Botkin 3: Elizabeth Married!

[Columbia]

If Vision Forum was still around she could easily be trotted out as a younger, newer Jennie Chancey (sans badly written books, but there’s always time for that later.) The college-educated former feminist who met a good man who showed her the error of her ways, and is now ready to settle down and be a good homeschooling SAHM. The real estate investing is just a little Proverbs 31 side project to help her husband’s vision. And we all know those rules don’t really apply to the folks at the top, anyways. She’d be the grown up version of those girls who would write her sisters-in-law that they read “So Much More” dropped out of college, and are now faithfully following their father.

[hoipolloi]

Meanwhile, over at Lucas & Kara Botkin's social media, there's a lot of talk about guns, money, self-improvement, real estate, and sushi but no mention of Geoff's 200-year plan.

Oh, and T.Rex Arms donʻt need no stinkin' gun safety:

[Petronella]

On 6/1/2023 at 9:06 PM, Columbia said:

She’d be the grown up version of those girls who would write her sisters-in-law that they read “So Much More” dropped out of college, and are now faithfully following their father.

That link was—whoa. It’s about a young woman who’s extremely successful at university dropping out to be a stay-at-home-daughter after being inspired by the Botkins. Now I’m really curious to know what Evangeline McNiel is up to now, fourteen years since it was written.

I remember feeling overwhelmed at the challenges of university and dreaming about being able to focus on my apartment and my relationships. I wanted to read and cook and go for walks. I worked as a nanny one summer, and enjoyed being able to just be playful and responsive instead of capital-A Ambitious. Other summers I travelled or just enjoyed having a break. It gave me room to rest and room to think.

When I look back at the hypercompetitive program I was part of, and look at Evangeline’s list of many, many activities at which she excelled, I suspect there’s a middle ground between doing it all and becoming a stay-at-home daughter. I relate to her feelings of being overwhelmed, but I don’t think the opposite extreme would actually solve it.

So I’m curious how long being a stay-at-home daughter worked for her. Did she love it? Did she get bored? Did she get ideas? Did she see that her goal of being the best college student is in some ways very similar to becoming the best stay-at-home daughter and that becoming more relaxed about being fine instead of amazing, about taking only some opportunities instead of committing to them all, might be a better path? Learning moderation, rather than choosing between extremes.

As with so much fundie advice, it’s shared at the point the decision is made, rather than looking back with perspective. I’d love to hear her perspective now.

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by Petronella

[Columbia]

6 hours ago, Petronella said:

That link was—whoa. It’s about a young woman who’s extremely successful at university dropping out to be a stay-at-home-daughter after being inspired by the Botkins. Now I’m really curious to know what Evangeline McNiel is up to now, fourteen years since it was written.

...

So I’m curious how long being a stay-at-home daughter worked for her. Did she love it? Did she get bored? Did she get ideas? Did she see that her goal of being the best college student is in some ways very similar to becoming the best stay-at-home daughter and that becoming more relaxed about being fine instead of amazing, about taking only some opportunities instead of committing to them all, might be a better path? Learning moderation, rather than choosing between extremes.

I've wondered the same things for a long time. She's one of three girls that I've thought about a lot for years. The other two are the pastor's daughter who was beaten 13 times for not shaking a man's hand, and the little girl who couldn't read at 9 years old, because she was busy raising her three younger siblings and working in the garden. I have no idea who either of them are, but I hope that they're safe now, and I would give a great deal to hear from them, especially because two big shot men (Voddie and Sproul, Jr.) knew of their plight and did nothing to help them.

[Howl]

8 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

Oh, and T.Rex Arms donʻt need no stinkin' gun safety...

Lucas responds to telluride368 explaining basic, safe gun handling practice with "Where did that come from, whose rule is it?"  tellurid e368 responds:  "best practices based off statistical attributions for what causes accidents". 

This points directly at the arrogance of the insular fundy bubble, where you don't draw on the experience of the outside world because you think you have everything you need with your in group.  Fundy homeschooling, anyone?  

 Lucas spends a lot of time in gun cosplay; a lot of his followers on Instagram likely have real world experience (military, LE or both) and think he's  little poser. He's been called out more than once. 

 

 

[sleepygirl1]

2 hours ago, Columbia said:

I've wondered the same things for a long time. She's one of three girls that I've thought about a lot for years. The other two are the pastor's daughter who was beaten 13 times for not shaking a man's hand, and the little girl who couldn't read at 9 years old, because she was busy raising her three younger siblings and working in the garden. I have no idea who either of them are, but I hope that they're safe now, and I would give a great deal to hear from them, especially because two big shot men (Voddie and Sproul, Jr.) knew of their plight and did nothing to help them.

