Jump to content
IGNORED

Botkin 3: Elizabeth Married!


Coconut Flan

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Howl said:

I hope the era of very young people writing books and blogging  with great authority that "this and that approach is absolutely and positively the only way" is over.  I'm talking about you, Joshua Harris (I Kiss Dating Goodbye) and the years of patriarchal SAHD drivel from Elizabeth/AS. 

I wonder if we're witnessing the slow decline of extreme fundamentalist patriarchy.  We witnessed the implosion of Vision Forum and IBLP seems to be on its last legs.  There are a lot of people deconstructing from fundamentalist/evangelical backgrounds. 

Scottie Brown seems to still be going strong, though. As you drill down a bit into his website, the beliefs become more defined and rigid.   If you want to know about those beliefs as defined by Scottie: A Declaration of the Complementary Roles of Church and Family

I'm wondering if Scottie is drawing a line between his own beliefs and where Geoff Botkin has gone with his political rants. 

Now we have Girl Defined, Paul and Morgan, and Jeremy and Audrey Roloff. I think there will always be young people who think they know everything about the world. I just hope most people don’t give them that much credit. 

  • Upvote 13
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Howl said:

I wonder if we're witnessing the slow decline of extreme fundamentalist patriarchy.  We witnessed the implosion of Vision Forum and IBLP seems to be on its last legs.  There are a lot of people deconstructing from fundamentalist/evangelical backgrounds. 

I don’t think so. VF/DPIAT simply shifted  to Doug Wilson, who is the worst parts of VF/IBLP on steroids. Perhaps even worse, since he has more branches with his publishing and schools and whatnot. DPIAT always seemed like a little fringe leader on the outskirts of fundamentalist evangelicalism, but DW has comfortably ensconced himself in the middle of it, and his influence is getting bigger and bigger, as witnessed by the way he shut Costi Hinn down so easily last week. He has more power, influence, money, and low friends in high places than Phillips could have ever wished to have, and he’s not building his empire so he can be at the front of a fantasy life where he can play dress up and go on adventures like Phillips. He’s building his so he can be king.

Edited by Columbia
Typo
  • Upvote 9
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

I hope both of them can go to therapy...They do owe an apology about the advice they gave to others and how that advice had an impact on other people.

They could certainly benefit from therapy but I doubt that has happened.

Judging from that recording, they donʻt seem to have done any self-examination or reflection. They do owe many women, especially, an apology for the toxic belief system they pushed and apparently still support in some form.

5 hours ago, Howl said:

I'm wondering if Scottie is drawing a line between his own beliefs and where Geoff Botkin has gone with his political rants. 

Thanks for that link but what load of absolute blather.

Until Scottie PUBLICLY acknowledges the debacle of Kellyʻs marriage to Peter, including the role that Scottieʻs bullshit religious beliefs played, heʻs a whited sepulcher -- outwardly clean and shining white but inwardly filled with rot and dead menʻs bones.

For years, he made serious bank off her marriage and its surrounding mythology. Until he acknowledges this publicly, he is in a state of unrepentant sin, as far as Iʻm concerned.

Edited by hoipolloi
Fixed typo
  • Upvote 15
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hoipolloi said:

They could certainly benefit from therapy but I doubt that has happened.

I’m sure they stay far away from “the pseudo-sciences of psychiatry and psychology” (one of Victoria’s favorite phrases.)

Which is a shame, because they could probably use some good therapy. Jasmine wrote about getting therapy and how much that helped with her anxiety (and that anxiety stuck out like a sore thumb all through “Joyfully at Home.”) Both sisters have mentioned several times in various speeches how they were very shy and timid when they were younger, and how their father helped them get over that. I don’t know what techniques Geoff may have used, but I doubt they actually addressed the problem, just the symptoms. If they’ve ever received therapy it’s probably just that wretched nouthetic counseling. 
 

Both Ben and Audri have mentioned being in therapy on Twitter (and I’m sure they needed it after all they went through,) so perhaps that will normalize it for their sisters. 

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Howl said:

 

I wonder if we're witnessing the slow decline of extreme fundamentalist patriarchy.  We witnessed the implosion of Vision Forum and IBLP seems to be on its last legs.  There are a lot of people deconstructing from fundamentalist/evangelical backgrounds. 

