Pearls On the Today Show This Morning

[Want More Babies]

I can't watch that sick bastard, but thought maybe someone else could.

[Koala]

He's certainly making the rounds isn't he?

Off topic, but Today Show is a hotbed of fundie/crazy isn't it? Wonder if they'll pander to him like they do their precious Duggars? I'm just waiting for the day that they do an interview live from Michelle's bathroom. Just think, we can all watch the stick turn pink together! :shock:

[GatorGutCasserole]

I can't watch that sick bastard, but thought maybe someone else could.

Same here, I am expecting someone with a stronger stomach to watch it and let us know about the gorey details :twisted: :oops: :whistle:

[mrs]

Here is the link, if you want to watch:

http:// today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/#45803746

[camdendayton]

FYI: you don't need to break links to media sources. they don't care what ppl are saying about them, as long as we're looking.

ETA: I watched the video, the first half is pretty typical of the media portrayals of Pearl. The parenting expert they talk to in the second half was good. (Wow, an educated person comes off as better than Pearl, what a shock ;-) )

As far as the Today show and fundies, you have to realize that there is a big difference between what Pearl is selling and what the Duggars are selling (or at least purporting to sell.) Pearl (through his appearance alone) immediately turns most mainstream people off. The Duggars don't look like scary, unattractive mountain people that you would be scared of if you broke down on a country road somewhere. They look like a nice, wholesome, fairly attractive family. Just compare JB and MP or J'chelle and Mrs. P, who do you think most people would want to be? Mrs. P just looks tired and broken. J'chelle, for all her obnoxiousness sells better. The Duggars are selling big family fun. Pearls are selling "Biblical Chastisement." It's pretty clear which is more appealing to the general public, and the Today show is definitely about appealing to the general public.

[MaroonMandy]

I watched it, but it wasn't too interesting. Everything was pre-recorded, so Pearl didn't have to backtrack or really justify anything. The whole thing took about 3 minutes. Here's a quick rundown if you're interested:

Pearl said parents who refuse to spank are “emotional cowardsâ€

TODAY showed a book quote “If you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he has surrendered.â€

When asked about spanking with the hand, he said something to the effect of: I could take my hand and break your ribs with it, I could dislocate your shoulder, I’d never hit a child with it.

Shows the reporter how to pick the right “switchâ€

They looked through the warehouse where they keep the books.

TODAY reviewed the deaths of the three kids and talked to the Schatz prosecutor and he said they were using the book almost exactly as Pearl intended.

He explained why Pearl hasn’t been charged. “He has a First Amendment Right to write awful things. Was he legally responsible? No. Was he morally responsible? Yes.â€

Pearl says it’s not his fault. “If they had listened to my book, it wouldn’t have happened.â€

Reporter asked why and Pearl gave the standard “I don’t teach to leave a mark†line

Psychiatrist talking about how spanking sets a bad example, it’s okay not to spank, talking to them or giving them a time out is acceptable.

Then they cut back to the studio to talk to an educational psychologist (I think that was her title at least)

[Koala]

Link help please! I can't get that one to work, and I can't find it on the website! TIA!

n/m found it

[Koala]

BTW~ They have a poll on their site asking if the TTUAC goes to far. Go vote!

[debrand]

I saw it. Don't worry, Pearl is only on for a short while and he doesn't do well.

Debbi looks worn out and tired.

For some reason when Pearl lifted his hand and said, "I could dislocate your shoulder or break your ribs with this hand. WHy would I ever use it on a child?" I got an unpleasant shivers. There is something about seeing him in person that makes me believe that he would be violent when he is angry. I don't mean just with kids but anyone that doesn't do as he wants.

Also, if you are using a switch or plumbing line on a child, you are using your hands. Your hand is the one holding the weapon.

[lauracat7]

Just found this about the Pearls and Today show appearance at the LA Times

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/jacketcopy/2011/12/did-christian-parenting-book-lead-to-child-deaths.html

[finleeport]

Do you think the Pearls could be sadomasochists?

[EmmieJ]

I think Michael Pearl is a brutal, sadistic person. His wife has probably been beaten into submission, but the fact that she beats children makes it hard for me to feel sorry for her. I wonder how many more children have to die before Amazon finally will remove their book from the website? I got a gift certificate on my birthday for Amazon.com, but haven't been able to bring myself to use it.

[Witsec7]

I could dislocate your shoulder or break your ribs with this hand. WHy would I ever use it on a child

I think Becca wrote about her father hitting her with his hands. I wonder what changed his mind :roll:

[thoughtful]

It frustrates me that the media always seem to downplay what he says, partly for CYA reasons, and partly out of sheer error.

