Michael Pearl is going to be on Anderson's daytime talk.....

[Brainsample]

So, this is finally airing in Denver right now.

The commenters who posted that Pearl was being cut off and not allowed to speak are definitely Pearl devotees following talking points! Not only did Pearl do most of the talking, a couple of times I noticed Anderson trying to ask a question to "direct" Pearl's ramblings into something relevant, and Pearl just literally bulldozed, continuing to ramble through the entire question about whatever nonsense he was saying to begin with. When someone said something he didn't like (the DA for example), he would pretend to ignore them and read the copy of his book he brought.

I don't think anyone who wasn't already one of Pearl's supporters or some other corporal punishment fanatic would have watched this show and not seen Pearl for what he is.

Edited for Pearl-rage-induced typo

He picked up something that was laying on the sofa and started leafing through it while Elizabeth was talking, too.

Hey-- over on Anderson's site, someone linked to FJ on Yuku, and then I posted one of the links that thoughtful posted here for me. I figured someone would bring it up.

After talking to my friend I google Pearl's kids, Rebekah and Gabe Anast. There wasn't much information on them but what I did find does now show Rebekah and Gabe as these successful people that Pearl says they will be when someone raises kids this way. I discovered that Gabe quit his job after God told him to, and that he was begging for money while Rebekah was pregnant with her sixth kid. I also read that they were so poor that their heat had been turned off. If you don't believe me just read it here

http://freejinger.yuku.com/topic/7035#.Ttzqx5g5DzI

andersoncooper.com/episodes/michael-pearl-and-extreme-child-discipline-plus-miracle-dog-and-healthy-cooking-with-rocco-dispirito/#ixzz1fgGmoixl

[browncoatslytherin]

haha freejinger is taking over teh internetz! :twisted:

[DinnerPlateDahlia]

I am really glad that we and others are getting the word out on the Anasts. I actually posted about them over on the AC comments the other day as well, and on Amazon a few weeks ago. I keep hearing supporters say, "Well, Pearl must be doing something right; his kids sure turned out great!" Yeah, says HIM.

Pearl has said many times that his definition of success in his children is that they are "married" with children, and that were virgins when they "married". That's a pretty damn low bar. I think if most people who read TTUAC, fundies-lite especially, would be discouraged if they knew the truth about what a disaster Pearl's daughter's life is. Even very conservative Christians usually want their children to have a legally recognized marriage and employment allowing them to financially support their children or a spouse who does, at the bare minimum. Even most hardcore fundies don't want to see their grandchildren freeze or starve.

What can we dig up about the other Pearl kids? I know it's tougher because they don't have crazy-making dream-prophesizing online "ministries", but there's gotta something out there. People need to be disabused of the notion that this a valid way to raise healthy, successful children.

[Brainsample]

Glad I asked for them because I've posted all of those links that thoughtful put up here about the Anasts.

And I put up the quote about them not being legally married (and it has a dig at homosexuals in it) and the link. That ought to go over good.

Thank you, thoughtful~

[Brainsample]

Oh, and is this a total scream:

Eva

6 hours ago

So, if you are open minded in the least about spanking, please examine the evidence of what Mr. Pearl advocates and read their book. Their teaching of the proper use of spanking and the whole concept of proper training are very clear. The Christian Law Association (CLA) has gone over their materials at their request. The CLA, as well as the State of Tennessee Dept. of Child Services have given a clear OK that they do not contain anything that might be construed as teaching abusive use of spanking. They have addressed the whole scope of the issue in To Train Up a Child book - the heart of the parent towards the child, parental anger, abuse of spanking, etc. Their publications and website contain materials that fully describe what they teach. Training is teaching the child early in life what to do and how to respond, using gentle, positive reinforcement. That is the whole scope of their ministry and they have been a huge blessing to many families.

You can no more implication them in the death of those children than you can implicate McDonalds in the improper use of their food in child obesity, a slow death.

andersoncooper.com/episodes/michael-pearl-and-extreme-child-discipline-plus-miracle-dog-and-healthy-cooking-with-rocco-dispirito/#ixzz1fghFBbm3

Somebody checked!

MeDenne Jones

about an hour ago

I just got off the phone with Christian Law Association. From what they told me they have never heard of this book or Mr. Pearl. They are going to check into this because they don't want their names being linked to something that they don't know about. I also called the state of Tennessee Department of Child Services. Once again they know nothing about this stuff. They too are checking into this and where their name is linked.

.andersoncooper.com/episodes/michael-pearl-and-extreme-child-discipline-plus-miracle-dog-and-healthy-cooking-with-rocco-dispirito/#ixzz1fgghcpak

[browncoatslytherin]

haha someone got owned!