 

My cousin's son seems to be in a fundamentalist, Catholic, Latin-mass only, Trump loving, abortion-hating fertility cult. His wife is from a large, home-schooled Catholic family - so 2nd generation cult. My point is getting rid of right-winged patriarchal lifestyle is a game of whack-a-mole in that 1 sect commits suicide and another gains prominence.

Years ago my home-schooling, evangelical neighbor would take her little children to abortion protests, which just seemed odd but her choice. I remember her giving me a pamphlet on a 6,000 year old earth, which just seemed whack-a-doodle. Back then, the Duggars seemed really nice.

But now, this seemingly quaint thinking/lifestyle choice has become dangerous as these people legislate their backwards thinking into laws for everybody to follow.

  • Upvote 17
  • Sad 2
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/9/2022 at 5:28 AM, Howl said:

This whole "bug-out from the city, you're only safe in rural areas when the apocalypse comes" perspective is crazy.  Cities are the places where resources are. 

It's true that out in the country you can build your own private redoubt but it's also true that out in the country no one can hear you scream for help when your neighbors who have more ammo than you come for your resources.

  • Upvote 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

https://churchandfamilylife.com/resources/60ca663297de084c5325436e

So apparently the Botkinettes gave two talks at the NCFIC conference last year. The second one was a general rehashing of the topics they touched on in their first talk, and then they jumped into a strawman rebuke of religious deconstruction (though they didn't use that term) that just as widely missed the mark as their unfortunate blog posts about sexual abuse. 

This portion of the talk starts at 40:20. If you start at the beginning you can hear Scott Brown gush over Anna and Elizabeth for five minutes, chase all the men out so they won't accidentally learn something from a woman (teh horrors) and then announce that he's staying himself. Apparently he's holy enough that he can handle learning from a couple of women. Or maybe he knows everything already, and there's nothing they can teach him.

I transcribed, as best as possible, the section on "deconstruction."
 

Spoiler

Elizabeth: A big burden on a lot of our hearts, definitely Anna’s and mine, is just this whole issue of how do you go about in a wise, godly, safe, sane manner, how do you go about reevaluating things like this, and maybe making changes in decisions or in priorities. Because probably every one of us has seen, and has had our hearts broken by, the examples of dear friends or family members, or whatever it might be, who came to this quandary where they realized, “I was, maybe I’ve been taught some things that weren’t perfect, maybe I’ve inherited some ideas and theology and practices from imperfect people,” imagine that. That’s actually every person in the world. And so they, and now they’re faced with this quandary of “what do I do with this?” And this is something we all have to wrestle with in fear and trembling before the Lord because quite frankly all of us have inherited ideas and theology and practices from imperfect people. So are we going to be reformers? Are we going to be rebels? Are we going to have zeal for the tradition of our parents in the way that Saul of Tarsus did? Which was actually a bad thing because some of those traditions of his fathers were not something he should have had zeal for. Or are we gonna be like some of the Kings of Israel or Judah who, they didn’t destroy some of their parents’ high places, and they actually were supposed to? But the thing is, there are very God honoring ways of going about this, and there are extremely spiritually dangerous ways of going about this. And, we have a pile of thoughts on this.


Elizabeth starts out strong with the "no one's perfect!!!11!" excuse. Neither of them get into the notion that "ideas and theology and practices" could go way beyond imperfect to outright harmful or abusive. It's such a strong contrast between Jasmine, who has outright said that SAHD teachings were wrong and harmful, and these two who hem and haw about how they got some things wrong (none of us are perfect!!) but would never admit that there were women out there actually damaged by the SAHD practices pushed by VF or IBLP.

For the life of me I will never understand how Calvinists, with all their focus on human sinfulness and depravity don't have a more skeptical view of people in authority. Everyone's totally depraved, except for the guy who runs my favorite parachurch organization. He's just "imperfect."

I'm also assuming that they never talked with someone deep in the throes of deconstruction. It usually isn't something that one chooses. It usually happens as a result of trauma, and quickly spirals out of control. It's frightening and disorienting and feels like the ground is falling out from under your feet. They seem to have the impression that some SAHD woke up one morning and decided "today's the day when all this comes undone." And maybe she did, but also maybe it was after years of neglect and abuse and running the house since she was 10 years old.
 