Everyone seems to say (with horror) that he says it's OK to start whipping very young, but then says that is six or seven months.

But he advises whipping a baby in the crib, without stating an age limit, and admits to whipping his daughter at 4 months.

Maybe there are differences in the editions of the book -- I have the old one.

[dairyfreelife]

I think Pearl ought to put a warning on his book that his methods are not to be used on adopted children. All three of the children who died were adopted.

I think the book should disappear, but we can't ban it, just warn using the deaths and text bits to show his horrible ideas. A warning for adopted children needs up so naive parents won't use his methods for children who need more than physical discipline to stay in line. I know that when a 4yo cousin came here from China, she would overeat and sometimes hide food. Physical discipline would not have worked to fix the insecurities with food she had. Nor are they going to help a lack of communication and issues with adjusting to a new home life in a new country. That takes more. Beating before you've bonded with a new child is just asking for problems to happen. (I think beating a child period causes problems, but before a loving bond happens-red flag danger imo because loving parents often won't go to the limit of beating one to their death even if they switch or spank).

Though, don't misquote me here. I detest the Pearls and if the God they believe in is to judge us when we die for how we lived, I hope the Pearls get earfuls of disgust from It. They deserve nothing less.

[deelaem]

I think Pearl ought to put a warning on his book that his methods are not to be used on adopted children. All three of the children who died were adopted.

I think the book should disappear, but we can't ban it, just warn using the deaths and text bits to show his horrible ideas. A warning for adopted children needs up so naive parents won't use his methods for children who need more than physical discipline to stay in line. I know that when a 4yo cousin came here from China, she would overeat and sometimes hide food. Physical discipline would not have worked to fix the insecurities with food she had. Nor are they going to help a lack of communication and issues with adjusting to a new home life in a new country. That takes more. Beating before you've bonded with a new child is just asking for problems to happen. (I think beating a child period causes problems, but before a loving bond happens-red flag danger imo because loving parents often won't go to the limit of beating one to their death even if they switch or spank).

Though, don't misquote me here. I detest the Pearls and if the God they believe in is to judge us when we die for how we lived, I hope the Pearls get earfuls of disgust from It. They deserve nothing less.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Is it that physical discipline is ok if it's your biological child? The bonding is really beside the point because hitting children is wrong no matter what. Adopted or not has nothing to do with it. The reason the adopted children died is because sick fundie fucks thought that their non-white children should have been kissing their feet all day long because they "saved" them from heathenism. When they didn't do that, and instead had all the normal problems of an adopted child, they decided it was the devil and tried to beat it out of them.

[dairyfreelife]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Is it that physical discipline is ok if it's your biological child? The bonding is really beside the point because hitting children is wrong no matter what. Adopted or not has nothing to do with it. The reason the adopted children died is because sick fundie fucks thought that their non-white children should have been kissing their feet all day long because they "saved" them from heathenism. When they didn't do that, and instead had all the normal problems of an adopted child, they decided it was the devil and tried to beat it out of them.

Love how you quoted one part of a line and didn't bother to read about my disgust with the Pearls-nice. I don't like the Pearls and detest their methods, but some parents will use spanking as a discipline method always. The Pearl's are not going anywhere and ignorant people will continue to purchase their books and use their nutty ideas. Adoption does have to do with it. How many children who were biological have died using their awful methods-zero. They may be mentally and emotionally damaged, but they aren't dead. How many adopted have died? At this point three and there could be more sadly because yes, it is because people adopt these children and think it's going to be just like a bio child at birth and they will come in and have no issues and yes, probably think the child ought to "appreciate" what they did for them. My point is Pearl needs an advisory to seek other advice for adopted children. His methods suck on all children (only an ignorant person would state otherwise), but on adopted children-it's proven to be fatal because that bond takes more time. Whatever methods used on bio child for discipline are not going to be the same for adopted children. And yes-the bond with a child DOES make a difference imo. Always will because even if a parent spanks a child, they will not do damage because they love the child too much to cause damage and really harm it any way. Disagreeing with you, sorry. It does make the difference-adopted vs. biological. You can't get rid of the book. It's not going anywhere due to freedom of speech. If Pearl had any decency or a conscious, even a little one, he would tell parents (well, he should realize his methods are awful, but he won't because the narcisstic arse believes he's second to God) to use his methods with caution, give limits-like one or two spanks (and plumbing line had to hurt terribly), and avoid them on adopted children because Pearl knows zilch about adoption and his methods should never be used on them (any children imo, but we can't stop ignorant parents from using them-if you think you can-no offense, but that's very naive).

