Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
HerNameIsBuffy

Chelsy and John Maxwell 8: Killing Demons with a Salt Gun

Recommended Posts

kpmom
4 hours ago, usmcmom said:

 

How is she supposed to get a good photo for the blog if he WON’T SMASH HIS CAKE!?!  

I read this in a Pink Floyd, "How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?", voice. 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NancyDrewFan1989
On 3/28/2020 at 8:35 AM, fundiefan said:

Chelsey posted about streaming church services - two times on each Sunday! 

She managed to discuss training her one year old son to sit quietly during church. You can't wait til they're 4 and expect them to sit quietly, you have to train them when they're young!

There is a picture of Axton on John's lap with John holding Axton's hands in place. There was a similar picture on his birthday post. I don't think they're training him to do anything - they're forcing him.

The sad part is that both Chelsy and John were raised this way. Both of them are probably taking the advice from the Pearl family.

As for sitting through the church services, I know a few families who have little ones who are partaking in services online. They all say the same thing which is that the children act the same way they do during a regular mass. The churches they go to have a room for parents with young children so they can run around or read books separate of church, after all telling a toddler to sit still for an hour is tough. These parents don't force the children to sit through the mass, rather they make sure they are all in the same room and they let them move around a bit and read a book. 

I wonder if the church John and Chelsy go to have a cry room (that is what we call the room for parents with young children) or if they just choose to be in the church for the mass. I remember on an episode of 19 Kids and Counting with the Bates family Kelly Bates, Michelle and Josh Duggar, and Michael (Bates) Keilen took a few of the younger children into a separate area for the children who were, I think, eight and under. Either way, I hope both John and Chelsy understand that they are going to have two children soon and keeping them silent, making them sit still, and forcing them to pay attention for an hour or more is going to be a learning curve aka a pain in the ass. 

  • Upvote 6
  • Confused 1
  • I Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PennySycamore

Almost all Protestant churches in the US as well as many Catholic churches have a church nursery for the little kids.  Catholic churches also tend to have a cry room for moms of babies who may not want to leave their babies in the nursery.  The cry rom is typically in the back of the church with windows so that the parent can still participate in the mass.  We even went up for communion.  One parish we attended did not have a cry room -just a nursery- and it sucked not having a cry room.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Botkinetti

If you are spending all your time on trying to make a toddler stay still and be quiet how much attention can you possibly be paying to the actual church ceremony ? 

The whole concept is so screwed up and is almost impossible to achieve. It is pious play acting and the end results must be frazzled parents and children. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usmcmom
2 hours ago, Botkinetti said:

If you are spending all your time on trying to make a toddler stay still and be quiet how much attention can you possibly be paying to the actual church ceremony ? 

 

Well, to be fair, she is also taking photos for the blog. (End sarcasm font)
 

Frankly, I am already tired of my Facebook feed being filled with pictures of stay-at-home worship.

We get it!  You are the most saved! You are worshiping God even during a global pandemic!! Now go eat your saltine communion bread and show me some cat videos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JermajestyDuggar
1 hour ago, usmcmom said:

Well, to be fair, she is also taking photos for the blog. (End sarcasm font)
 

Frankly, I am already tired of my Facebook feed being filled with pictures of stay-at-home worship.

We get it!  You are the most saved! You are worshiping God even during a global pandemic!! Now go eat your saltine communion bread and show me some cat videos. 

Luckily I don’t have many friends posting things like that on FB. Most of my friends are Christian or Jewish. But I gravitate towards people who mostly keep their religion to themselves. Most postings on FB are just things they are doing around the house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NancyDrewFan1989
4 hours ago, Botkinetti said:

If you are spending all your time on trying to make a toddler stay still and be quiet how much attention can you possibly be paying to the actual church ceremony ? 

The whole concept is so screwed up and is almost impossible to achieve. It is pious play acting and the end results must be frazzled parents and children. 

Part of me thinks Chelsy is doing this just to brag. The other part of me thinks Chelsy is just assuming that people know that she can't make a toddler sit still for a an hour and they are letting him get some movement in. I mean, she and John have to know on some level that toddlers have the attentions span of a teaspoon when it comes down to watching a church service. The two of them have been around children growing up going to church and what not, so I kind of assume that they know that Axton is going to get fidgety and want to move. Either that or the Maxwells and Bontragers took advice from the Pearl family way too seriously when raising their children for church services. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JillyO

One of the best things my parents did raising me was to never, EVER, force me to eat anything. I was a pretty picky eater as a child, so I know it couldn't have always been easy. But I grew up to be a pretty adventurous eater as an adult, who enjoys many different cuisines, likes to cook, and generally eats pretty healthy.