Spoiler

Anna: I will just throw out really quickly, I think that all of us have a huge debt. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to our parents, and to leaders who 20, 30, 40 years ago, made some very drastic and radical choices, and to step away from feminism and the worldliness and the statism that was ravaging our country at the time. And we are still now just part of the process of hashing out some of the questions that they started asking like “how do we educate our kids if we’re not gonna put them in school?” “What is a woman going to do if she’s not going to be a career woman?” We’re all in this together, and it should not surprise us when the people who first decided to step away from the status quo and do things differently didn’t get it all right at the very beginning, and no one can. And when you look at the Reformation, you can see that the early reformers, it took some time to actually hash things out. But we’re so grateful for what they did, and we’re all just continuing in the reformation. We’re continuing to build on that foundation, and refine that foundation, and we’re continuing to work together as a team. And so I think that is what our attitude should be towards leaders and teachers and parents who really wanted to serve the Lord in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation but did not get every single thing totally perfect.


To Which leaders do we owe a huge debt, Anna??? Doug Phillips? Handsy Bill Gothard? Doug Wilson and his cadre of pedophile protectors? R.J. Rushdoony the slavery apologist? Gary North and his hysterical apocalyptic obsessions? R.C. Sproul, Jr. who tore his family in two with his own hands? Voddie Baucham who needs his daughter's attention so he doesn't go get attention from other young women? Which leaders who weren't sketchy as hell, or enabling/covering up for sketchy as hell men?

Or do they all get a pass because "they didn't get it perfect?" These two are going to bounce from abusive leader to abusive leader, defending and shaking off every awful thing they do because "well, he's not perfect." They have zero discretion. Have they ever considered that any of these leaders could have been in it for the power or authority or money? Can you imagine telling one of them "the elder's son molested my kid, and all the other elders kicked my family out of the church when I started talking about it?" Would they have any more sense than to say "well, you know none of us are perfect?"

Also, who decides which leaders are well intentioned but not perfect, and which leaders are teaching heresy? I guarantee that they would write off a pastor who held to conservative, orthodox Christianity, but believed that women could preach in church, as heterodox, if not downright dangerous. Why would that person be shunned, but someone truly abusive like Doug Wilson embraced? (Rhetorical question; we all know why.)
 

Spoiler

Elizabeth: Right, okay so a few things that I think are really important as we try to keep a watch over our hearts as we do these things. One is to see what is it that we are being drawn towards, or pushed away from? Are we just being drawn more and more towards the beauty of Scripture, and that is what is causing us to realize “oh, this thing here was not correct, or this thing here was not correct.” Or, is it more “I am so fed up and disgusted with these things that aren’t working," or "these things that now look so dumb to me or all my friends think they’re dumb. Are we actually just careening away from something in reaction, or is it just the pull of Scripture that’s causing us to make these decisions? I think another thing that’s really important is how much are we soaking in doctrines of the goodness of God and just growing in our trust of him? Because I’ve seen so many friends falter when they started wrestling with “could it really be good that God tells children to honor their parents? I’m not sure I understand how that can be good. I’m not sure I understand how God can be good to tell me that.” Or “could it really be good that God put me in a situation where my parents are doing this or that?” And once somebody starts to question whether God is really good, and whether what God says is actually better than what they or their friends might have figured out, you’re in such a dangerous place, and usually everything starts unravelling at the point when they decide they’re okay with maybe God isn’t good, maybe he doesn’t know what he’s doing here. So you have to anchor yourself on this, even if you don’t quite understand what a verse means, or how it’s supposed to look for you to honor ungodly parents, you have to believe that God knows what he is talking about, and to say, like Peter, when he didn’t understand what Christ was saying, he just said “But Lord, where would we go? You have the words of eternal life.” Nobody else has that, so I’m not going to run to the people over here, who say they found better answers. You’re the only one who has words of eternal life, even if I don’t fully understand them.

Elizabeth pulls out a fantastic straw man of options for girls/women in the SAHD movement who are deconstructing. Either I'm dropping these teachings because these things aren't working for me, or these things are dumb and my friends think they look dumb. There's no option here for Lourdes. There's nothing for the girl who grew up under heavy handed parents, raising her siblings since she was 9. There's no option for the woman who was spiritually abused by her pastors and had to leave her church before it destroyed her soul. 

She also writes off this deconstruction as someone asking if God is good. She never addresses the possibility that someone could still hold that God might be good, but that the teachings they received are garbage. If someone in Christ the King Church was stomped on by the leadership so much that they fled and wound up in the hypothetical church I mentioned earlier, where would that stand? If someone "did their research" and came to the conclusion that CTKC's teachings were harmful, but still believed in the goodness of God, would that be acceptable? Or, as I suspect it might be, is questioning these poor, imperfect leaders actually questioning the goodness of God?

