ate the whole thing. For a snack later I have yogurt & an apple with peanuts. 

[older than allosaurs]

One of my former high school students, from a large, devoutly Christian family, was diagnosed with schizophrenia at age 10. I know her faith has helped her deal with her condition, but she also got psych meds, therapy, special education, and tremendous family support.  She said with her meds she could still see the demons following her down the hall, but she could remember they weren't real.

If trusting God were enough to give you "a sound mind," she would have one. As it is, she has a raw deal, a tremendous talent for art and writing, and a seemingly inextinguishable supply of hope. I admire her tremendously.

[Free Jana Duggar]

https://talesfrommyhearttoyours.wordpress.com/

[louisa05]

History according to Lori's doodles alert: Before 1960, teenagers had no money of their own and nothing was marketed to them. 

So apparently my dad, who graduated from high school in 1959, actually did not have paper routes and work odd jobs to earn his own money beginning at age 8 was just a big lie he told us? 

Yeah, I don't think so.

Also, marketing to specific demographic groups began in the 50s. From an article on the Ad Age site: 

 

Quote

Other concepts from the 1950s included "exposure," first identified as a readership measurement in an Advertising Research Foundation-sponsored Reader's Digest/Alfred Politz study in 1956; "subliminal advertising," a controversial concept during the Cold War; and the "creative team" approach, which paired an art director and a copywriter, popularized by Doyle Dane Bernbach in its "Think Small" campaign for Volkswagen. Children became a target market for advertising; teenagers, who came into their own as a separate demographic segment, saw ads for records and phonographs, radios, magazines, soft drinks and apparel developed just for them.

 

[jerkit]

My dad also had a paper route from 11-17. Then he got a job at McDonald's until he went to college. This would've been 1967-1973

[Coy Koi]

3 hours ago, Free Jana Duggar said:

https://talesfrommyhearttoyours.wordpress.com/

Well then.

[usmcmom]

Hmm. I wonder how Mary Esther's question offended Lori. Doesn't Lori usually reserve her "blessings" for those to whom she'd really like to give the middle finger. 

I would love to know Lori's cleaning schedule. She insists women keep a clean home but gives no examples of how her maid actually does it. Heh. 

Mary Esther has given her a perfect topic for her next video or blog post and she can't come up with anything for it. That tells me Lori does not clean her house. It seems odd that someone with such a regimented idea of food preparation and eating does not approach housecleaning the same way. 

[jerkit]

1 minute ago, choralcrusader8613 said:

This. Also, no offense, but it's likely that Ken has exactly the same views on depression as Lori. It's not like Ken is a winner at marriage or gender relations.

But Ken still has some semblance of reason. It's small, but it's there.

 

[RosyDaisy]

Lori and Ken are vile, evil monsters. May they both rot in Hell.

[Coconut Flan]

Ken is going to first and foremost take up for his own against outsiders.  He does seem to share the same basic views and beliefs. 

[Joyce]

It seems Lori can't help but give dangerous advice.

To a woman who is sensitive to butter:

Quote

Can you not use butter? Most people who are allergic to dairy can eat butter.

To a woman whose husband has weed in the house and tells her not to dispose of them:

Quote

 

She must not disobey him. It's his problem and she must daily give it to the Lord in prayer and show Christ to him. 1 Peter 3:1-6 is her prescription too! As long as a man isn't asking his wife to participate in something evil, she needs to obey him in everything!

 

The woman should read the drug laws of her state and act accordingly.

In my country, a person who owns or maintains a house where drugs are used or stored, like this woman, can be imprisoned from 12 to 20 years. 

 

[EowynW]

5 minutes ago, Joyce said:

It seems Lori can't help but give dangerous advice.

To a woman who is sensitive to butter:

To a woman whose husband has weed in the house and tells her not to dispose of them:

The woman should read the drug laws of her state and act accordingly.

In my country, a person who owns or maintains a house where drugs are used or stored, like this woman, can be imprisoned from 12 to 20 years. 

 

Oh my gosh. Where did you see this? 

[Coy Koi]

After reading through @Free Jana Duggar's blog, I really just want to say that a lot of your beliefs are unacceptable and not far off from Lori's beliefs (not all of them, but too many). Beliefs like yours directly put a child like mine (and millions of others, perhaps including yours) at a higher risk of suicide, and for that there is no excuse. Your husband also sounds emotionally abusive and completely unfit to lead anyone.