The only food items I have hangups about are things other adults forced me to eat. I vividly remember two occasions where I had dinner at my childhood best friend's house, where we always HAD to finish our plates (and plates were filled by the parents). Once they made liver. Very few nine-year-olds will enjoy liver. I was definitely not one of them. I have never touched any innards with a ten-foot pole since. Another time, there was some kind of meat (which was fine) with pumpkin mashed potatoes (mashed potatoes with pumpkin puree mixed in). I liked mashed potatoes before this evening. I'd never had pumpkin before - tried it and really disliked it. They made me finish the whole thing, which I did over multiple hours and by flushing down every single bite with a glass of water. After I threw up from this whole ordeal (but hadn't finished my meal), they made me continue eating. I didn't eat either mashed potatoes or pumpkin anything for probably 15 years after that. Now I enjoy both, but it took a looong time to get there. Lastly, peas. Those I was forced to eat at catholic summer camp. Refused to ever eat them again for probably 10 years after that experience. Now I will force them down if served at another person's home, but will generally avoid them if possible.

The moral of the story for me is... you can't force people (INCLUDING children) to like something, and you very well might get the opposite results instead. I have no interest in inflicting life-long food aversions on my children, so I will 100% let them make their own choices on what they will and won't eat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hane

@JillyO, that’s freaking appalling. What a thing to do to a child! When my daughter was in middle school, she went to dinner at a friend’s house. My daughter has never been a picky eater, but she cannot stand mayonnaise; she finds it revolting. She politely declined the potato salad that was being served, and her friend’s (fundie-lite) parents made repeated passive-aggressive comments about how  “*sigh* WE were brought up to eat everything we were offered *sigh*.”

  • Upvote 6
  • Angry 1
  • WTF 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fundiefan
14 hours ago, JillyO said:

One of the best things my parents did raising me was to never, EVER, force me to eat anything. I was a pretty picky eater as a child, so I know it couldn't have always been easy. But I grew up to be a pretty adventurous eater as an adult, who enjoys many different cuisines, likes to cook, and generally eats pretty healthy.

The only food items I have hangups about are things other adults forced me to eat. I vividly remember two occasions where I had dinner at my childhood best friend's house, where we always HAD to finish our plates (and plates were filled by the parents). Once they made liver. Very few nine-year-olds will enjoy liver. I was definitely not one of them. I have never touched any innards with a ten-foot pole since. Another time, there was some kind of meat (which was fine) with pumpkin mashed potatoes (mashed potatoes with pumpkin puree mixed in). I liked mashed potatoes before this evening. I'd never had pumpkin before - tried it and really disliked it. They made me finish the whole thing, which I did over multiple hours and by flushing down every single bite with a glass of water. After I threw up from this whole ordeal (but hadn't finished my meal), they made me continue eating. I didn't eat either mashed potatoes or pumpkin anything for probably 15 years after that. Now I enjoy both, but it took a looong time to get there. Lastly, peas. Those I was forced to eat at catholic summer camp. Refused to ever eat them again for probably 10 years after that experience. Now I will force them down if served at another person's home, but will generally avoid them if possible.

The moral of the story for me is... you can't force people (INCLUDING children) to like something, and you very well might get the opposite results instead. I have no interest in inflicting life-long food aversions on my children, so I will 100% let them make their own choices on what they will and won't eat.

That's awful. I simply can't even comprehend it, to be honest. 

I wasn't a very picky eater as a kid. There were definitely things I didn't like - eggs, many veggies-but not all, red meat. I don't remember ever being forced to eat any of it. I do remember times I sat at the table alone, after everyone else finished, and wasn't allowed to leave until I ate. But, that was because I was being bratty or something, not because I was refusing to eat anything then forced/punished. I threw a handful of corn at my sister one night and refused to apologize. I had to sit at the table and eat the corn my mom replaced on my plate. I didn't dislike corn, it wasn't about food, it was about me being a brat. 