The comments about “could it really be good that God put me in a situation where my parents are doing this or that?” and "even if you don’t quite understand what a verse means, or how it’s supposed to look for you to honor ungodly parents" seem telling. How many letters have they received from girls in families that are manipulative, or emotionally or psychologically abusive, that they wrote off as "questioning God?"

Once upon a time I said that the Wilson daughters scared me more than AS and E, but I'm not sure anymore. I think they'll be pretty comparable in another ten years. Ultimately, these two are shaping up to be excellent, useful female enforcers in an authoritative church, the women whom the elders send to "talk with you" when they find out you're talking publicly about how you've been treated in order to Matthew 18 you, and shut you up, and bring you back in line. The ones who "don't know all the details" but do know that "pastor X may not be perfect, but none of us are, and he has a hard job leading the church. Jesus would want you to forgive him. You're damaging the church's witness and unity." Poor Audri.

  • Upvote 8
  • Thank You 8
  • Love 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that Elizabeth has flown the coop, is AS stuck at home with her mother, "serving" her madman of father?

Or, has she also escaped to the world of work, where she now appears to be known as Anna Botkin?

Thank you, @Columbia, for the summaries. Will listen myself but only when I have a glass of wine.

  • Upvote 3
  • Haha 1
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

Now that Elizabeth has flown the coop, is AS stuck at home with her mother, "serving" her madman of father?

Or, has she also escaped to the world of work, where she now appears to be known as Anna Botkin?

To be fair, in their speeches last year and this year they did unequivocally state that taking care of the house and the husband and the kids is the wife’s job, not the daughter’s. Why anyone let two teenagers get away with saying otherwise for so long is a mystery that will never be answered. When they talk about choosing what activities or work to do they run through a list of questions (will this use my gifts well, will it put me in a good situation, will it meet needs?) “Will it serve my brothers” was not on the list. It’s quite a contrast when you listen to them talk about how it’s good for a girl to have adventures, but their example of having adventures is sitting at home being helpful while their brothers run off to Egypt. 

  • Upvote 9
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Columbia said:

https://churchandfamilylife.com/resources/60ca663297de084c5325436e

So apparently the Botkinettes gave two talks at the NCFIC conference last year. The second one was a general rehashing of the topics they touched on in their first talk, and then they jumped into a strawman rebuke of religious deconstruction (though they didn't use that term) that just as widely missed the mark as their unfortunate blog posts about sexual abuse. 

This portion of the talk starts at 40:20. If you start at the beginning you can hear Scott Brown gush over Anna and Elizabeth for five minutes, chase all the men out so they won't accidentally learn something from a woman (teh horrors) and then announce that he's staying himself. Apparently he's holy enough that he can handle learning from a couple of women. Or maybe he knows everything already, and there's nothing they can teach him.

I transcribed, as best as possible, the section on "deconstruction."
 

  Hide contents

Elizabeth: A big burden on a lot of our hearts, definitely Anna’s and mine, is just this whole issue of how do you go about in a wise, godly, safe, sane manner, how do you go about reevaluating things like this, and maybe making changes in decisions or in priorities. Because probably every one of us has seen, and has had our hearts broken by, the examples of dear friends or family members, or whatever it might be, who came to this quandary where they realized, “I was, maybe I’ve been taught some things that weren’t perfect, maybe I’ve inherited some ideas and theology and practices from imperfect people,” imagine that. That’s actually every person in the world. And so they, and now they’re faced with this quandary of “what do I do with this?” And this is something we all have to wrestle with in fear and trembling before the Lord because quite frankly all of us have inherited ideas and theology and practices from imperfect people. So are we going to be reformers? Are we going to be rebels? Are we going to have zeal for the tradition of our parents in the way that Saul of Tarsus did? Which was actually a bad thing because some of those traditions of his fathers were not something he should have had zeal for. Or are we gonna be like some of the Kings of Israel or Judah who, they didn’t destroy some of their parents’ high places, and they actually were supposed to? But the thing is, there are very God honoring ways of going about this, and there are extremely spiritually dangerous ways of going about this. And, we have a pile of thoughts on this.