I think every once in a while here we're too quick to be accepting (because that's USUALLY a good thing), but this is not a thing we should accept. And anyone is of course free to downvote me all they want but I would encourage you to read through the blog first.

[feministxtian]

@Free Jana Duggar I read some of your blog...you think the cheeto is a "successful businessman"? What the fuck are you smoking? Oh, and I just LOVED being called a "feminazi"...why don't you go curl up with Rush and company and be a cute little drone? You nauseate me. 

[Jellybean]

It's so hard to see stuff like this and be completely powerless to change anything about the situation. I know we are observers here and don't insert ourselves into the lives of those about whom we snark, but gosh, it's so difficult, especially when there is a strong possibility of harm to vulnerable people. Snark is entertaining and fun; watching people be cruel and hurtful is not.

[Hisey]

1 hour ago, Coy Koi said:

After reading through @Free Jana Duggar's blog, I really just want to say that a lot of your beliefs are unacceptable and not far off from Lori's beliefs (not all of them, but too many). Beliefs like yours directly put a child like mine (and millions of others, perhaps including yours) at a higher risk of suicide, and for that there is no excuse. Your husband also sounds emotionally abusive and completely unfit to lead anyone.

I think every once in a while here we're too quick to be accepting (because that's USUALLY a good thing), but this is not a thing we should accept. And anyone is of course free to downvote me all they want but I would encourage you to read through the blog first.

I read through the blog. I strongly disagree with Free Jana's beliefs. But Lori bans people she disagrees with. Do you really want to do the same? And be like Lori?

I certainly wouldn't ban someone because they voted for Trump. He isn't worth it. Besides, banning someone for having different political beliefs. .. do you really want to go there? 

I actually think Free Jana sounds like a reasonable, thoughtful person who holds views diametrically different than mine. I have lots of friends like her in real life. It makes life interesting. She's nothing like Lori.

Take gay marriage. From what I could see, Free Jana does not believe in using the term "marriage" to apply to gay couples. She does believe their union should be given legal protection (health benefits, etc). I believe she said she thinks gay sex is a "sin" but that she has several gay friends. This seems like a fairly ordinary conservative Christian viewpoint.  

Bear in mind, Free Jana comes here and reads many feminist/liberal viewpoints. I don't see her blasting anyone for those views. I think we should give her the same courtesy.

[Coy Koi]

5 minutes ago, Hisey said:

I read through the blog. I strongly disagree with Free Jana's beliefs. But Lori bans people she disagrees with. Do you really want to do the same? And be like Lori?

Not at all. I'm not calling for her to be banned. I'm condemning her harmful beliefs. She's definitely not a hateful monster like Lori, so I can only hope there's some shred of hope that she will rethink these things. If not, I will continue to condemn what deserves condemnation and prioritize the civil rights of people like my daughter over the feelings of a bigot.

[onemama]

1 hour ago, Coy Koi said:

After reading through @Free Jana Duggar's blog, I really just want to say that a lot of your beliefs are unacceptable and not far off from Lori's beliefs (not all of them, but too many). Beliefs like yours directly put a child like mine (and millions of others, perhaps including yours) at a higher risk of suicide, and for that there is no excuse. Your husband also sounds emotionally abusive and completely unfit to lead anyone.

I think every once in a while here we're too quick to be accepting (because that's USUALLY a good thing), but this is not a thing we should accept. And anyone is of course free to downvote me all they want but I would encourage you to read through the blog first.

- Beliefs are beliefs and you can't get rid of them that easily.  I'm sure I'd find some of yours questionable, but unacceptable?  What makes a belief unacceptable?

- I don't know what to say about your comment about her husband. She lives with him, she isn't telling you to do so or to follow his lead, he's not on here telling you what to do. IOW, what business is it of yours to comment on her husband? 

- Why shouldn't we accept each other? I went to the blog, commented on her post about Lori (latest), perused a post or two, disagreed with a thing or two (I wouldn't publish some things FJD has published), but that's it. Nothing I think needs to be brought here and called unacceptable. 

I snark about Lori because Lori holds abhorrent views and tries to push them on everyone around her. She's set herself up as "a teacher" and is spiritually and emotionally abusive.  I wouldn't even comment on her practices if she were not trying to push them on other people.  Blogging doesn't equal trying to "teach", it's just an outlet, and it seems like FJD's is an outlet for her thoughts and opinions, to which she has every single right.  Just like you do.   FJD may hold views I disagree with, or I may not discuss online, but she isn't trying to push them on anyone, or trying to crush anyone's rights.  Does she have to agree with you on every level for you to accept her? 

