Jump to content
IGNORED

Chelsy and John Maxwell 7: Not as Beige as Maxhell - Yet


Coconut Flan

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Tatar-tot said:

That wacky photo is funny as all get out....it is the photo shoot from Sarah’s wild dreams she never gets to do.  We need to hook her up with Ardnt photography!  

Idk if you were kidding or not but in case anyone thinks that's a good idea...

We cannot control what people do outside of FJ, but if you contact the people discussed here leave us out of it.  It's against the rules to involve FJ in your poop touching.

Also curious as to how to know Sarah's wildest dreams?  If you don't have reason to believe what you said is true then it's just fan fiction.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My sister and dad are extreme extroverts and my mom is an introvert like me. I call myself an ambivert though. I’m not a true introvert. It really depends on the situation for me. Some people think I’m an extrovert while others think I’m an introvert. I’m mostly a social chameleon. I can usually adapt to most situations. When I’m uncomfortable with the people I’m around, social interactions exhaust me. When I’m comfortable with the people I’m with, I’m energized by the interaction and very outgoing. 

  • Upvote 11
  • I Agree 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/31/2019 at 10:37 AM, Cora Persephona said:

WTF did I just read?!

If you think a 2 year old can understand the "feelings of someone who may have spent hours or all day preparing for her guests so that they could enjoy a meal together", you haven't met too many 2 year olds.  

No shit, right?!? As an adult, I have only known a few two-year-olds, and even I knew this is a ridiculous expectation. Jesus wept.

11 hours ago, Caroline said:

I'm a teacher so I've had to learn to do all of the above in order to survive with lots of different personalities five days a week.  I call myself a 'faketrovert' because it's a real effort sometimes.

I can relate. In a previous life, I trained to be a Lutheran pastor, and learned to be a "vocational extrovert." (And along with some theological differences and policy disagreements, this is one reason I decided that ministry wasn't the vocation for me.)

You're not being fake, just exercising some diffrerent "muscles" as part of your career. (Thank you for teaching, btw!) ?

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I’ve posted this before. Imo she is wearing jeans and it is not photoshopped. It’s simply the light from the window behind her falling onto the back of her legs. If you zoom in and look at the different shades of shadows, it is clearer. 

F888CFAB-FAD3-4004-A987-DD27148024D0.png

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A new little cult member is on the way to Maxhell. Wonder what "out-there" name [for a Maxwell] this kid will get? Daxx? Veronique? lol

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shy is not a synonym for introvert. And wanting autonomy over your body, regardless of your age, is not being rude. I say this as a not-shy introvert who to this day will not hug someone I do not wnat to hug, and who bristles as sales clerks and servers who insist on addressing me with a term of endearment.

If there's a history in the Bontrager family of making children accept physical affection from anyone, it stands to reason they are going to turn away and cling for protection from the very person who should be protecting them. When someone told my kids to "come here so I can give you a hug", I would quietly reassure them that they did not have to do that if they didn't want to. They learned early on that offering their hand to shake while saying something to the effect of "Thank you for inviting me. I had a nice time." generally deterred those determined to demand a hug and a kiss.

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Black Aliss said:

Shy is not a synonym for introvert. And wanting autonomy over your body, regardless of your age, is not being rude. I say this as a not-shy introvert who to this day will not hug someone I do not wnat to hug, and who bristles as sales clerks and servers who insist on addressing me with a term of endearment.

If there's a history in the Bontrager family of making children accept physical affection from anyone, it stands to reason they are going to turn away and cling for protection from the very person who should be protecting them. When someone told my kids to "come here so I can give you a hug", I would quietly reassure them that they did not have to do that if they didn't want to. They learned early on that offering their hand to shake while saying something to the effect of "Thank you for inviting me. I had a nice time." generally deterred those determined to demand a hug and a kiss.

Your handshake solution is a good one and appropriate for today. To say there is a history in the Bontrager family--well, there's a history in MANY, MANY families of this. The notion of a child refusing affection is a very new one. There is a big difference between being told to kiss your 95 year old great-grandmother, or accept her hug, than to do that/take that from a stranger. Most parents of all ages and generations can understand that. It can get carried too far imho. Example: the mother who won't hold her toddler's hand in the parking lot because it is violating his personal authority over his body. B.S. It is endangering him not to hold his hand. 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IReallyAmHopewell said:

The notion of a child refusing affection is a very new one. There is a big difference between being told to kiss your 95 year old great-grandmother, or accept her hug, than to do that/take that from a stranger.

My kids are in their 20s and my approach to leave it to them to hug or kiss family, including their elderly grand and great-grand parents, was seen as odd by some of the older generation.