How abhorrent. That makes me so mad. Shaking hands is really a western cultural thing. You’ll find in many countries in the east, bowing is appropriate or other forms of greeting. You can be polite without shaking hands. When a deacon is begging a little girl to shake his hand just so she doesn’t get spanked again you know somethings wrong.

[Howl]

2 hours ago, sleepygirl1 said:

The other two are the pastor's daughter who was beaten 13 times for not shaking a man's hand,

Part of the fundy eradication of personal boundaries grooming process, to train women to never, ever say "no" to a fundy man, the perfect set up for sexual abuse by men in authority. 

But back to Lucas Botkin and his side piece wife, no word yet on a blessing on the way? 

 

[Columbia]

7 hours ago, Howl said:

Lucas responds to telluride368 explaining basic, safe gun handling practice with "Where did that come from, whose rule is it?"  tellurid e368 responds:  "best practices based off statistical attributions for what causes accidents". 

This points directly at the arrogance of the insular fundy bubble, where you don't draw on the experience of the outside world because you think you have everything you need with your in group.  Fundy homeschooling, anyone? 

It's also kind of ironic because the Botkins emphasized teaching your kids to teach themselves so much in their homeschooling seminars. I guess they forgot to teach poor Lucas how to find primary sources.

[Columbia]

On 10/30/2022 at 9:05 AM, Howl said:

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. 

It seems Joe Morecraft (the third) called upon his old friends to review/endorse his new commentary on the Westminster Larger Catechism. 

I can not imagine why he would want the endorsement of women, or why they would give it. They could never stand up in Christ the King on Sunday and preach on anything he's written (or, I think, even ask questions after the service, if what we've heard about the church is correct.) In many patriarchal circles a pastor couldn't even reference a theological book written by a woman, because that would still be her teaching in authority over men (there was a big dust up in the LCMS about a woman simply writing theology recently.) And, on top of that, neither of them have any formal theological training like the pastors who endorsed his books. Why does their endorsement carry enough weight to be reliable? How is this weight not a form of being in authority over men, since they are using their own personal authority to declare that Joe's commentaries are worthwhile? What younger version of Doug Phillips/Doug Wilson/Scott Brown/Kevin Swanson would concern himself with a woman's recommendation of a theological text? 

[hoipolloi]

7 hours ago, Columbia said:

neither of them have any formal theological training like the pastors who endorsed his books. Why does their endorsement carry enough weight to be reliable? How is this weight not a form of being in authority over men, since they are using their own personal authority to declare that Joe's commentaries are worthwhile? What younger version of Doug Phillips/Doug Wilson/Scott Brown/Kevin Swanson would concern himself with a woman's recommendation of a theological text? 

All good questions. Hard to believe this multi-layered doorstop is worth $350.

I have an easier question: why isn't Elizabeth going by her married name?

[JermajestyDuggar]

5 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

All good questions. Hard to believe this multi-layered doorstop is worth $350.

I have an easier question: why isn't Elizabeth going by her married name?

That’s what always got me about these patriarchal types. They let their daughters take someone else’s last name? I bet they all hated that but couldn’t go against patriarchal tradition. 

[Columbia]

1 hour ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

That’s what always got me about these patriarchal types. They let their daughters take someone else’s last name? I bet they all hated that but couldn’t go against patriarchal tradition. 

There's a reason Geoff never mentioned daughters when he talked about his 200 year plan. At one of the VF father-daughter retreats he gave a long windy talk about making sure your daughters have everything they need to be ready for marriage, and then launched into a spiel on his 200 year plan, and everything from there out was "my sons." When he had to start thinking about the future the only women who mattered were the ones his sons would marry.

[Nothing if not critical]

8 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

I have an easier question: why isn't Elizabeth going by her married name?

Well, if you're the daughter of an internationally renowned duck biologist, then surely the Botkin name trumps everything a future husband could possibly bring to the table... It's a classic case of "the rules that apply to mere mortals don't apply to us", if you ask me.

[Howl]

It will be interesting to see what shakes out when the erstwhile duck biologist flies south (metaphorically speaking).  I'd guess Anna Sophia is still a true believer.  I hope her new SiL opens her eyes a little in terms of what is possible. 

[Columbia]

17 hours ago, Howl said:

It will be interesting to see what shakes out when the erstwhile duck biologist flies south (metaphorically speaking).  I'd guess Anna Sophia is still a true believer.  I hope her new SiL opens her eyes a little in terms of what is possible. 

Given their comments at the most recent NCFIC conferences about how it's fine for single women to own their own houses and have their own money, she'd probably move out and be just fine. Especially because she's got her realtor's license and knows the ins and outs of that market.

