Lori Alexander 52: Looking for Debt-free Virgins Without Tatoos

[delphinium65]

3 minutes ago, Free Jana Duggar said:

I  don't understand how some of these women can't at least see that a college education can be a benefit for them homeschooling.

As long as ignorance is a feature, not a bug in the system, Lori don't need no education.  

[louisa05]

16 hours ago, SuperNova said:

. The only ones listening to her and agreeing are ones that have already made their choices. As ridiculous as it is, there are plenty of other women just like Lori, willing to live in subjection to an asshole just so they don't have to go out and make life happen for themselves.

 

I wonder what baggage is there that makes some women seek this out. One of my former Christian school students is the perfect submissive wife and mother. She is the one that I posted about recently whose husband made the activity, daily schedule, menus and chore thing for her and the kids for the entire summer one year, then she bragged about it online. 

BUT thinking about her life when I knew her, I can see why this would be something that is meaningful to her or makes her feel loved. Her parents worked five jobs between them when she was in high school so their three kids could go to an expensive Christian school (they would've been paying about $15,000 a year in tuition--in the mid to late 90s). Mom and dad were either at work or sleeping. She was the oldest with a sister two years younger and a brother three years younger. She got a school permit in ninth grade and was in charge of driving herself and her siblings to school and activities. She had to keep track of schedules for all of them on her own. She was given money each month to budget for food and car expenses. She was in charge of grocery shopping and meals for her and the siblings. She was responsible for getting all three of them up and ready for school, packing lunches, monitoring grades for the younger siblings--all of it. She went to a nearby Christian college and lived at home and was still in charge of her siblings then. She literally showed up at parent-teacher conferences for herself and the siblings with no parent along. On top of all of that, no parent was able to come to the kids' events. She was in two of my plays and no adult family members came to see her perform. She was the only one who came to her younger siblings's games or other events. 

And she wanted to be a normal teenager. Very much so. She wanted her parents to be at home and in charge of this stuff. She would have preferred that to attending that school if that was the choice. 

So I can see as how someone who grew up that way would be happy with a spouse who actually does stuff for them--even if it is to the extreme. She likely finally feels like someone is taking care of her. Because in years when someone should have been, no one was and she was responsible for others, too. If that means totally giving up decision making, etc...all the better for someone who grew up that way. 

As for Lori...I wonder whose decision it was that she become a teacher? Obviously, she was not inclined to the profession in the least. It seems she does not actually like children. Classes in educational psychology, child development and teaching methods would be dreadfully unappealing to someone who does not like children and has no inclination to the profession. And perhaps she was not academically inclined at all. Some people are not. Could it be that doctor dad just felt strongly that all of his children would be college educated regardless of their talents or desires? Could it be that her parents chose teacher education for her so she would be home with future children for summer and holidays and/or it was a typical career for young women to pursue? Would young Lori have chosen something else on her own and didn't have the opportunity? So instead, she has decided college/all post-secondary education is a total waste for all women. 

Just meandering thoughts. Sorry it is so long. 

 

[Hane]

15 minutes ago, Free Jana Duggar said:

I  don't understand how some of these women can't at least see that a college education can be a benefit for them homeschooling.

Oh! They argue their way out of it by claiming that colleges and universities are chock-full of ungodly, Satanic Marxist professors who will turn them from JESUS!!! and de-virginify them.

I am convinced that many women of this ilk are just too damn lazy to complete a college degree and/or hold a job outside the home. It can be intellectually easier to sit back and let someone else support you.* Although I did earn two degrees, as a young wife I was definitely attracted to the SAHM lifestyle, as the idea of supporting myself struck me as intimidating. Then I wound up divorced, with a baby, unemployed, and with a big $2000 in the bank (which wasn’t much even in 1979). I grew up FAST.

*This is NOT a blanket indictment of all SAHW/Ms—I know many damn smart, hardworking ones, but the ones who suck up to Lori disgust me. Turn your brain off, let Hubby make all the decisions, give him five minutes and lube, and crank out babies nonstop.

@louisa05 , I’m not much older that Lori and, while things were starting to change for women in the ‘60s and ‘70s, the old mindset of teacher/nurse/secretary being the primary career slots for women was still alive and well.

[EmiGirl]

@louisa05  I think her dad insisted she went to college. I'm under the impression her parents are not patriarchal and she could have studied whatever she wanted. He wanted his kids to be educated.