[thoughtful]

I just got word that my proposal to present patriarchy at the International Cultic Studies Association's meeting in Montreal in July 2012 was accepted.

Congratulations! :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[thoughtful]

By all means let us know what else you see! I am also curious about the sexism in the 'tying strings' chapter. It's been a long time since I read that vile book.

Here you go (apparently, boys wanting to make something heart-shaped is only OK if it's cut out of wood, in a manly woodshop):

PAPER HEARTS

Recently, a father told us of a victory in this area. His first grader came home from school and became preoccupied drawing and cutting out paper hearts. The father and son were close and often did things together. Seeing the boy's smitten condition, the father lightly poked fun at his activity. The child didn't see anything amusing. He turned away and continued his labor of love. Over the next several days, the boy would conceal his endeavors from the father. The father became aware that a confidence crisis had occurred. The child was withdrawn and resisted all overtures to fellowship with his father. The strings had been cut.

If, at this point, the father had accepted this wall as just a "stage"--or worse, become irritated and contributed further to the breach--this would have been the beginning of a breach that would have grown wider with the years. But the father was wise and took positive action. After school one day, he said to his son, "Hey Jessie, you want to go out to the shop with me? We will cut out wooden hearts." Jessie reservedly looked up and seemed to be cautiously analyzing his father's intent. After a moment, his facial expressions changed to believing delight, and he said, "Sure Dad, that would be great." As they worked together creating a wooden heart to be given to Jessie's friend, the wall came down and camaraderie was restored

More:

* Mother, teach your children to do everything that must be done in the house. Make it all a fun experience. Don't use the very young as slave labor, they will experience burnout. Let them bake cookies at three years old. When you are sewing, let the young ones sit on the floor and cut out doll clothes. When you are painting, let them make a few swipes.

* Fathers, by their participation, let the boys feel they are the protectors and providers of the house. If they can walk, they can carry in groceries or bring in firewood. Brag on their achievements.

That chapter also contains this bizarre interpretation of pain-free punishment (by a sibling, no less) working just fine, and Pearl completely missing that, only to see some imagined victory in battle that the mother missed.

Yes, he still talks about conquering the "rebel child" even in the supposedly nicey-nice tying strings chapter:

THE THREE-YEAR-OLD TRUCKER

As my wife sat talking, an altercation developed between the young mother's two sons, one and three years old. They both began to scream while tugging at opposite ends of the same toy truck. The mother hollered, "What is wrong with you two?" "He is trying to take my truck," cried the older of the two. "Billy, give Johnny back his truck," she yelled. After further peace-shattering threats and screams of protest, he reluctantly handed over the truck.

The younger child then defeatedly left the yard and stumbled into the house to stand beside his mother--thus punishing the other brother by the loss of his company. (It is an adult form of retribution, but children must learn it sometime.)

After the chastisement of loneliness had done its work, the older brother became repentant. Picking up his truck from the sand pile, he made his way into the house where he found the offended younger brother now sitting in his mother's lap being consoled for his losses on the battlefield. With a smile of reconciliation, he held his truck out to the younger brother. As the younger brother was about to accept the sacrificial peace offering, the mother turned to see the grinning child dribbling sand from his truck onto the floor. "Get that thing out of here!" she commanded.

Being engrossed in her company, she was not thinking of her children as human beings with complex feelings. She just saw another cleaning job to further add to her burden.

At this point a psychological transformation occurred in the child. He had just experienced a "repentance" that had cleansed him of anger and selfishness. Weighing his right to possess the truck against his brother's company, he had found that he valued his brother more. He was learning important social lessons about give-and-take. He was learning to share and how to control his possessiveness. His heart was surrendered and vulnerable. He had gone the second mile; and when he got to the end of it, he was shocked to find that no one cared. It really didn't matter. He had laid down his guns, and now he was being fired upon. If he was not going to be allowed to surrender, if they didn't care enough to accept his offering, he was not going to stand there exposed, grinning like a fool, while being unjustly blasted.

He didn't understand what all the row was about. Who could be upset about a little sand on the floor? After all, he had been playing in sand all morning--he loved it. As he studied the threatening face before him, you could see the little mental wheels turning.

Immediately the smile left and was replaced by wonder, then puzzlement, finally defiance. Suddenly, an idea came to him. It now being clear she was mad about the sand being dribbled on the floor, he raised his truck to examine it, then defiantly dumped the full contents onto the floor. To his satisfaction it worked. She came apart. She had hurt him and he had successfully retaliated. "Just look at her red face. That will teach her to attack me. Boy, I won this round."

This mother had missed the opportunity to accept the surrender of this rebel leader. Instead she had driven him back into the countryside to practice his civil dissent in defiance of the established authority. Like many rebels, he had no alternate plans for the future. He lived to be a rebel because of his hatred for the authority that he hoped to punish for perceived injustices.

