Seewalds 41: Christian Hero Ivy Jane

[JordynDarby5]

4 hours ago, Glasgowghirl said:

I like Elizabeth as well, as a Catholic Scot, I did sympathise with Mary, Queen of Scots more growing up, I still do to an extent but Mary, after Darnley was murdered didn't do anything to distance herself from those suspected of his murder, she married the man suspected of killing him. Bothwell was a nasty and unpopular man and while what he did to Mary was horrible, even being close to him after the murder, knowing he was the main suspect was what cost her the crown and her infant son. She learned nothing while imprisoned by Elizabeth, she fell into the trap set for her and that was a fatal mistake.

Elizabeth learned from all the mistakes people made around her and survived scandal's and a trip to the tower of London herself. When her companion and rumoured potential suitor Robert Dudley's wife, Amy died after falling down stairs and it was speculated that she was pushed, Elizabeth was smart enough to distance herself from him and have her death investigated. Elizabeth also struck a balance between the extremes of her sibling's reign and wasn't scared to stand up for herself or England, when the Armada was trying to invade the country. Mary also for the most part kept things civil with King James VI knowing he was the one most likely to succeed her. 

I sympathize with Mary too. But it is frustrating that she made so many mistakes that seem so obvious. Starting with Darnley. She thought she felt love tending to him when he was sick and jumped into marriage. She didn't listen, wait or bother to get to know him better and ended up saddling herself with a worthless husband. She should have been or at least acted shocked at his death and outraged to keep suspicion off her and stayed away from his (most likely) murderer. She should have learned from Elizabeth or picked up a few things from Catherine Medici who was Queen when she was growing up at the French Court (not everything of course). She had the potential to be really great and really wasn't a bad person. 

 

[SassyPants]

8 hours ago, Bryna said:

I assume TLC probably does pay them ok, especially relative to their cost of living. But also, $38.98 including shipping isn't exactly breaking the bank for most people. I mean, just because she has one outfit like that doesn't necessarily mean she has 30. If they had a baby shower, she probably had enough clothes for the first six months given to her, and I'm sure she could have easily filled in any holes at little to no cost from hand me downs and used clothing. If it were me having a baby, I'm sure I'd buy at least one outfit that I really liked for less than the cost of dinner for two in an average restaurant. And I'm a cheapskate who probably doesn't spend $40 on clothing for myself in a year, lol.

If you follow them on IG, Ivy has been shown in 3 of those same sleepers, all in different colors. Now maybe only one of them cost that amount, or they were gifted the others, but 100$ for sleepers that will be outgrown in a few weeks...like I said, I would not call that a thrifty use of money.

[tabitha2]

I’ll cut her some slack this once.It’s her first very much wanted daughter and if she is going a little overboard that’s understandable. It’s not like she can’t afford it and there’s every chance they will be handme downs for future daughters . 

[ViolaSebastian]

Unfortunately, (ugh), she is an “influencer” with a large IG following. I’d imagine that the sleepers were given in exchange for exposure. 

[nst]

43 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

I’ll cut her some slack this once.It’s her first very much wanted daughter and if she is going a little overboard that’s understandable. It’s not like she can’t afford it and there’s every chance they will be handme downs for future daughters . 

much wanted daughter

didn't they both say they wanted 15 sons before any daughter

ivy is the new one. 

[Sobeknofret]

On 6/8/2019 at 10:52 PM, JordynDarby5 said:

No, it really hasn't. Its too bad. Her story is just as exciting as Elizabeth's but more heartbreaking. It is unfortunate that its not told as much. I read other books on Tudors before reading that one and held the more negative view. But that book showed how hard she had it once Henry decided to divorce Katherine. I really never considered it because I never heard another side or version. It changed my opinion of her. I still hate what she ended up doing later with the persecutions and putting Elizabeth in the tower. Tudor history is so full of complex and interesting women. All Six Wives are fascinating and interesting. So are Mary, Elizabeth, and Jane Grey. Henry's sisters Margaret and Mary. 