I meant spanking with Physical discipline and no, I don't like spanking, but a parent who spanks a time or two isn't going to damage a child for life or kill their own child 99 out of 100 times. I was spanked a couple times and I turned out okay. Though I was resentful for some of the reasons he did it because even as an adult and I think about why he smacked me with his belt a couple times, it was a bad method to use and didn't fix the issue, made it worse. A couple other times-probably deserved it in a way (meaning doing something I wasn't supposed to). My father was not a patient man. If he had gotten a hold of Pearl, scary. :shock: Most people have been spanked a few times in childhood, even if they don't spank their own children and I don't plan to if I ever have any. The Pearl's methods are more than a spank or two and yes, the more Pearl gets out and people learn and see how awful the methods are, the better, but some people will still use them anyway. None of us here can stop that sadly. That's all I am saying.

[holierthanyou]

Love how you quoted one part of a line and didn't bother to read about my disgust with the Pearls-nice. I don't like the Pearls and detest their methods, but some parents will use spanking as a discipline method always. The Pearl's are not going anywhere and ignorant people will continue to purchase their books and use their nutty ideas. Adoption does have to do with it. How many children who were biological have died using their awful methods-zero. They may be mentally and emotionally damaged, but they aren't dead. How many adopted have died? At this point three and there could be more sadly because yes, it is because people adopt these children and think it's going to be just like a bio child at birth and they will come in and have no issues and yes, probably think the child ought to "appreciate" what they did for them. My point is Pearl needs an advisory to seek other advice for adopted children. His methods suck on all children (only an ignorant person would state otherwise), but on adopted children-it's proven to be fatal because that bond takes more time. Whatever methods used on bio child for discipline are not going to be the same for adopted children. And yes-the bond with a child DOES make a difference imo. Always will because even if a parent spanks a child, they will not do damage because they love the child too much to cause damage and really harm it any way. Disagreeing with you, sorry. It does make the difference-adopted vs. biological. You can't get rid of the book. It's not going anywhere due to freedom of speech. If Pearl had any decency or a conscious, even a little one, he would tell parents (well, he should realize his methods are awful, but he won't because the narcisstic arse believes he's second to God) to use his methods with caution, give limits-like one or two spanks (and plumbing line had to hurt terribly), and avoid them on adopted children because Pearl knows zilch about adoption and his methods should never be used on them (any children imo, but we can't stop ignorant parents from using them-if you think you can-no offense, but that's very naive).

I meant spanking with Physical discipline and no, I don't like spanking, but a parent who spanks a time or two isn't going to damage a child for life or kill their own child 99 out of 100 times. I was spanked a couple times and I turned out okay. Though I was resentful for some of the reasons he did it because even as an adult and I think about why he smacked me with his belt a couple times, it was a bad method to use and didn't fix the issue, made it worse. A couple other times-probably deserved it in a way (meaning doing something I wasn't supposed to). My father was not a patient man. If he had gotten a hold of Pearl, scary. :shock: Most people have been spanked a few times in childhood, even if they don't spank their own children and I don't plan to if I ever have any. The Pearl's methods are more than a spank or two and yes, the more Pearl gets out and people learn and see how awful the methods are, the better, but some people will still use them anyway. None of us here can stop that sadly. That's all I am saying.

I was spanked a couple times and I turned out okay.

People hit me when I was a child, and (apart from the fact that I now think it's ok to hit children and continue to do so myself) I'm ok.

[dairyfreelife]

I was spanked a couple times and I turned out okay.

People hit me when I was a child, and (apart from the fact that I now think it's ok to hit children and continue to do so myself) I'm ok.

If you are trying to mock me-epic fail since I said I don't plan on spanking, just that most people were spanked and are not damaged as a result. Not to mention that I said the Pearl's methods are awful.

[Koala]

Always will because even if a parent spanks a child, they will not do damage because they love the child too much to cause damage and really harm it any way.

I have to believe I am misreading this. Are you asserting that a biological parent isn't capable of "doing damage" to their own bio children because they love them? :shock: Ummm, no. That's just not true. Parents (even bio parents) who practice the Pearl's methods are VERY MUCH capable of "doing damage" to their children.