The only time I ever remember a food situation was after my mom married her husband. He was a hunter and brought home venison. I refused to eat venison. I didn't like the idea of it. I don't even know if I ever had eaten it before the night in question, but I hated the idea of it. I think I was 13 or 14. I came home from wherever I was and they were grilling "steaks". By that time I'd mostly gotten over my red meat aversion and I was fine with steak for dinner. It was smothered in mushrooms & onions, just as a good steak often is. I sat down to eat and after the 2nd bite or so, I noticed my mom & her husband staring at me with grins on their faces. I asked what was up? Why are you staring at me? They asked, repeatedly, if my dinner was good? Do I like it? How does it taste? Eventually, I figured it out - they gave me venison! I didn't even make it to the bathroom and threw up all over the hall floor. I was so pissed at them and it ended up being a big blow up night (my mom's husband was an abusive alcoholic, so I will leave you to figure out how bad it really got). 

My mom did clean up my vomit, and I ended up in my room crying after everything. She later came up and her only words to me were "see, you CAN eat venison. It's not that you can't it's that you refuse." It was all a game to them. 

For years & years I still refused to eat venison. Sometime while I was married, I did start eating it and I had no problem. We had a friend who is an avid hunter and I ate bear and moose too. And buffalo-although not that our friend hunted, from restaurants and whenever we were "out west". I drew the line at squirrels & raccoons, but mostly had no problem with game.  Hell, that hunting friend hit a deer with his car and he cut out some tenderloins right away and fried them up in butter & garlic and I ate & loved those. **Here, if you hit a deer and kill it, once reported, you can take it. There are timing requirements - you can't just claim a deer you find on the side of the road or one that you hit an hour ago and reported later. But, with immediate reporting, you can claim it if you want. 

The moral of all this rambling story is exactly what you already said @JillyO- you cannot force anyone to eat anything. When you do, you create lasting damage to some extent, whether emotional or with eating issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SPHASH
1 hour ago, fundiefan said:

That's awful. I simply can't even comprehend it, to be honest. 

I wasn't a very picky eater as a kid. There were definitely things I didn't like - eggs, many veggies-but not all, red meat. I don't remember ever being forced to eat any of it. I do remember times I sat at the table alone, after everyone else finished, and wasn't allowed to leave until I ate. But, that was because I was being bratty or something, not because I was refusing to eat anything then forced/punished. I threw a handful of corn at my sister one night and refused to apologize. I had to sit at the table and eat the corn my mom replaced on my plate. I didn't dislike corn, it wasn't about food, it was about me being a brat. 

The only time I ever remember a food situation was after my mom married her husband. He was a hunter and brought home venison. I refused to eat venison. I didn't like the idea of it. I don't even know if I ever had eaten it before the night in question, but I hated the idea of it. I think I was 13 or 14. I came home from wherever I was and they were grilling "steaks". By that time I'd mostly gotten over my red meat aversion and I was fine with steak for dinner. It was smothered in mushrooms & onions, just as a good steak often is. I sat down to eat and after the 2nd bite or so, I noticed my mom & her husband staring at me with grins on their faces. I asked what was up? Why are you staring at me? They asked, repeatedly, if my dinner was good? Do I like it? How does it taste? Eventually, I figured it out - they gave me venison! I didn't even make it to the bathroom and threw up all over the hall floor. I was so pissed at them and it ended up being a big blow up night (my mom's husband was an abusive alcoholic, so I will leave you to figure out how bad it really got). 

My mom did clean up my vomit, and I ended up in my room crying after everything. She later came up and her only words to me were "see, you CAN eat venison. It's not that you can't it's that you refuse." It was all a game to them. 

For years & years I still refused to eat venison. Sometime while I was married, I did start eating it and I had no problem. We had a friend who is an avid hunter and I ate bear and moose too. And buffalo-although not that our friend hunted, from restaurants and whenever we were "out west". I drew the line at squirrels & raccoons, but mostly had no problem with game.  Hell, that hunting friend hit a deer with his car and he cut out some tenderloins right away and fried them up in butter & garlic and I ate & loved those. **Here, if you hit a deer and kill it, once reported, you can take it. There are timing requirements - you can't just claim a deer you find on the side of the road or one that you hit an hour ago and reported later. But, with immediate reporting, you can claim it if you want. 

The moral of all this rambling story is exactly what you already said @JillyO- you cannot force anyone to eat anything. When you do, you create lasting damage to some extent, whether emotional or with eating issues. 

Your venison story reminds me of a story my aunt use to tell me.  She had friends over for dinner and was serving deer meat.  One of the friends hated deer so Aunty also fixed a plate of chicken for her.  While the friend and Aunty were in the kitchen getting things ready the friends sees the deer meat, grabs a fork and takes a sample.  She says hmm this is good what is it, Aunty turns around and of course is surprised and says it's deer, the friends rushes into the bathroom and spends the evening worshipping the porcelain goddess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jigsaw3

Chelsy's recent blog posts show a little bit more of their house, and it's interesting.