H.F.M. Prescott wrote a book called Mary Tudor: The Spanish Tudor which I can highly recommend. Excellent insight into Mary's behavior and actions. I read it every couple of years and it's still one of my favorite books about Mary, precisely because it *doesn't* demonize her, but it doesn't whitewash her actions either.  

[libgirl2]

18 hours ago, Kayleigh83 said:

Philippa Gregory’s books were the first ones I really got into after ones that were specifically aimed at the younger/preteen age group so I think they’ve always just held a special place for me! It was with her books I really got into the Tudor era in particular so for me it was a big gateway. I still do enjoy her books a lot even though I recognise she isn’t the *best* author, but I just really still enjoy her work and the subject matter she chooses if that makes sense?

Ugh but yes Margaret George is amazing, and I have read one or two Jean Plaidy books. I know I read The lady in the tower. I haven’t read the other authors as far as I know, will have to put them on the list!

Alison Weir is doing a book series on the 6 wives. She is up to Ann of Cleves (Anna of Kleve) which just came out. 

15 hours ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

Jean Plaidy’s “My Enemy the Queen” was one of the first books I read about the Tudors. It’s told from the perspective of Lettice Knollys, who was a granddaughter of Mary Boleyn and possibly also Henry VIII. She married Elizabeth’s favorite Robert Dudley, and was the mother (by a different husband) of Elizabeth’s favorite the Earl of Essex. 

Jean Plaidy was one of several pen names for the very prolific Eleanor Hibbert - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eleanor_Hibbert.

That was quite a good book but Elizabeth came off poorly. 

18 hours ago, JordynDarby5 said:

Elizabeth will always be my favorite. Its amazing everything she went through and was really intelligent and made a lot of really good decisions. She really seemed to learn from the mistakes made by her father, brother, sister and Cousin Mary. She had excellent tutors.

Mary would have been so happy to be a mother. It really was stupid on Henry's part not to marry her off just in case. He could have continued to try to produce heirs while his daughter also could have been. He could have a couple grandsons in line following after Edward. After Edward was a long line women and you just don't know how that's going to turn out. Mary was 30 when he died she would turn thirty-one a month later. She could have had a fourteen or fifteen year old heir by that point and maybe a few spares. 

I'll have to look into those bools. I love Tudor history, and do agree about Gregory. I've tried her books but don't like them. 

Elizabeth is my favorite. I have been reading biographies and other books in addition to every movie or TV show I can find since I was in middle school. I loved Glenda Jackson in Elizabeth R! Elizabeth was one of the smartest women if not the smartest women of her time. What she survived! 

 I am very critical about how she is portrayed. I won't watch the second Blackadder series because I can't stand how she is portrayed in that! My husband says I am weird. 

Perhaps the fact that prior to his reign there was the whole War of the Roses, made him afraid to trust the Tudor throne to grandchildren but he could have after Edward was born. 

9 hours ago, JordynDarby5 said:

I sympathize with Mary too. But it is frustrating that she made so many mistakes that seem so obvious. Starting with Darnley. She thought she felt love tending to him when he was sick and jumped into marriage. She didn't listen, wait or bother to get to know him better and ended up saddling herself with a worthless husband. She should have been or at least acted shocked at his death and outraged to keep suspicion off her and stayed away from his (most likely) murderer. She should have learned from Elizabeth or picked up a few things from Catherine Medici who was Queen when she was growing up at the French Court (not everything of course). She had the potential to be really great and really wasn't a bad person. 

 

I agree. Look how Elizabeth handled the whole Amy Dudley death. She didn't rush off and make Robert her husband (not that she would ever have anyway). She actually sent him away to cool things off. 