Elizabeth starts out strong with the "no one's perfect!!!11!" excuse. Neither of them get into the notion that "ideas and theology and practices" could go way beyond imperfect to outright harmful or abusive. It's such a strong contrast between Jasmine, who has outright said that SAHD teachings were wrong and harmful, and these two who hem and haw about how they got some things wrong (none of us are perfect!!) but would never admit that there were women out there actually damaged by the SAHD practices pushed by VF or IBLP.

For the life of me I will never understand how Calvinists, with all their focus on human sinfulness and depravity don't have a more skeptical view of people in authority. Everyone's totally depraved, except for the guy who runs my favorite parachurch organization. He's just "imperfect."

I'm also assuming that they never talked with someone deep in the throes of deconstruction. It usually isn't something that one chooses. It usually happens as a result of trauma, and quickly spirals out of control. It's frightening and disorienting and feels like the ground is falling out from under your feet. They seem to have the impression that some SAHD woke up one morning and decided "today's the day when all this comes undone." And maybe she did, but also maybe it was after years of neglect and abuse and running the house since she was 10 years old.
 

  Hide contents

Anna: I will just throw out really quickly, I think that all of us have a huge debt. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to our parents, and to leaders who 20, 30, 40 years ago, made some very drastic and radical choices, and to step away from feminism and the worldliness and the statism that was ravaging our country at the time. And we are still now just part of the process of hashing out some of the questions that they started asking like “how do we educate our kids if we’re not gonna put them in school?” “What is a woman going to do if she’s not going to be a career woman?” We’re all in this together, and it should not surprise us when the people who first decided to step away from the status quo and do things differently didn’t get it all right at the very beginning, and no one can. And when you look at the Reformation, you can see that the early reformers, it took some time to actually hash things out. But we’re so grateful for what they did, and we’re all just continuing in the reformation. We’re continuing to build on that foundation, and refine that foundation, and we’re continuing to work together as a team. And so I think that is what our attitude should be towards leaders and teachers and parents who really wanted to serve the Lord in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation but did not get every single thing totally perfect.


To Which leaders do we owe a huge debt, Anna??? Doug Phillips? Handsy Bill Gothard? Doug Wilson and his cadre of pedophile protectors? R.J. Rushdoony the slavery apologist? Gary North and his hysterical apocalyptic obsessions? R.C. Sproul, Jr. who tore his family in two with his own hands? Voddie Baucham who needs his daughter's attention so he doesn't go get attention from other young women? Which leaders who weren't sketchy as hell, or enabling/covering up for sketchy as hell men?

Or do they all get a pass because "they didn't get it perfect?" These two are going to bounce from abusive leader to abusive leader, defending and shaking off every awful thing they do because "well, he's not perfect." They have zero discretion. Have they ever considered that any of these leaders could have been in it for the power or authority or money? Can you imagine telling one of them "the elder's son molested my kid, and all the other elders kicked my family out of the church when I started talking about it?" Would they have any more sense than to say "well, you know none of us are perfect?"

Also, who decides which leaders are well intentioned but not perfect, and which leaders are teaching heresy? I guarantee that they would write off a pastor who held to conservative, orthodox Christianity, but believed that women could preach in church, as heterodox, if not downright dangerous. Why would that person be shunned, but someone truly abusive like Doug Wilson embraced? (Rhetorical question; we all know why.)
 

  Hide contents

Elizabeth: Right, okay so a few things that I think are really important as we try to keep a watch over our hearts as we do these things. One is to see what is it that we are being drawn towards, or pushed away from? Are we just being drawn more and more towards the beauty of Scripture, and that is what is causing us to realize “oh, this thing here was not correct, or this thing here was not correct.” Or, is it more “I am so fed up and disgusted with these things that aren’t working," or "these things that now look so dumb to me or all my friends think they’re dumb. Are we actually just careening away from something in reaction, or is it just the pull of Scripture that’s causing us to make these decisions? I think another thing that’s really important is how much are we soaking in doctrines of the goodness of God and just growing in our trust of him? Because I’ve seen so many friends falter when they started wrestling with “could it really be good that God tells children to honor their parents? I’m not sure I understand how that can be good. I’m not sure I understand how God can be good to tell me that.” Or “could it really be good that God put me in a situation where my parents are doing this or that?” And once somebody starts to question whether God is really good, and whether what God says is actually better than what they or their friends might have figured out, you’re in such a dangerous place, and usually everything starts unravelling at the point when they decide they’re okay with maybe God isn’t good, maybe he doesn’t know what he’s doing here. So you have to anchor yourself on this, even if you don’t quite understand what a verse means, or how it’s supposed to look for you to honor ungodly parents, you have to believe that God knows what he is talking about, and to say, like Peter, when he didn’t understand what Christ was saying, he just said “But Lord, where would we go? You have the words of eternal life.” Nobody else has that, so I’m not going to run to the people over here, who say they found better answers. You’re the only one who has words of eternal life, even if I don’t fully understand them.