I know that, should I ever go back to blogging regularly, I'll never link to my blog on here. 

 

[Jellybean]

One of the justifications for believing that trans* people are experiencing a mental illness just like anorexia is that Johns Hopkins doesn't perform gender reassignment surgery, which is no longer the case (Washington Post).

trans* people already experience the most astonishing prejudice, hatred, ridicule and threats to their physical safety (as well as suffering actual violence). The risk of suicide is heartbreakingly high, and isn't helped by the psychological and physical aggressions directed at trans* people. I feel ok about speaking up for people like @Coy Koi's child, whose life will be hard enough without any public airing of views that misunderstand, misgender, and promote further discrimination.

[Coy Koi]

4 minutes ago, onemama said:

- Beliefs are beliefs and you can't get rid of them that easily.  I'm sure I'd find some of yours questionable, but unacceptable?  What makes a belief unacceptable?

- I don't know what to say about your comment about her husband. She lives with him, she isn't telling you to do so or to follow his lead, he's not on here telling you what to do. IOW, what business is it of yours to comment on her husband? 

- Why shouldn't we accept each other? I went to the blog, commented on her post about Lori (latest), perused a post or two, disagreed with a thing or two (I wouldn't publish some things FJD has published), but that's it. Nothing I think needs to be brought here and called unacceptable. 

I snark about Lori because Lori holds abhorrent views and tries to push them on everyone around her. She's set herself up as "a teacher" and is spiritually and emotionally abusive.  I wouldn't even comment on her practices if she were not trying to push them on other people.  Blogging doesn't equal trying to "teach", it's just an outlet, and it seems like FJD's is an outlet for her thoughts and opinions, to which she has every single right.  Just like you do.   FJD may hold views I disagree with, or I may not discuss online, but she isn't trying to push them on anyone, or trying to crush anyone's rights.  Does she have to agree with you on every level for you to accept her? 

I know that, should I ever go back to blogging regularly, I'll never link to my blog on here. 

 

-Are you saying there is no such thing as an unacceptable belief? That would be an incredibly extreme position so I'm just going to go ahead and assume you don't hold it, unless you tell me otherwise.

-She says her husband regularly yells at her over tiny mistakes and calls her very hurtful names and bosses her around and consistently refuses intimacy (and calls her a slut for trying to bring up the subject). That sounds like emotional abuse to me. Why would I need to be the victim of it to recognize that? I've been *a* victim of emotional abuse, just not her husband's victim, if that helps at all.

-She is actively advocating against civil rights for my child, as I said. I shouldn't call that unacceptable? She's not just blogging. She's voting.

[Coy Koi]

2 minutes ago, Jellybean said:

One of the justifications for believing that trans* people are experiencing a mental illness just like anorexia is that Johns Hopkins doesn't perform gender reassignment surgery, which is no longer the case (Washington Post).

trans* people already experience the most astonishing prejudice, hatred, ridicule and threats to their physical safety (as well as suffering actual violence). The risk of suicide is heartbreakingly high, and isn't helped by the psychological and physical aggressions directed at trans* people. I feel ok about speaking up for people like @Coy Koi's child, whose life will be hard enough without any public airing of views that misunderstand, misgender, and promote further discrimination.

Great points! I just want to be straightforward that my child is cisgender, but she is bisexual. @Free Jana Duggar is against same sex marriage so that's what I was talking about there. My daughter is also prone to depression (as am I) so the increased suicide risk for LGBTQ+ teens hits extremely close to home for me. I don't even want to think about my daughter being raised in a household that wasn't supportive of her.

Thanks for the info about John Hopkins, I was planning to look that up but hadn't gotten the chance yet.

[onemama]

11 minutes ago, Coy Koi said:

Are you saying there is no such thing as an unacceptable belief?

No I'm not. 

I still don't think her husband is your business, and if you think it is, then PM her your concerns. The way you aired them here it sounds like you're anything but concerned about her. It's part of a post where you're calling for her not to be accepted here. 

16 minutes ago, Coy Koi said:

She is actively advocating against civil rights for my child, as I said. I shouldn't call that unacceptable? She's not just blogging. She's voting.

That is a tough one. I don't know what to say because I think this is the price of freedom of expression. I really wish people weren't so loud with their opinions about issues that are so personal.  As I said above, there are opinions I hold that I'd rather discuss in an atmosphere of trust because I think I may have to reconsider them and because I care about how other's feel. I don't consider an online debate the place to do that.  Still, I don't think censorship helps, either.