[Glasgowghirl]

9 hours ago, JordynDarby5 said:

I sympathize with Mary too. But it is frustrating that she made so many mistakes that seem so obvious. Starting with Darnley. She thought she felt love tending to him when he was sick and jumped into marriage. She didn't listen, wait or bother to get to know him better and ended up saddling herself with a worthless husband. She should have been or at least acted shocked at his death and outraged to keep suspicion off her and stayed away from his (most likely) murderer. She should have learned from Elizabeth or picked up a few things from Catherine Medici who was Queen when she was growing up at the French Court (not everything of course). She had the potential to be really great and really wasn't a bad person. 

 

Mary was already up against it, she hadn't taken into account that she had grown up in France and in that time the reformation had happened. As a Catholic, a lot of people had mistrust of her. Darnley was definitely a useless and horrible man and he had her private secretary David Rizzio murdered due his jealousy of the closeness between them. Having him murdered was never going to work, even if she was a popular ruler but when she was already someone that was mistrusted by the people and a lot of the Scottish nobility then she was playing a dangerous game. Elizabeth knew how to deal with her court and play things to her advantage, Mary didn't and in a male dominated world that was her downfall.

[Hisey]

3 hours ago, nst said:

much wanted daughter

didn't they both say they wanted 15 sons before any daughter

ivy is the new one. 

I know! I never got the sense they particularly wanted a girl. They both predicted another boy. When they say “I think it’s a boy” I’ve always taken that to mean that they hope it is one. I think they liked the idea of a string of boys. Men are the influencers in that society. 

[AussieKrissy]

The one thing  I will give the Duggars is that I have never seen any couple give any indication to the public about a gender preference.

I think there was one stupid comment about being glad about having a boy first to be a leader to his siblings if I recall.

The one thing this cult does do is make them grateful for any gender baby they have.

For the record I have no judgement for gender preference. how someone (badly) deals with it, maybe 

[Anna Bolinas]

On 6/11/2019 at 12:57 PM, libgirl2 said:

 I am very critical about how she is portrayed. I won't watch the second Blackadder series because I can't stand how she is portrayed in that! My husband says I am weird. 

 

Don't worry, I'm the same with Anne Boleyn! I can't read "The Other Boleyn Girl" or "Wolf Hall" for this very reason, even though they're both always recommended to me. 

[Melissa1977]

1 hour ago, AussieKrissy said:

The one thing  I will give the Duggars is that I have never seen any couple give any indication to the public about a gender preference.

I think there was one stupid comment about being glad about having a boy first to be a leader to his siblings if I recall.

The one thing this cult does do is make them grateful for any gender baby they have.

For the record I have no judgement for gender preference. how someone (badly) deals with it, maybe 

I think that Michelle and Kelly both wanted daugthers. The more daughters, the less work for them. Of course, they wanted boys, too. But sure Michelle was relieved to have Johanna after the 5, 6(?) middle boys.

In general, if you are planning to have a big family, you want to have boys and girls. I think nobody wants 10 only boys or only girls. The sex preference is more usual when you're planning to have an only child or a couple children, or when you have a lot of same sex children in a row.

 

[JordynDarby5]

On 6/11/2019 at 9:45 AM, Sobeknofret said:

H.F.M. Prescott wrote a book called Mary Tudor: The Spanish Tudor which I can highly recommend. Excellent insight into Mary's behavior and actions. I read it every couple of years and it's still one of my favorite books about Mary, precisely because it *doesn't* demonize her, but it doesn't whitewash her actions either.  

I'll look for it. It sounds good.

[JordynDarby5]

On 6/11/2019 at 12:09 PM, Glasgowghirl said:

Mary was already up against it, she hadn't taken into account that she had grown up in France and in that time the reformation had happened. As a Catholic, a lot of people had mistrust of her. Darnley was definitely a useless and horrible man and he had her private secretary David Rizzio murdered due his jealousy of the closeness between them. Having him murdered was never going to work, even if she was a popular ruler but when she was already someone that was mistrusted by the people and a lot of the Scottish nobility then she was playing a dangerous game. Elizabeth knew how to deal with her court and play things to her advantage, Mary didn't and in a male dominated world that was her downfall.