[louisa05]

1 minute ago, EmiGirl said:

@louisa05  I think her dad insisted she went to college. I'm under the impression her parents are not patriarchal and she could have studied whatever she wanted. He wanted his kids to be educated.

I had a student teacher the last year I was teaching full time whose parents chose education for her in spite of her wanting to pursue something in relation to marketing or public relations. This was in 2010. And other than choosing their daughter's college major, the parents didn't sound at all patriarchal. They vetoed pre-med for her brother and agreed to PT school instead; so it wasn't just her. She felt stuck because if she hadn't gone along with their choice, they wouldn't have helped pay. With the cost of college now, that puts a student in a bad place. So she did English and Social Studies hoping that picking up sociology and such as well as writing/communication skills would help her pursue jobs she wanted later. She was a terrible student teacher because she didn't want to be there. And after finishing, she ended up working at a call center. 

I'm not sure that lack of patriarchy stops some parents from being controlling. Plus, as @Hane points out, certain professions were still considered more acceptable for young women in the period Lori would have gone to college. That may have influenced both her and her parents. All I'm saying is, how would Lori been different if she could have done what she wanted? She may have never considered what she might have really wanted due to parental pressure or cultural norms of the time.  But I'm pretty sure she never had any real desire to teach. 

[ladyicantxplain]

4 hours ago, Lisafer said:

May I have the name of the preacher you are referring to?

https://yahministries.wordpress.com/2017/05/13/7-year-old-girl-raised-from-the-dead/

 

Sure. Here is story of Rebekbah's being raised.  His first daughter died, and he decided after this tragedy that he would not lose another child.

I have met him face to face; he is the real deal.

Just because the mainstream news doesn't carry these stories doesn't mean they haven't happened.

You can read more testimonies of resurrections from the dead and other miracles on the JGLM website; this is the oldest healing ministry in US.

[quiversR4hunting]

1 hour ago, louisa05 said:

I had a student teacher the last year I was teaching full time whose parents chose education for her in spite of her wanting to pursue something in relation to marketing or public relations.

it's sad that she didn't go for a secondary education in business degree. So she would be certified to teach computers, econ, marketing and accounting. Then it would have been easier for her to transition into the business world.

So I was updating my Goodreads list (got a notice that Janet Dailey has a new book. love me some cowboy romance with some mystery mixed in ) So I had to check out her reviews on goodreads and boy have they been active! I looked at the dates and since she had her tattoo/debtfree/virgin post many reviews came up. So then I had to go to Amazon. Oh be still my heart! 63% = 1 star reviews. the 3-star review is pretty good here is my screenshot of the reviews.

(date & time stamp is my addition)

So one recent 5-star reviewer on amazon said that this is just "tribal hazing" all these 1-star reviews. I made a comment but I realize I forgot to start my comment to Bethany's review with "Oh bless your heart" (read in your best Dixie Carter or Reese Witherspoon southern drawl)

 

[Sarah92]

I went to two Christian universities and you'd be surprised by the number of kids who are only there because their parents said they had to go there or they wouldn't help the kids pay for anything. It honestly just makes the students angry and resentful. My most recent school's undergrad program requires numerous Bible classes so those who are forced to go and don't believe, end up miserable in difficult Bible classes. 

[Petronella]

8 minutes ago, ladyicantxplain said:

https://yahministries.wordpress.com/2017/05/13/7-year-old-girl-raised-from-the-dead/

 

Sure. Here is story of Rebekbah's being raised.  His first daughter died, and he decided after this tragedy that he would not lose another child.

I have met him face to face; he is the real deal.

Just because the mainstream news doesn't carry these stories doesn't mean they haven't happened.

You can read more testimonies of resurrections from the dead and other miracles on the JGLM website; this is the oldest healing ministry in US.

Okay, I read at the link. I don't see anything there corroborated by witnesses. I don't see any objective information to lead me to believe that she actually was dead in the first place. I'm confused by the assertion that, upon later examination, "doctor’s [sic] confirmed that she had been dead for at least 45 minutes." What evidence would there be to show "has been dead for X amount of time"??

I'm not saying he's lying (though I'm pretty sure some people claiming "raising from the dead" miracles are lying). Being in that emotionally charged a situation and both experiencing it and then remembering and telling it through the paradigm of faith, well, things get massaged, not even on purpose. Details get filled in in a way that jibes with the teller's understanding of the world.

But what really gets me with stories like this is the implication that if other people just **believed enough**, just **believed as much** as this superspecial person, then they too would have living children. That's horrendous.