I was spanked a couple times and I turned out okay. Though I was resentful for some of the reasons he did it because even as an adult and I think about why he smacked me with his belt a couple times, it was a bad method to use and didn't fix the issue, made it worse. A couple other times-probably deserved it in a way (meaning doing something I wasn't supposed to).

Please not the "I was spanked and I turned out just peachy" argument. NO child deserves to be hit. Ever. Would you say that if a husband hit his wife? That she probably deserved it because she was doing something she wasn't supposed to. Because I can't think of a single situation where a child "probably deserves" to be hit by an adult man.

My father was not a patient man. If he had gotten a hold of Pearl, scary. :shock:

Doesn't this statement kind of contradict this statement:

Always will because even if a parent spanks a child, they will not do damage because they love the child too much to cause damage and really harm it any way.

Here's the thing, to put a warning on Michael Pearl's book just for adopted kids almost endorses his methods for children who aren't adopted, and that's atrocious. The only answer is to expose this book over, and over, and over in the media and boycott establishments that sell his book until there is no question that Michael Pearl's books promote violence towards ALL children and it won't be tolerated.

Every single time he makes news I post it to my facebook. I've got some fundies I know that need to hear it.

Rest assured, Michael Pearl is dangerous to all children...biological AND adopted.

[Koala]

If you are trying to mock me-epic fail since I said I don't plan on spanking, just that most people were spanked and are not damaged as a result. Not to mention that I said the Pearl's methods are awful.

I'm sorry, but do you personally know "most people that were spanked"? Because as you said, that's a LOT of people. And how are you qualified to say whether they were damaged (either emotionally or physically) by the violence perpetrated on them? Did they tell you, or do you have some way you gauge that? I'm just curious, because I never, ever, ever talk about the impact that my childhood has had on my life. I don't even think I would be capable of talking about it if I had to. So I guess that means I turned out okay right?

Well then, it's all good. That's a relief.

Sorry guys, but shit like this pisses me right off. This downplaying is why people continue to hit their children. They hear a bunch of adults prattling on about how they "turned out just fine and probably deserved it anyway". :cry:

[holierthanyou]

If you are trying to mock me-epic fail since I said I don't plan on spanking, just that most people were spanked and are not damaged as a result. Not to mention that I said the Pearl's methods are awful.

I'm not sure if my point deliberately went over your head, or if that was genuine confusion on your part. Either way, you need to educate yourself (from academic, peer-reviewed journal articles, not fundy books by pastors) on the effects of violence against children (including 'spanking'). Violence begets violence.

[Koala]

I'm not sure if my point deliberately went over your head, or if that was genuine confusion on your part. Either way, you need to educate yourself (from academic, peer-reviewed journal articles, not fundy books by pastors) on the effects of violence against children (including 'spanking').

Exactly. Just look at our prison system. Any idea how many of THEM were spanked as children? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Turned out just fine indeed.

(this is directed towards Dairyfreelife)

[jaynie]

I'm sorry, but do you personally know "most people that were spanked"? Because as you said, that's a LOT of people. And how are you qualified to say whether they were damaged (either emotionally or physically) by the violence perpetrated on them? Did they tell you, or do you have some way you gauge that? I'm just curious, because I never, ever, ever talk about the impact that my childhood has had on my life. I don't even think I would be capable of talking about it if I had to. So I guess that means I turned out okay right?

Well then, it's all good. That's a relief.

Sorry guys, but shit like this pisses me right off. This downplaying is why people continue to hit their children. They hear a bunch of adults prattling on about how they "turned out just fine and probably deserved it anyway". :cry:

Not to mention, a lot of people who were smacked as children aren't really capable of understanding the damage that has been done. Some children dissociate the horrifying experience of being hit by the person they depend on for care, so they can remember *that* it happened but not the actual feeling of it -- and yet studies show that the effects linger. Most often this comes up in relationship difficulties, trouble becoming close to people, etc, but for some people it can turn them violent.

Corporal punishment wasn't used as a rule in our household, but on a very rare occasion my mother would get frustrated and lash out. Mostly this happened when I was being overly contrary. All I learned was how to push her buttons -- if things were getting tense to the point that I thought she might get angry with me, I'd just get more and more argumentative and difficult. I've since learned that this is a very common response that gives the child some sense of control over an uncontrollable, bad situation. Even to this day, if she's in a bad mood I have trouble not making it *worse*.