But I disagree that it's different.  Most molestations are someone the child knows, including family and others close to the parents.  It's much easier to teach them that they have bodily autonomy when it comes to strangers, but extending it to family takes the guess work out of it for kids...and keeps them safer.

I don't for a second think my 82 year old grandma had sexual intent when she wanted to hug my toddlers, but I wanted them to learn no one - even safe, loving grandma, has a right to touch them if they don't want to.

Fwiw I have never known anyone that extended that to safety measures, holding hands, parental bathing, etc.  

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 4
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m *huge* on bodily autonomy for kids but I’ve changed many diapers over the protests of kids, saying, “I need to change your diaper so you don’t get a rash.” They can choose where to have the diaper changed, what toy to hold, what YouTube video to watch during, what snack to have after, anything, but kid - you’re walking around with poop and that is not okay. Sorry. 

  • Upvote 11
  • I Agree 3
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@anachronistic i'm not a parent yet, and I don't remember this with the many younger siblings I raised, but do you find there is an overlap between the age/sentiment of a toddler who is embarrassed to have their diaper changed and also unwilling to start potty training? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My kids are in their 30's and, yes, strangers and unfamiliar family members did bristle at my allowing my toddlers to refuse hugs and kisses. I didn't GAF. It was what all my friends with similar aged children were doing and in our circle it wasn't considered at all odd. There was even a picture book that was popular back then called "My Body is Private".  My MIL, with a PhD in early childhood education, was completely on board with this even when our firstborn was an infant. (Funny story: my FIL finally stopped his years-long 4 pack a day cigarette habit when, on first meeting, our 2 month old son turned his head away from him and began to cry because FIL reeked of tobacco. They later became best buddies.)

There is a huge difference between respecting bodily autonomy and keeping your child safe. WRT autonomy, though, one of my kids attended an infant care center where the owner was a disciple of Magda Gerber (google her if you're not familiar) and it was a delightful place. No high chairs, for starters. Babies who couldn't sit independently and feed themselves were held in a caregiver's lap for meals and bottles. When they were old enough to feed themselves they all sat around a low table on tiny chairs. Toddlers would raise their arms to a caregiver to indicate that they wanted to be picked up, otherwise a caregiver would get down on the floor next to them and be available for comfort when they asked. They were not given the option of having their diapers changed! They aged out of that center at 2-2 1/2 so the staff never really had to deal with the next stage of development.

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bonts announced Max #2 on their blog.  Only one pic of Judgy Chelsy in jeans and you really have to look close to see as she is sitting down and her hair is hanging over her lap.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

25 minutes ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

2 hour long discussion? Huh? It’s pants.

I would happily spend two hours reading on FJ about various fundies making the jump to wearing pants, but never in a million years would I want to spend two hours engaged in a conversation about making the jump to wear pants. 

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HA88 said:

 

I would happily spend two hours reading on FJ about various fundies making the jump to wearing pants, but never in a million years would I want to spend two hours engaged in a conversation about making the jump to wear pants. 

LOL!  Well put!

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Chelsy addressing the pants wearing is a HUGE step for her and John.  To publicly announce that basically they do not agree with Stevehova's  interpretation of the bible is a big step for them.  Not so much that their core values change, but that it will piss Steve off and maybe get the girls still at home.....well all of the girls thinking!!

  • Upvote 18
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I like from Chelsy's comment is how she, again, makes clear that John and her decide things together. It's not the first time I notice that and I think it's refreshing, considering their extremely sexist upbringing. 

Pants may be a tiny step, but an equal marriage can make the difference for them as a couple. Not that it makes them less fundie, but they will be less miserable at least.

 

  • Upvote 14
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Melissa1977 said:

What I like from Chelsy's comment is how she, again, makes clear that John and her decide things together. It's not the first time I notice that and I think it's refreshing, considering their extremely sexist upbringing. 

Pants may be a tiny step, but an equal marriage can make the difference for them as a couple. Not that it makes them less fundie, but they will be less miserable at least.

 

I just don't think a woman wearing pants is going to make anyone any less miserable. Too much stock is put into that around here.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

I just don't think a woman wearing pants is going to make anyone any less miserable. Too much stock is put into that around here.

I was trying to say that pants are no important, but making decisions together as a couple, it is. Maxwells and Bontragers clearly put husband as the main leader, but Chelsy writes often about John and her being a team. That was my point, not the pants.

  • Upvote 15
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sops2 said:

The telling bit for me was...." we are now our own family"

But are they their own "extended family?"

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa1977 said:

I was trying to say that pants are no important, but making decisions together as a couple, it is. Maxwells and Bontragers clearly put husband as the main leader, but Chelsy writes often about John and her being a team. That was my point, not the pants.

Gotcha! I misread!

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • HerNameIsBuffy locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.