Oh, I forgot -- that chapter also contains the "Mom and Dad are God's rehearsal stand-ins" stuff:

SEEING GOD IN DADDY AND MAMMA

When the child is young, the parents are the only "god" he knows. As he awakens to Divine realities, it is through his earthly father that he understands his heavenly Father. Fathers (and mothers also), you are the window through which your young child understands God. A child learns of the character of God through observing the parents. The parents do not have to be perfect, just a mini-caricature representing a balance of God's personality. All that God is in infiniteness, the parents should display in the finite. The parents need not be all-powerful, just the child's source of strength. The parents do not have to be all-wise, just wise enough to guide the child and warrant admiration. The parents need not be sinless, just demonstrate a commitment to the good and holy. As the child sees the parents' humble dependence on and love for God, because he loves and respects his parents, he will love and honor the one the parents love.

As the child relates to the figurehead of authority (his parents), in like manner he will later be prone to relate to God. If, when the parents say, "No," they do not mean '"No," then the "thou shalt not" of God will not be taken seriously either. Children with cruel fathers usually mature with a foreboding of their heavenly Father. Those disciplined to lovingly obey their earthly fathers are more ready to obey their heavenly Father

So, even without exhortations to violence, that "nice" chapter contains quite a bit that concerns me.

[thoughtful]

So, this is finally airing in Denver right now.

The commenters who posted that Pearl was being cut off and not allowed to speak are definitely Pearl devotees following talking points! Not only did Pearl do most of the talking, a couple of times I noticed Anderson trying to ask a question to "direct" Pearl's ramblings into something relevant, and Pearl just literally bulldozed, continuing to ramble through the entire question about whatever nonsense he was saying to begin with. When someone said something he didn't like (the DA for example), he would pretend to ignore them and read the copy of his book he brought.

Glad to see that confirmed.

[fakepigtails73]

Very cool! :clap:

Will that be open to the general public? I love reading about cults and I live in Montréal. Will it be at the Palais Des Congrès?

I'm a historian, although cults are not my area of expertise as I said I like to learn about them. We have tons of 'em in QC and we had a cultic disaster in 1994 with the "Order Of The Solar Temple" who murdered members, then torched their compounds up North and killed themselves in a mass suicide at the same time other members in Europe did the same thing in Switzerland and France.

I wish we'd be more strict with cults. Here any bozo with a few followers and a crazy belief system can register as a religion, with all the tax advantages that go with it. I love how France deal with cults (and the way they deal with many other things, but that's out of topic).

[Brainsample]

Very cool! :clap:

Will that be open to the general public? I love reading about cults and I live in Montréal. Will it be at the Palais Des Congrès?

I'm a historian, although cults are not my area of expertise as I said I like to learn about them. We have tons of 'em in QC and we had a cultic disaster in 1994 with the "Order Of The Solar Temple" who murdered members, then torched their compounds up North and killed themselves in a mass suicide at the same time other members in Europe did the same thing in Switzerland and France.

I wish we'd be more strict with cults. Here any bozo with a few followers and a crazy belief system can register as a religion, with all the tax advantages that go with it. I love how France deal with cults (and the way they deal with many other things, but that's out of topic).

I think that if you showed up and acted like you knew what you were doing, they'd let you in. Or tell them you know me and wanted to come, perhaps. (I have to pay, but I get a reduced rate.)

http://icsahome.com/infoserv_respond/ev ... asp?ID=406

I had in my head that it was at the university, but it will be held at the Downtown Holiday Inn Select Center Ville. I guess that it's just in conjunction with the university. I'm a little bummed. I thought that I was going to be able to manage a cheap deal at the school which they sometimes arrange to do. Not so.

Oh well.

[Brainsample]

Well, I'm sad to say that the Pearl defenders seem to have stopped coming around on Anderson's site to post their damage control comments from whatever list of talking points they were issued. Hopefully the comments there will not be long forgotten but will affect someone and will give them cause to think. I'm just amazed that anyone in their right mind could defend someone so blindly when their teachings end up being attached to the deaths of beautiful little children. I understand why, probably better than most people, but it still amazes me. It isn't just that kids turned out wrong or have problems with certain things that are somewhat manageable. These kids are dead. Even death is not enough to make his followers stop and question what has happened, but only polarizes them. It is a shame.

I'm also disappointed that the Foxes, the marriage experts that sat on the couch between Pearl and Elizabeth who had just childish things to say about the psychologist and the "myths and lies" about spanking did not make an effort to respond, either.

On to the next bit. We'll see how well Pearl holds up on the Today show tomorrow.