And immediately I feel the overwhelming urge to defend my mother, who is genuinely a kind, loving person, just one who made a mistake from time to time (a mistake probably rooted in her own childhood experiences of corporal punishment, and not one she made often, and one she always regretted). I think this is part of the problem too. Sometimes otherwise loving parents, due to their own experience or societal values, do spank their kids, and if those kids grow up to have loving, happy relationships with their parents, it's hard to reconcile that with the knowledge that spanking is ineffective and wrong. It means admitting that your parents screwed up, no matter how much they did to make up for it. I think this is why there are so many people who say "I was spanked and it never did me any harm, but I'd never do that to my own kids."

[dairyfreelife]

I have to believe I am misreading this. Are you asserting that a biological parent isn't capable of "doing damage" to their own bio children because they love them? :shock: Ummm, no. That's just not true. Parents (even bio parents) who practice the Pearl's methods are VERY MUCH capable of "doing damage" to their children.

Please not the "I was spanked and I turned out just peachy" argument. NO child deserves to be hit. Ever. Would you say that if a husband hit his wife? That she probably deserved it because she was doing something she wasn't supposed to. Because I can't think of a single situation where a child "probably deserves" to be hit by an adult man.

Doesn't this statement kind of contradict this statement:

Here's the thing, to put a warning on Michael Pearl's book just for adopted kids almost endorses his methods for children who aren't adopted, and that's atrocious. The only answer is to expose this book over, and over, and over in the media and boycott establishments that sell his book until there is no question that Michael Pearl's books promote violence towards ALL children and it won't be tolerated.

Every single time he makes news I post it to my facebook. I've got some fundies I know that need to hear it.

Rest assured, Michael Pearl is dangerous to all children...biological AND adopted.

Fine, but how are you going to stop people from using them-none. Yes, it is scary to think of my father or parents using their methods, but no, my father would not have beaten me to death. I just hate the Pearl's methods, they scare me so to think of anyone using them-no. I am not arguing that it's okay to hit children-it's not, just that people used to be switched and spanked and it's not like we are screwed up as a result. I said I won't be spanking my own, what more do you all want? And yes, parents can and do hurt children, but not children they truly do love and care about-so no, not a contradication. My father would not leave bruises or kill me, just that with his impatience and the Pearl's horrible methods, it could get out of hand. I hate the thought of their methods on anyone, but I cannot stop people from using them. For the millionth time-the Pearls are vile, narcisstic people. Even if parents spank and that was the methods used until recently-physical discipline for the most part, they rarely went far enough to cause serious harm. Most parents love their children too much to harm them. They used other methods too, but yes, they spanked. That's all my point is. People don't just use that anymore and have better ways thankfully.

My point stands though-the only children who died using Pearl's methods are adopted ones. Not biological ones. Though that does not mean it wouldn't happen. I think most people who use the book, although horribly misguided, want what they think is best and are too green to see the harm. On the outset, spanking looks fine, on the inside, Pearl sugar coats near abuse. It looks all pretty to the fundies who believe in "spare the rod, spoil the child" nonsense. The more he shows his face and his craziness the better, but stopping people from physically disciplining their children and using his methods is not likely. We cannot stop his book from being used by ignorant people. That's all I am saying. He needs to tell people who adopt children to avoid his methods because it's not like he will stop telling people to use his methods altogether and because of free speech, his book is not going anywhere-the person who sees themselves so high and mighty as he does never will. If a parent does not love or care for their child enough, then yes, any method of parenting can get out of hand because discipline takes patience and time. ANd no, this does mean I am advocating for physical discipline. I'm not and don't at all because I think there are better ways to handle children. Mainstream society will never agree with Pearl, it's the fundies and those who are desparate because they don't know what to do with discipline that need to see that Pearl is bad and to avoid at all costs. Yes, I did say it would be scary if my dad got a hold of Pearls books, but I can't honestly say that he would believe them. As impatient as he was, he was abusive and did love his children. Yes, he did spank and by deserve, I meant deserved punishment because I did something wrong like all children do, not that I deserved to be hit.

I figure this will get taken out of context too because people keep ignoring my main point so I think I will bow out of this thread to stick to others. Rest assured: I think the Pearls are terrible, narcisstic people who advocate for abuse of children and my opinion on them is not going to change. I just think if they had any decency, they would say that their methods are at least bad for adopted children even if they won't admit they are bad for all children (which is what I think. I didn't state otherwise). And we all should know that Pearl will never admit the latter because he thinks his methods work. Unless he has an epiphany and suddenly sees his own wrongs or someone who was abused by his methods speaks out against them, I see little changing because the audience Pearl is reaching is mostly those like us who already think he and his wife are awful and their methods horrific.