I'm thinking of the family in the Jill Rodrigues thread who lost all three of their children to a fire. Why didn't God raise them? Those parents certainly have faith, faith to rival Job's. (For the record, even Job himself didn't get his children raised from the dead as his reward--he got replacement children, which I've always found pretty uncomfortable.)

As for why the mainstream news doesn't carry these stories? Well, the story in the link comes across as dodgy. Very dodgy. All hearsay and urban legend. I can believe that he is telling the truth as he perceives it, but I don't see anything in that story to convince me that she was literally dead for 45 minutes and then miraculously brought back to life.

[Alisamer]

I'm sure that Lori probably did feel her career prospects were limited at that time, and chose teaching so she'd have summers off. She just seems so incredibly lazy to me, as do many of her followers. I mean sure, it's sometimes nice to not have to make some decisions. It'd be wonderful to have somebody else bringing in money so I could stay home and enjoy my hobbies. But she doesn't even seem to have any hobbies, except posting photos of bread and making other people miserable! 

[ladyicantxplain]

@Petronella, I understand.  It's really outrageous.  Just read it and listen to her firsthand testimony.

As I said, if I hadn't met this man face  to face and spent a weekend with him, I wouldn't put his name out there.  

I can assure you, he would NEVER tolerate any other believer saying to someone whose child died that they "didn't have enough faith" or otherwise putting ANY blame whatsoever on the parents or others.  He throws people who talk like that out of his services.  He has no tolerance for  blaming people for being "faithless".

He DOES despise religion, and this is why I chose to quote him, when he said, "If anyone brings up your past, if at all possible, get away from that person immediately...Jesus will NEVER bring up your past."  

The Jesus He knows and preaches would NEVER speak the way Lori does, or many of her followers do.

This man's teachings have helped me to recover from horrific abuse myself (a lifetime of abuse) and regardless of other's thoughts about Rebekah, what he speaks is the closest thing I have ever heard to Jesus from a church on this earth.

 

[Petronella]

Thanks for taking my response kindly, @ladyicantxplain. He sounds like a genuine and kind person. I don't believe that events unfolded in the way he asserts, but I accept that he believes that they did.

A side note about pasts: I agree with the sentiment that one's past shouldn't be thrown in one's face, a la Lori; after all, you can't change it now, and it's what makes you you. But extremes of that usually healthy attitude can become toxic. I'm not saying that he makes it toxic; just that if taken to an extreme it can become toxic. It's teachings like that that encourage women to stay with abusers--they have to be forgiving, don't they? If Jesus wouldn't bring up their man's past, why should they? But past actions can be a pretty darn good predictor of future behaviour. I wouldn't marry someone who abused his first wife, is what I'm saying.

[ladyicantxplain]

@Petronella, yes, you are correct, we have to use wisdom in all things.

The audience he spoke this to is an audience of people who understand what new creation means, and are living it.

If a woman is with a man who is clearly abusing and abused others in his past, it is clear that he is not, nor has he ever been, truly born again.

If you were to listen to all of his teachings, you would see that there is no tolerance for bullying of any kind towards anyone.

Context is so important; audience is so important.  There are men (and women) who get born again and literally live entirely different lives than they did before they were born again.  These are people whose families constantly remind them of "how awful they were" before God, and it has frequently derailed their ministries.  He's basically ministering to ministers. 

Honestly I understand your skepticism; there is so much spiritual abuse out there.  All I can say is this ministry and this man are the real deal.

 

[Imrlgoddess]

18 minutes ago, Petronella said:

I agree with the sentiment that one's past shouldn't be thrown in one's face, a la Lori; after all, you can't change it now, and it's what makes you you.

To snatch a page from their book:  just because *they* and can't get over the idea of a spouse with another partner or a drunk night at a college party, doesn't mean everyone can't. That's their burden to bear.  No everyone on earth is so insecure that they have to compare themselves constantly to a memory that is quickly forgotten.  If you breed bitterness, bitterness is what will grow. 

I had a college friend who was like this, he wasn't religious at all, just a textbook misogynist.  He only wanted to date "good girls" but he had no issues asking me for a birth control pill here and there to act as a "morning after" remedy (yes it did actually work).  Not to mention he had one hell of an xtasy racket going on for years.  Piety only counts for de wymenz.  

[Petronella]

1 minute ago, Imrlgoddess said:

To snatch a page from their book:  just because *they* and can't get over the idea of a spouse with another partner or a drunk night at a college party, doesn't mean everyone can't. That's their burden to bear.  No everyone on earth is so insecure that they have to compare themselves constantly to a memory that is quickly forgotten.  If you breed bitterness, bitterness is what will grow. 