Elizabeth pulls out a fantastic straw man of options for girls/women in the SAHD movement who are deconstructing. Either I'm dropping these teachings because these things aren't working for me, or these things are dumb and my friends think they look dumb. There's no option here for Lourdes. There's nothing for the girl who grew up under heavy handed parents, raising her siblings since she was 9. There's no option for the woman who was spiritually abused by her pastors and had to leave her church before it destroyed her soul. 

She also writes off this deconstruction as someone asking if God is good. She never addresses the possibility that someone could still hold that God might be good, but that the teachings they received are garbage. If someone in Christ the King Church was stomped on by the leadership so much that they fled and wound up in the hypothetical church I mentioned earlier, where would that stand? If someone "did their research" and came to the conclusion that CTKC's teachings were harmful, but still believed in the goodness of God, would that be acceptable? Or, as I suspect it might be, is questioning these poor, imperfect leaders actually questioning the goodness of God?

The comments about “could it really be good that God put me in a situation where my parents are doing this or that?” and "even if you don’t quite understand what a verse means, or how it’s supposed to look for you to honor ungodly parents" seem telling. How many letters have they received from girls in families that are manipulative, or emotionally or psychologically abusive, that they wrote off as "questioning God?"

Once upon a time I said that the Wilson daughters scared me more than AS and E, but I'm not sure anymore. I think they'll be pretty comparable in another ten years. Ultimately, these two are shaping up to be excellent, useful female enforcers in an authoritative church, the women whom the elders send to "talk with you" when they find out you're talking publicly about how you've been treated in order to Matthew 18 you, and shut you up, and bring you back in line. The ones who "don't know all the details" but do know that "pastor X may not be perfect, but none of us are, and he has a hard job leading the church. Jesus would want you to forgive him. You're damaging the church's witness and unity." Poor Audri.

Brava! This whole post is magnificent and depressing.

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 7
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

Now that Elizabeth has flown the coop, is AS stuck at home with her mother, "serving" her madman of father?

Or, has she also escaped to the world of work, where she now appears to be known as Anna Botkin?

Thank you, @Columbia, for the summaries. Will listen myself but only when I have a glass of wine.

OMG….. Anna B in a public, leadership position?

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, gustava said:

OMG….. Anna B in a public, leadership position?

Yes, but remember, ANNA B DOES NOT HAVE A CAREER! Careers are for feminist possibly lesbian women with cats and no kids or husband. 

Anna Sofia doesn't have kids or a husband and we don't know her cat status or sexual inclinations, but she does not have a career because it's simply not allowed. 

*************************************************************

*sotto voce*  AS has a career

 

  • Upvote 12
  • Haha 3
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Howl said:

*sotto voce*  AS has a career

 

She specifically said in this talk that when she was considering taking the position of Chamber of Commerce director one of the things she had to consider was whether she’d be in authority over any men. Now she’s the President. 
 

I don’t know how the Chamber of Commerce works, but does this mean that she won’t allow any men on it, because she would be in a position of authority over them? Or if a man was hired (?) would she step down? I can’t imagine that the Hickman County Chamber of Commerce is now drafting rules into its policies that prohibit men on the council. That seems a little illegal. 

  • Upvote 7
  • WTF 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Columbia said:

She specifically said in this talk that when she was considering taking the position of Chamber of Commerce director one of the things she had to consider was whether she’d be in authority over any men. Now she’s the President. 

FFS, these people.  If AS was serious about not being in authority over men or being a true SAHD, you would not be out and about doing shit like selling real estate or getting involved with CoC.  I find the mental contortions interesting, though. 

I suspect part of it is making money. 

But if she needs an income stream, why doesn't she limit herself to T-Rex Arms, the family bidness where she'd be helping her brother and under the supervision of brother as patriarch? 

This really is very interesting. 