That's very true. Scotland had changed religions while she was gone, and she was trained more for a French court then a Scottish one, everyone distrusted her because they didn't know her, had grown up in France, was Catholic and was a woman. Whatever education she received in France didn't prepare her at all for Scotland. Not surprising given the plan was for her to be Queen of France, which she was but no one expected it to be short or without heirs. She did start out well but it didn't last long. She really didn't know how to play the game. She should have married someone else. There was no way she could divorce him and why anyone thought murdering Darnley was going end well I don't know. Especially in that matter. Explosion followed by strangulation. Even in Tudor era that wasn't going to fly.

[Glasgowghirl]

7 hours ago, JordynDarby5 said:

That's very true. Scotland had changed religions while she was gone, and she was trained more for a French court then a Scottish one, everyone distrusted her because they didn't know her, had grown up in France, was Catholic and was a woman. Whatever education she received in France didn't prepare her at all for Scotland. Not surprising given the plan was for her to be Queen of France, which she was but no one expected it to be short or without heirs. She did start out well but it didn't last long. She really didn't know how to play the game. She should have married someone else. There was no way she could divorce him and why anyone thought murdering Darnley was going end well I don't know. Especially in that matter. Explosion followed by strangulation. Even in Tudor era that wasn't going to fly.

Exactly, she thought because she was queen that she may have gotten away with it, a stronger ruler in previous generations but in her era Scots were a lot more enlightened and with their religious revolution happened quicker and was different to the one in England. Darnley's murder was the excuse that the majority of the nobles and a lot of the Scottish public were looking for to get rid of her and marrying Bothwell meant that their was no way back for her. 

[TeaELSee]

15 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

The one thing  I will give the Duggars is that I have never seen any couple give any indication to the public about a gender preference.

I think there was one stupid comment about being glad about having a boy first to be a leader to his siblings if I recall.

The one thing this cult does do is make them grateful for any gender baby they have.

For the record I have no judgement for gender preference. how someone (badly) deals with it, maybe 

I thought Joy and Austin were very clear that they wanted a first born boy.

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

27 minutes ago, TeaELSee said:

I thought Joy and Austin were very clear that they wanted a first born boy.

I think it was Joy who said that, and Austin said he didn't care. I think Joy was projecting her upbringing on to Austin in thinking that the 1st born should be male. Austin has 2 or 3 older sisters I don't think it matter to him. Though he was happy with a boy, I suspect he will be equally happy with a daughter, but I think Joy would be more comfortable with boys as that has been most of her social circle growing up and she is still having a hard time adjusting to being "a Godly woman" vs "a Godly kid tomboy"

[VelociRapture]

1 hour ago, TeaELSee said:

I thought Joy and Austin were very clear that they wanted a first born boy.

The only ones I remember stating a clear preference are Benessa and Derick. With Benessa I got the feeling it was more of a joke when they said they wanted 15 boys. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were glad to have a boy first, but I don’t remember them saying anything about that. Derick did state he was glad they were having a boy first because he’d be a “leader” for his siblings. That made me roll my eyes pretty hard. That comment stuck with me so much though that I was really glad we had a daughter first and that our second child will be a boy - I like the idea of Velocitoddler being the leader in her relationship with Velocibaby, kind of like how my mom was clearly the leader of her three younger siblings (one sister and two brothers.) 

There was also Cathy’s massive asshole move of saying something about how maybe the next baby would be a girl... when Jill was still pregnant with Sam... during their sex reveal... and Jill was just standing there looking super uncomfortable. But the Dills themselves didn’t say anything about a preference that time as far as I recall. 

[Sobeknofret]

14 hours ago, JordynDarby5 said:

I'll look for it. It sounds good.