I had a college friend who was like this, he wasn't religious at all, just a textbook misogynist.  He only wanted to date "good girls" but he had no issues asking me for a birth control pill here and there to act as a "morning after" remedy (yes it did actually work).  Not to mention he had one hell of an xtasy racket going on for years.  Piety only counts for de wymenz.  

Oh, yeah, the whole Lori/MRA thing is an enormous rabbit hole.

I keep trying to formulate a coherent, pithy response but there's just SO MUCH to say.

 

[SuperNova]

13 hours ago, Sarah92 said:

I don't like the way she uses baggage. Almost everyone has baggage and things that hurt them. My brother being an alcoholic for most of my childhood and adult years is baggage. Does a guy get to look at that and say "I'm gonna walk away because I don't want to be part of that family. She has too much baggage?" At what point do we decide someone's past is too much?

Truth be told, I would be more wary of someone with no baggage. What circumstances (or lack of) have happened that this person has no baggage at all? Actually, I take issue with the word baggage. Most people would call it life experience. It only becomes baggage if it's a negative that the person hasn't dealt with. The life experiences that people have had are a part of them and they're not a negative, it is part of the story. I wouldn't want to associate with, much less date, someone that would judge me based solely on history. I would consider why something happened, what they did about it, how they grew as a person, and who they are now. Then again, Lori and her new found friends think of children as baggage. How sick is that?

I don't think that your brother counts as your baggage. His choices are his baggage. I don't know how close you are with him, but assuming he is a part of your life to some degree, I would think that he being part of your baggage would hinge on how much you yourself participate in his unhealthy behavior. My own brother is in the process of ruining his life with alcohol. I don't consider him baggage because I don't engage with him when he's drinking. I will only speak with him or spend time with him when he's sober. We don't talk much because he refuses to acknowledge his problem.

Lori and the ridiculous men that comment on her page always seem to make the assumption that these "ruined" women are being totally transparent. Who says they're sharing everything with their potential mate? If it makes no difference in the present, why should anyone feel obligated to share every detail, every experience, every partner? Nobody owes their partner a total disclosure of the past. Sorry Lori.

[delphinium65]

4 minutes ago, SuperNova said:

Truth be told, I would be more wary of someone with no baggage.

I'd be very cautious if someone seems to have no baggage, because they're probably lying, or at least hiding things that may be important. 

As for what 'baggage' is important...I'm interested in two things.  1. How long ago was it?  Ten years ago is a lot different from ten days ago.  2. If this person did something seriously objectionable, or purely stupid, have they learned something from it?  I think both of those factors are important in determining if this person is likely to do < insert whatever happened here > again. 

[Sarah92]

5 minutes ago, SuperNova said:

I don't think that your brother counts as your baggage. His choices are his baggage. I don't know how close you are with him, but assuming he is a part of your life to some degree, I would think that he being part of your baggage would hinge on how much you yourself participate in his unhealthy behavior. My own brother is in the process of ruining his life with alcohol. I don't consider him baggage because I don't engage with him when he's drinking. I will only speak with him or spend time with him when he's sober. We don't talk much because he refuses to acknowledge his problem.

 

I think you're right. My brother's choice aren't my baggage. He  lives with my parents and is currently sober but we aren't close. It would take a very long time to build trust between us. It's a long complicated story. When I refer to baggage I'm mostly referencing my own emotional issues. I've spent over 15 years, starting before I was 8, watching him slowly killing himself with alcohol and poor choices. It's a weird kind of trauma. I've found some healing. At one point I was so emotionally numb I didn't feel anything. I'm now processing emotions much better and protecting myself by setting boundaries. 

[Lisafer]

@ladyicantxplain Thank you for providing the name. I do believe that, as Shakespeare said, "there are more things in Heaven and Earth" than we have explanations for, so I don't want to leap all over your assertion that this man actually raises the dead. But the story at the link has nothing to back it up. As @Petronella says, this man's memory of the incident could be colored by trauma. It has some really questionable plot holes. 

You've met the man and I haven't. He may be a good, well-meaning person. As long as he's not hurting anybody, taking money under false pretenses, or abusing the trust of his followers, he can attempt to heal and raise the dead all day long as far as I'm concerned.  

Thank you for your polite responses in this thread. I'm sure you're not surprised that we had questions!