Edited by Howl
  • Upvote 9
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Howl said:

If AS was serious about not being in authority over men or being a true SAHD, you would not be out and about doing shit like selling real estate or getting involved with CoC.

If she was really serious about it she wouldn’t have agreed to have Scott Brown in the room while she was talking. The loopholes are innumerable, as long as you’re one of the people at the top. 

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Howl said:

But if she needs an income stream, why doesn't she limit herself to T-Rex Arms, the family bidness where she'd be helping her brother and under the supervision of brother as patriarch? 

 

51 minutes ago, Columbia said:

If she was really serious about it she wouldn’t have agreed to have Scott Brown in the room while she was talking. The loopholes are innumerable, as long as you’re one of the people at the top. 

Once more, with feeling, "Do as we say and not as we do"  -- the clarion call of fundie Christians.

  • Upvote 10
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus, they never surrender the victories they have attained on the backs of powerful fundie women like Amy Commey Barret. Trump could have gone 3 for 3 and found one more conservative male judge. I don't recall these SAHD types getting in a tizzy over Amy Comey Barret. They gritted their teeth for a "good" cause and got on with it. 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Pecansforeveryone said:

Plus, they never surrender the victories they have attained on the backs of powerful fundie women like Amy Commey Barret. Trump could have gone 3 for 3 and found one more conservative male judge. I don't recall these SAHD types getting in a tizzy over Amy Comey Barret. They gritted their teeth for a "good" cause and got on with it. 

They definitely didn’t like Sarah Palin when she was running as Vice President. 

https://botkinsisters.com/article/why-sarah-palin-inspires-us

The two links at the bottom referencing Vision Forum’s stance on women in government are the cherry on top. 

Edited by Columbia
Typo
  • Upvote 3
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Pecansforeveryone said:

Plus, they never surrender the victories they have attained on the backs of powerful fundie women like Amy Commey Barret. Trump could have gone 3 for 3 and found one more conservative male judge. I don't recall these SAHD types getting in a tizzy over Amy Comey Barret. They gritted their teeth for a "good" cause and got on with it. 

I don’t think they even grit their teeth anymore. They had issues with Palin, yes, but that was pre-Trump. These days the blatant inconsistencies in politics are expected.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Trump was the best, the best I say at exposing fundies inconsistencies. (Nobody exposes it like he does.) Seriously if you are going to say with a straight face that Trump is God's man and make a golden idol out of him, everything else is minor details. 

  • Upvote 13
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the escape loophole for Anna Sofia is it's OK as to be in a position of authority over men as long as they aren't members of Geoff's church, i.e., Godless Heathens. 

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember Lori Alexander talking about Amy Commey Barret when she first joined the Court.  Lori was glad that she was a conservative, but felt the need to spout that it would have been better for ACB to stay at home because her kids needed her, and therefore she wouldn't be celebrating her placement on the Court because her kids would suffer.  I strongly dislike ACB, though not for the reasons that Lori does.  Both of them  🤢 .

  • Upvote 7
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, crawfishgirl said:

I remember Lori Alexander talking about Amy Commey Barret when she first joined the Court.  Lori was glad that she was a conservative, but felt the need to spout that it would have been better for ACB to stay at home because her kids needed her, and therefore she wouldn't be celebrating her placement on the Court because her kids would suffer.  I strongly dislike ACB, though not for the reasons that Lori does.  Both of them  🤢 .

If I remember correctly, some of her kids are grown. So it’s not like she has 7 toddlers at home. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Rufus Bless 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2022 at 12:00 PM, Columbia said:

Elizabeth: A big burden on a lot of our hearts, definitely Anna’s and mine, is just this whole issue of how do you go about in a wise, godly, safe, sane manner, how do you go about reevaluating things like this, and maybe making changes in decisions or in priorities. Because probably every one of us has seen, and has had our hearts broken by, the examples of dear friends or family members, or whatever it might be, who came to this quandary where they realized, “I was, maybe I’ve been taught some things that weren’t perfect, maybe I’ve inherited some ideas and theology and practices from imperfect people,”

I take it she is referring to Ben and Audrie?

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

On 10/29/2022 at 12:51 PM, Columbia said:

It’s quite a contrast when you listen to them talk about how it’s good for a girl to have adventures, but their example of having adventures is sitting at home being helpful while their brothers run off to Egypt. 

Oh, but they got to edit the video footage when the brothers came home! What, that's not an adventure?!?

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
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.