They've clearly done more finishing work in the living areas: the windows and doors are now trimmed out and the kitchen has a backsplash. The outlets in the kitchen are not finished yet (no outlet covers/junction boxes hanging out) but they may not have put them back after tiling; that's usually a finishing step. There's blue painter's tape on the floors in places, so maybe they're not done there? I can't figure out what it's for. Do they need to stain the transitions between flooring? I think the tile in the kitchen is new.

The bedrooms and bathrooms are not exactly reno'd yet, though. The Axton in the bath picture shows an old bathtub and old tiles, and there's a picture of Chelsy in a bedroom (?) in a robe, where the bedroom floor is that old lino/vinyl. It's all quite usable, just not new and shiny.

No shade to them if they're taking it slow and redoing the house bit by bit; it makes sense and it's frugal. But they made such a fuss about getting the house ready for Chelsy to move in after marriage that it makes me wonder. Was the house absolutely destroyed such that they had to do lots of work to make it barely livable? Were they simply painting everything to make it more appealing, leaving big changes like flooring and bathrooms to further down the line? Or was it the typical Maxwellian behaviour of tons of fuss and bother accomplishing very little?

My major criticism is that with a soon-to-be-toddler and a second baby on the way, they should really focus on cleaning up the electrical situation. It's stunningly unsafe and a major hazard if a baby grabs a junction box. Maybe they're relying on their repulsive baby training methods to keep Axton safe instead of properly baby-proofing, but they're courting danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
smittykins

You still see that attitude on certain FB memes.  “If I didn’t eat what my mom cooked, I didn’t eat” and “When I was a kid, we had two choices for dinner—take it or leave it!”

(And my mom tricked me into eating venison by telling me it was beef.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JermajestyDuggar
10 minutes ago, Jigsaw3 said:

Chelsy's recent blog posts show a little bit more of their house, and it's interesting.

They've clearly done more finishing work in the living areas: the windows and doors are now trimmed out and the kitchen has a backsplash. The outlets in the kitchen are not finished yet (no outlet covers/junction boxes hanging out) but they may not have put them back after tiling; that's usually a finishing step. There's blue painter's tape on the floors in places, so maybe they're not done there? I can't figure out what it's for. Do they need to stain the transitions between flooring? I think the tile in the kitchen is new.

The bedrooms and bathrooms are not exactly reno'd yet, though. The Axton in the bath picture shows an old bathtub and old tiles, and there's a picture of Chelsy in a bedroom (?) in a robe, where the bedroom floor is that old lino/vinyl. It's all quite usable, just not new and shiny.

No shade to them if they're taking it slow and redoing the house bit by bit; it makes sense and it's frugal. But they made such a fuss about getting the house ready for Chelsy to move in after marriage that it makes me wonder. Was the house absolutely destroyed such that they had to do lots of work to make it barely livable? Were they simply painting everything to make it more appealing, leaving big changes like flooring and bathrooms to further down the line? Or was it the typical Maxwellian behaviour of tons of fuss and bother accomplishing very little?

My major criticism is that with a soon-to-be-toddler and a second baby on the way, they should really focus on cleaning up the electrical situation. It's stunningly unsafe and a major hazard if a baby grabs a junction box. Maybe they're relying on their repulsive baby training methods to keep Axton safe instead of properly baby-proofing, but they're courting danger.

Steve Maxwell is crazy anti-debt. So John had to find a house he could pay for in cash. Which means it could have been a foreclosure or a house that was in such crappy shape that it was super cheap. I don’t think any Maxwell has 200K in the bank in their 20s for a newly renovated house after marriage. I think all of them bought houses that needed work and did it themselves to save money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baxter

I don't understand insisting that your kid eats everything on their plate. I was a picky eater as a kid. But usually my parents would just encourage me to try things and if I didn't that was ok. I grew out of a lot of my pickiness except bananas. I loathe bananas. The taste, the smell, the texture, there is nothing good there!

With my four year old, we encourage him to try foods. I will usually put just a little of something new on his plate. We try to have him take a couple bites and if he doesn't like it then that is fine. Sometimes he can be quite stubborn like when he insisted he did not like purple potatoes. Then we finally got him to try them (with some dessert bribery) and now they are his favourites and he is disappointed when we have regular potatoes. 