Now, of course, while it's okay for single women to have their own houses and their own money it is still bad for them to have "careers," so how you get those houses and stacks is an entirely different question.

[Howl]

It's always interesting to me which business pursuits fundies consider appropriate.  IT, photography, real estate.  Bradrick!, Scottie Brown are major into real estate and probably many others. 

Edited July 29, 2023 by Howl

[JermajestyDuggar]

6 minutes ago, Howl said:

It's always interesting to me which business pursuits fundies consider appropriate.  IT, photography, real estate.  Bradrick!, Scottie Brown are major into real estate and probably many others. 

I think they want careers that can make the most money with the least amount of dirty liberal college classes. 

[Columbia]

3 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I think they want careers that can make the most money with the least amount of dirty liberal college classes. 

And as little exposure to working with/under liberal pagans as possible, especially women. They also tend to jobs where the kids can easily be roped into service and save the family from issues with hiring, taxes, etc. 

I also think there might be a tendency to privacy of income in a lot of these "home business" families. If a family's father is a truck driver in Georgia, or an optometrist in Utah you can easily look up his potential income. If, instead, he's investing in real estate, or running some multimedia company, or a "consultant" in Washington D.C., it's harder to estimate how much he's worth, and that may be to the benefit if a family is not doing well financially, but still wants to hobnob with the VF elite. It can also further promote the belief that anyone can have a family with half a dozen kids, you just need to be frugal and work hard together like Family X. They won't hesitate to crow when a family business is doing well; there was a VF-associated family in Texas that started an HVAC company and sold it for a million or so dollars that Geoff and Doug liked to talk in VF speeches and conferences. And the Botkins are happy to talk about how well T.Rex Arms is doing. But the answer to financial struggles is always "pray harder, work harder, and go without," and successful families running vague businesses with no estimatable income make it easy to put the fault of financial struggles back on the family, instead of their potential bad circumstances. 

[Howl]

17 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I think they want careers that can make the most money with the least amount of dirty liberal college classes

Or actually getting their hands dirty!  There's definitely an elites + prosperity mashup going on. 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Howl

[Columbia]

On 7/23/2023 at 12:21 AM, hoipolloi said:

Oh, and T.Rex Arms donʻt need no stinkin' gun safety:

Yikes.
 

 

[RebelliousEscapee]

Anna Sofia & Elizabeth Botkin's page is now up on Cinema of Wonder

[CTRLZero]

Excellent.  I really enjoy the juxtaposition of their being anti-self-supporting with the fact that one is a realtor, and both have gone on book tours, which generate income.  These sorts of statements do such harm: 

We live in a cynical society that anticipates decline, decay and defeat. In God’s order, for the Christian woman, there is no circumstance where a widow or abandoned woman is forced to support herself. The reason this question is often asked is because fathers and churches and other responsible parties are not being responsible.

Again, kudos to the individual creating this website.  

[Howl]

2 hours ago, CTRLZero said:

We live in a cynical society that anticipates decline, decay and defeat. In God’s order, for the Christian woman, there is no circumstance where a widow or abandoned woman is forced to support herself. The reason this question is often asked is because fathers and churches and other responsible parties are not being responsible.

I wonder how many widows and "abandoned" women with a bunch of kids are being fully supported by the Botkins. 

The plan is they will support them briefly until they are "encouraged" to enter some forced marriage with a Godly man, other wise known as a loser (see Kelly Brown). 

[Columbia]

I do think it would be fair (whoever is making that page) to acknowledge that they have admitted that they "went too far" in some of their early teachings, including stuff about working, and single women being able to have their own houses. (Though interestingly the talk where they said it's okay for single women to have their own houses and money doesn't seem to be available on NCFIC anymore.) If you haven't listened to the recent talks they've given at NCFIC events, they're all worth hearing. Unfortunately, their admission starts and ends with themselves, and they've never mentioned even the remotest possibility of women and girls being hurt by their earlier teaching. They give a decent overview of where they are now in this talk, and discuss a few places where they were wrong, but you have to contrast it with this one they gave a day or two later where they blast "deconstruction" with a spectacular array of strawmen and call for their listeners to have gratitude for the leaders who made choices to step away from statism and feminism. I always wondered exactly which leaders they meant. When I first listened to that section I kept thinking of the little 9-year-old girl that Sproul Jr. wrote about who couldn't read because she was busy caring for three younger siblings and working in the garden. What would she have thought about their excuses that "no one's perfect" and that maybe people are struggling because they realized they were taught "imperfect" things from "imperfect" people, versus being taught harmful things from unsafe people.

[JemimaPuddle-Duck]

The Botkins are selling

https://go.realtracs.com/14R461I