[SuperNova]

17 minutes ago, Sarah92 said:

I think you're right. My brother's choice aren't my baggage. He  lives with my parents and is currently sober but we aren't close. It would take a very long time to build trust between us. It's a long complicated story. When I refer to baggage I'm mostly referencing my own emotional issues. I've spent over 15 years, starting before I was 8, watching him slowly killing himself with alcohol and poor choices. It's a weird kind of trauma. I've found some healing. At one point I was so emotionally numb I didn't feel anything. I'm now processing emotions much better and protecting myself by setting boundaries. 

I apologize if I anything I wrote was hurtful to you. I was trying to make a point (perhaps badly) that you shouldn't feel responsible for other people's shortcomings. I'm genuinely sorry for what you've gone through and I'm glad to hear that you brother is doing better. It's tough to watch someone you love suffer and I'm proud of you for doing the work to heal. I know from personal experience how hard it is to start feeling again, it can be scary to let it all in and find the clarity to process. Hang in there. 

[G33kywife]

23 hours ago, Free Jana Duggar said:

I can't believe I didn't remember this before. Check out the story of Hosea and Gomer.  God told Hosea to not only marry a non-virgin, but a prostitute! 

Totally!! My church just finished going through the book of Hosea as a sermon series. I’ve never heard the word “whore” in church so many times! Lori would probably say that Hosea shouldn’t be preached on for whatever reason. 

[Hisey]

2 hours ago, Sarah92 said:

I went to two Christian universities and you'd be surprised by the number of kids who are only there because their parents said they had to go there or they wouldn't help the kids pay for anything. It honestly just makes the students angry and resentful. My most recent school's undergrad program requires numerous Bible classes so those who are forced to go and don't believe, end up miserable in difficult Bible classes. 

I think it's a mistake to try to manipulate young adults with money. I mean, it's OK to say, "I don't want to pay for that because I don't approve of it." (for example, not paying for cigarettes or Red Bulls for your kid). That's setting reasonable boundaries--parents are not ATM machines. But, unless it's something harmful, I think it's wrong to try to influence their life choices by withdrawing funds if they don't do what you want them to do.

Also, I've found that kids often know what's best for them, starting at about age 11 or 12. If a Christian college doesn't float their boat, they won't do well there. 

I'm the parent of a young adult so I've thought this through! 

[feministxtian]

1 hour ago, Hisey said:

I think it's a mistake to try to manipulate young adults with money. I mean, it's OK to say, "I don't want to pay for that because I don't approve of it." (for example, not paying for cigarettes or Red Bulls for your kid). That's setting reasonable boundaries--parents are not ATM machines. But, unless it's something harmful, I think it's wrong to try to influence their life choices by withdrawing funds if they don't do what you want them to do.

Also, I've found that kids often know what's best for them, starting at about age 11 or 12. If a Christian college doesn't float their boat, they won't do well there. 

I'm the parent of a young adult so I've thought this through! 

I agree...however, closing the "first national bank of mom" was the smartest thing I ever did!

[louisa05]

1 hour ago, feministxtian said:

I agree...however, closing the "first national bank of mom" was the smartest thing I ever did!

My brother closed the Bank of Dad on his kid recently. Not because his son wasn't doing what he wanted him to do, but because he was doing next to nothing. Only in school part time and about to begin year six with no degree, failed out of one major and not choosing another, working a whole 10 hours a week in the school year and not at all in summer (when better options were available). My brother's decision was based on his conclusion that if this was where he is at 23, he is just going to cruise along for who knows how long living off of his dad's hard work. So bank is closed. And what do you know? Kid got a 30 hour a week job this summer which is a good start all things considered. 

[Sarah92]

3 hours ago, SuperNova said:

I apologize if I anything I wrote was hurtful to you. I was trying to make a point (perhaps badly) that you shouldn't feel responsible for other people's shortcomings. I'm genuinely sorry for what you've gone through and I'm glad to hear that you brother is doing better. It's tough to watch someone you love suffer and I'm proud of you for doing the work to heal. I know from personal experience how hard it is to start feeling again, it can be scary to let it all in and find the clarity to process. Hang in there. 

Oh no not at all! As someone who was/is a "peacekeeper" in the family I can easily take on people's baggage. What you said is a good reminder that I'm not responsible contrary to what he might have told me and the rest of us in a drunken fit. And thank you for the encouragement! It's nice to know others get it. 

I think you're wise not to engage when he's not willing to admit he has a problem. I hope he gets better because it really does suck watching someone do that. Stay strong!