But another day he was really not into the cauliflower cheddar soup I made so I also made him some peanut butter toast and that was fine too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
feministxtian

Again with the forcing kids to eat. Ya know, kids will eat only what they like (taste, texture). Some kids are adventurous eaters, some are not. If your kid is living on PB&J, cool...they've got all the food groups in there. Not exactly the healthiest meal but it's better they have something in their stomachs than nothing. My oldest, at 2, I swear survived on air. She did NOT eat. Fast forward a few years and along comes her brother (#1 son). I wait for him to start the no-eating phase. He just turned 33 and I'm STILL waiting for that phase. #2 son was a picky, fussy eater for years...allergies. I think he lived on chicken nuggets (plain thankyouverymuch) and almond or rice milk. Now, 29 years later (well, he's 29 now), he's a right adventurous eater and the spicier the better. 

I STILL have a thing with certain tastes and textures. I mean, it ain't happening. Fortunately, there's only a few things I won't eat now (starting with strawberries). I don't remember being forced to eat anything but then again, I don't remember much of my childhood. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nvmbr02

I also never really understood forcing a kid to eat something they hate or making them finish their plates. It was a rule in my house growing up too. It is something we have never done in our house. We do encourage our kids to try new things but we have never made them eat something they didn't like. My oldest was very picky and now that she is a teenager she has branched out on her own. She still wont eat many textures (nothing really soft/pureed or chewy) and wont eat many condiments/sauces. My son is picky about the texture of meat. He is getting a little better now, but still mostly sticks to eating chicken, My youngest has never been very picky in the past, but recently she is more reluctant to try something new. 

We don't make them finish their food but I do hate throwing food away.  The mostly serve themselves so our rule is if you take it you SHOULD finish it. Not have to. If it is something that they like and can be reheated we encourage them to package it up and have it the next day for lunch or a snack. Which they are usually fine with. Again, it isn't something we really enforce and they can certainly have other food. Most of the time they do eat their leftovers though but I do throw it out sometimes if it sits untouched for a few days. If the were mistaken and then really don't like it for whatever reason they just get a mom look when they throw it away. 

And while I wouldn't lie or try to trick them into eating food now, we did call all meat chicken with my son for awhile until we figured out which meats he really didn't like. And I did tell my then 2 year old that the carrots in the Cambell's chicken noodle soup were cheese because I didn't want to pick them out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NancyDrewFan1989

The whole entire finish everything on your plate deal is something that my I dealt with when I was staying at my grandmothers. She would always make sure we had a serving of one thing each and if we asked for seconds she would tell us that.

As for the whole picky eater deal, growing up my sister was a picky eater. The biggest issue we had with her is that she wouldn't eat what my mom made, but would eat the exact same thing at daycare or someone else's house like pasta and sauce and PBJ sandwiches. So, in a way my parents had trouble dealing with her eating because they would make something she liked, but would refuse to eat it. Then they would try to find something else. Eventually, my dad told her that if she didn't like what mom made she was getting a sandwich or a bowl of cereal or oatmeal for dinner. Trust me by that point they had exhausted every option. It worked she started eating dinner and found things that she didn't think she liked that she now enjoys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatar-tot

Kids taste buds are not the same as an adults and change as their brain develops.  As long as a child is given a variety of foods they are going to eat.  Like anyone they will have likes and dislikes. 

Family dinners should be a time to bond & grow as a family.  If Chelsey & John turn meal time into the food wars it is going to stab them in the back.  John especially should be sensitive to Axton’s needs & wants along with his individuality.  
 

I always got the feeling John was an extremely bright kid with a ton of energy. Rather than try to exploit John’s talents, Steve & Teri decided they were going to pound a square peg into a round hole.  it seems John resented this growing up.  
 

I hope they both take the time to enjoy their child at the age he is at. They will soon learn the days are long but the years are so short.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JermajestyDuggar

I think Chelsy will force Axton and any other children into whatever hole she decides. Just like her own mother. Becky didn’t even let 2 year olds show any shyness. I wish Chelsy and John were different, but I don’t think they are.

  • Upvote 11
  • Sad 3
  • I Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
usmcmom
30 minutes ago, Tatar-tot said:

 I hope they both take the time to enjoy their child at the age he is at. They will soon learn the days are long but the years are so short.  