You can get it on Amazon, in both paperback and a Kindle edition. I got it for Christmas in a boxed set of four books on women's history, the kind of thing you find in the discount section of the bookstore, marked 50% off. I was skeptical of it, but all but one of the books turned out to be terrific. There was a wonderful biography of Lucrezia Borgia, one of Frances Carr, Countess of Somerset, who was tried and convicted of the murder of Sir Thomas Overbury, and the Mary Tudor book. The fourth one had a great subject (courtesans in 19th century France) but was just written badly. 

 

[Georgiana]

I think that because, as far as we know, the second-gen Duggars all intended to have larger families than the norm, the gender of the first several kids in the family wasn't as big of a deal to them.  Likely, they all assumed that eventually they would have both boys and girls, and it didn't overly much matter to them what order they came in.  

It will be interesting to see if any of them start to have preferences if after a while they still have all one gender (all boys for Jill, Joy, and Kendra; all girls for Jinger) or if they realize they will not be having infinite babies and they don't yet have both.  

My fundie lite friends were kind of like that.  For the first couple kids, they had NO gender preference.  All girls.  Then they started to have a slight gender preference ("We'd really love a boy, but we have all the things for another girl, so we'd be happy either way!"). Another girl.  Then it became clear that health issues and finances would likely prevent them from having a kid every 1.5 years like they had been, and that next baby was going to be mom's last (at least for some time).  Then all of the sudden they REALLY wanted that boy (they got a beautiful baby girl).  Now they are openly jealous of people having boys.

So I'd be curious to see down the line if a gender preference surfaces in some of the families.  I think they all initially assumed they would get a mix, and so we won't really see whether or not they do strongly care one way or another until we see a long line of all one gender in one family or a family who won't be able to try infinitely to get that mix.  

[Moogritt]

2 hours ago, VelociRapture said:

our second child will be a boy

You found out? Congratulations!

[nickelodeon]

I only recall Austin saying that he wanted a bunch of kids to help around the campsite, which made me cringe given the fundie tendency to do child labor in lieu of homeschooling.

[VelociRapture]

1 hour ago, Moogritt said:

You found out? Congratulations!

Yes we did! I started my weekly cervical length checks this week and he was nice enough to show off for the ultrasound tech. Husband and I would have been just as excited no matter what the sex was just as long as baby is healthy and on track, but it was pretty exciting to find out for sure.  

[Vivi_music]

22 hours ago, AussieKrissy said:

The one thing  I will give the Duggars is that I have never seen any couple give any indication to the public about a gender preference. 

I think there was one stupid comment about being glad about having a boy first to be a leader to his siblings if I recall.

The one thing this cult does do is make them grateful for any gender baby they have.

For the record I have no judgement for gender preference. how someone (badly) deals with it, maybe 

I think you are right about the Duggar's reaction to their children's sex. But I wonder if a part of this is actually due to their strict gender conformity. Hear me out (I will try to explain my theory well but english is my second language).

From what I have observed, in very religious people, they seem to value women and men equally in the sense that they are both created by God. In that aspect, both sexes were created by God but to fuflfill different purposes. To be born female or male is also a gift from God (this is not real theology, just my perception of the fundie mindset here. Someone can correct me if I am wrong). I think that because both women's and men's roles are ordained by God, they are valuable and important.

I would say it is very close to the theory of seperated spheres. A godly man provides for his family (so works in the public sphere). And a goldy woman is a mother in charge of rearing the children (so in the private/domestic sphere). I think for fundies, both these gender roles are important in a home. That is.... as long as they are respected. I think fundies are as happy to be parents to girls and to boys in that regard. I think a true problem would arise if one of the children did question gender norms, cis-normative sexuality and so on.

[allthegoodnamesrgone]

3 hours ago, Moogritt said:

You found out? Congratulations!

I love her nonchalance of dropping big news like this. 

Congrats on your Velocoboy!  I hope he hangs in longer than his sister.