This makes me think of something that came to mind when one of these families recently announced a pregnancy: “Another baby?? What are they gonna do with all of them?”
It’s like some collection that many people have and others wonder what the heck they need all those items for. 
 

They have these kids and don’t enjoy them. They don’t cherish them or build happy memories with them. Many of them hoard them in their homes and don’t let them experience the world. They don’t raise their kids to use their talents to help themselves or others. They are not service oriented when it comes to their communities, so their kids are not taught to do anything except stay confined and make their parents look good.  These families actually collect children for absolutely no reason at all, in many cases. 
 

In the case of Steve Maxwell’s daughters, they are actually being kept on a shelf, only being seem and used by a very limited number of people. They’re like my mom’s Hummel figurines. I guess they’re nice, but what happens to them in the long run? 
 

For the record, I know these kids are valuable as individuals and worthy of so much more. It is their own families who, in my opinion, treat them like collectibles. 

  • Upvote 17
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 1
  • Love 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatar-tot
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, usmcmom said:

This makes me think of something that came to mind when one of these families recently announced a pregnancy: “Another baby?? What are they gonna do with all of them?”
It’s like some collection that many people have and others wonder what the heck they need all those items for. 
 

They have these kids and don’t enjoy them. They don’t cherish them or build happy memories with them. Many of them hoard them in their homes and don’t let them experience the world. They don’t raise their kids to use their talents to help themselves or others. They are not service oriented when it comes to their communities, so their kids are not taught to do anything except stay confined and make their parents look good.  These families actually collect children for absolutely no reason at all, in many cases. 
 

In the case of Steve Maxwell’s daughters, they are actually being kept on a shelf, only being seem and used by a very limited number of people. They’re like my mom’s Hummel figurines. I guess they’re nice, but what happens to them in the long run? 
 

For the record, I know these kids are valuable as individuals and worthy of so much more. It is their own families who, in my opinion, treat them like collectibles. 

Well said - the women like to be treated like queens when they are pregnant & could care less about being a good parent to teach their child a strong moral compass, self reliance, and generous spirit to give to the less fortunate. 
The only one I see breaking out of this mold is Anna Marie Maxwell.  She seems like such a loving person who takes great pride in being the best mom she can be. 

Edited by Tatar-tot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NancyDrewFan1989
23 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I think Chelsy will force Axton and any other children into whatever hole she decides. Just like her own mother. Becky didn’t even let 2 year olds show any shyness. I wish Chelsy and John were different, but I don’t think they are.

The saddest thing is John and Chelsy "don't know any better." The two of them were raised in households where the family took advice from the Pearl's. As super stupid as it sounds I really think Chelsy doesn't know any better. I know saying "doesn't know any better" looks bad for talking about this but, I don't know how else to word it. If Chelsy needs parenting advice she probably calls her mom or asks one of the Maxwell wives for their input. They probably tell her the same thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Melissa1977
43 minutes ago, NancyDrewFan1989 said:

The saddest thing is John and Chelsy "don't know any better." The two of them were raised in households where the family took advice from the Pearl's. As super stupid as it sounds I really think Chelsy doesn't know any better. I know saying "doesn't know any better" looks bad for talking about this but, I don't know how else to word it. If Chelsy needs parenting advice she probably calls her mom or asks one of the Maxwell wives for their input. They probably tell her the same thing. 

My grandparents were raised in a horrible way and didn't repeated that (and they did not read any book about education).

I know people who were mistreated or saw how their siblings were mistreated, and KNEW is was wrong. Even being little kids then, they knew. Of course I understand that isolation makes it much more difficult, because you cannot compare to others, not even en TV.

It is true that the way you are raised affects your views and some people do not know better. But usually the extremely strict parents are people who have issues with control. Bontragers are very "dark" and cold in my opinion. Just a feeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JermajestyDuggar
35 minutes ago, Melissa1977 said:

My grandparents were raised in a horrible way and didn't repeated that (and they did not read any book about education).

I know people who were mistreated or saw how their siblings were mistreated, and KNEW is was wrong. Even being little kids then, they knew. Of course I understand that isolation makes it much more difficult, because you cannot compare to others, not even en TV.

It is true that the way you are raised affects your views and some people do not know better. But usually the extremely strict parents are people who have issues with control. Bontragers are very "dark" and cold in my opinion. Just a feeling.

Especially since the Bontragers were raised Mennonite/Amish and then left that behind. They get to be different from their parents and are still accepted by their parents. But I don’t think Chelsy would be all that accepted if she decided to live differently than her parents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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