Botkins are writing another book and Those who can't-Merged

[tehgoobster]

Here are some questions I'd like to see them answer:

1. Why does God give a girl a yearning for marriage if He never plans on fulfilling that by providing a spouse? I'm not really referring to the Botkinettes here because I think they'll probably get married sooner or later, but I remember talking about a SAHD at the old board who was very childlike for her age. She had no guy friends, and she probably wouldn't know how to act around a guy, yet she wanted to get married more than anything. I remember feeling really bad for her because I wasn't sure that her wish would ever be fulfilled. She may not have been well-prepared for marriage, but there are plenty of girls who are, and they may never marry. (Granted, I know that the whole thing probably has more to do with the girl's father than with God, but still.)

2. They've said that girls shouldn't flirt with guys because that would lead to both parties "defrauding" each other, but where do you draw the line between being friendly and flirting? I mean, I'm sure they believe that commenting on someone's appearance or being too touchy-feely would be wrong, but some guys misconstrue friendly gestures like smiling and laughing at their jokes as romantic interest. Honestly, I don't know how many times guys have thought I might be interested in them when I was just being friendly. That said, I'd really like to know where they draw the line with this. Also, what some guys may view as flirting may be different from others, so I'm curious about how they'd deal with the subjective aspect to this issue.

3. Do they believe that crushes are wrong? How do they define crushes? I think they'd probably think that crushes would be wrong because it'd mean you weren't emotionally pure before marriage. But if you like someone's personality (as you would if you're friends with a guy) and you think he's attractive, how is that any different from a crush? Crushes are more or less unavoidable if you're friends with nice, smart, funny, and attractive guys, so I wonder how they'd handle that. I know they've said that they think of guys as brothers in Christ and that they try to think of the guys' future wives, but when it comes down to it, a crush is still a crush. If a guy you like ends up with someone else, it's still going to hurt, even if you don't officially have "designs" on him.

4. Guys presumably have to be attracted to and/or interested in a girl on some level before asking to court her, so how is this any different from a crush? I wouldn't be surprised if they said that this would be okay because it could lead to marriage, but the thing is, there's no guarantee that the girl's father would say yes to a courtship. If that's the case, a guy would have a crush on someone he isn't going to marry.

5. Do they believe that it's wrong to hug guy friends?

6. Would it be considered wrong to convey a little interest to a guy? If it's okay, where should the line be drawn? Without knowing if a girl is interested, approaching a chick's father about courtship would be a total crapshoot. With all their talk about not defrauding others, wouldn't it hurt more to approach a girl's dad and get shot down because the girl wasn't the least bit attracted to or interested in the guy? After all, doesn't getting hurt = being defrauded? I'd think a guy would feel a lot more comfortable approaching a girl's dad if he at least knew she was somewhat interested in him to begin with.

7. Is it okay to form an emotional attachment during courtship? If it is, then what happens if you break up? How does courtship protect against hurt feelings more than serious dating if forming an emotional attachment is a feature of both? If it's not okay to form an emotional attachment, what happens if you find out you're not emotionally compatible with the person you end up marrying? How should you deal with that?

That's all I can think of right now. :whistle:

[Effie]

Anna Sophia is 25 and Elizabeth is 22/23.

Wow, I kinda find them to be pathetic when I realize they are older than me. Okay, I have not written a book in my life (but such a book would really be nothing to brag about in my circles :lol: ). But I mean, I feel I have done many things and gained some experience while they have been staying at their mother's and father's place during their young adult life. I think they have too little experience to write a new book, especially since their last one was uninformed rubbish.

[LilMissMetaphor]

Then I'm a bitch too because I would love to see the reply to this letter or even a screen shot of them reading the email :lol:

There is no way you'd get an honest response to that letter (which, while funny, is slightly lacking in subtlety--and I'm sure those girls are bright enough to pick up on it). Rather, Anna Sophia would grit her teeth, plaster on a fake smile, and then compose the following response, cribbed from her previous online postings and running something like this:

Dear Waiting,

Thank you for your letter! People sometimes ask why we, at the ages of 22 24 and 24 26, are not yet married. The only answer we can give is that God has not ordained for us to be married yet, and that is, like all His other works, “very goodâ€; we are enjoying the extra time to labor with our family, to prepare ourselves more fully, and to “occupy until ‘he’ comes.†As much as we pray for godly marriages, there is much to rejoice about in the calling of visionary daughterhood.

My desires to one day be a wife and mother are still alive and well, but they must bow to God’s will. They may be fulfilled soon, or much later on… or they may not be fulfilled at all. If our desire to be placed in marriages really springs from the belief that we will be more useful to God thus, then we won’t feel let down if He decides to deploy us somewhere else. He knows where we will be the most useful to Him.

God is in control of your future, and His plan is being worked out day by day. The marriages that He has ordained to happen right now are happening, despite the fears of a “marriage crisis.†Dying an old maid is not the fate most to be feared. There is nothing people can do to make the right marriages happen before God intends them to, and there is no use crusading or going on witch-hunts when it’s God’s sovereign plan we’re up against. This should be a great relief to us: “Seeing that a Pilot steers the ship in which we sail, who will never allow us to perish even in the midst of shipwrecks, there is no reason why our minds should be overwhelmed with fear and overcome with weariness.†(John Calvin)

[liltwinstar]

I'm just so sad for the two of them. I can't even snark too much.

I mean, it's not really a tragedy to be unmarried at 25 in the real world. I got married at 29, and women are (statistically) getting married at later ages - something that correlates with lower rates of divorce. So, I'm not brokenhearted that they're not married.

I am brokenhearted that they have not been allowed to pursue their own lives and their own interests, whatever those interests are and wherever that would take them. If that would have meant married at 18 and popping out babies and such? I'm sad they weren't able to do that, if that's what they really wanted. If it was law school, or real conservatory training, or travel, or dating a variety of people, or marrying their childhood sweetheart, or even just working in a dentists' office and going out with friends on the weekend...they're trapped, bound as slaves to their father's wills and desires for them, in a unhealthy theological system that keeps them trapped and damns them to hell for defiance.

I could just *scream* when I see adult women treated this way. They deserve to find happiness in their own way, and yes, to make mistakes, and to learn from them and to feel that sense of accomplishment that can only come from making your own decisions, setting your own goals, and living your own life.

[deborahlynn1979]

I am just now finding out about and reading about this Botkin family, as I am still very new to the board. These people are FASCINATING! Those daughters are gorgeous...what a shame that they are kept so still under their father's thumb. This post in particular made me feel kind of sad, as Anna Sofia seems to be trying to convince herself of why she isn't married, as opposed to really facing the truth:

http://visionarydaughters (dot) com/2010/10/greater-expectations

[booksnbeats]

i keep looking at that picture of AS and E looking at their laptop with those smiles on their faces, and I am picturing them defrauding themselves by looking at a naked man on the screen. :D

I couldn't resist...

[Shirley MacLaine]

I am brokenhearted that they have not been allowed to pursue their own lives and their own interests, whatever those interests are and wherever that would take them. If that would have meant married at 18 and popping out babies and such? I'm sad they weren't able to do that, if that's what they really wanted. If it was law school, or real conservatory training, or travel, or dating a variety of people, or marrying their childhood sweetheart, or even just working in a dentists' office and going out with friends on the weekend...they're trapped, bound as slaves to their father's wills and desires for them, in a unhealthy theological system that keeps them trapped and damns them to hell for defiance.

It's really wretched, isn't it?

[gardenvarietycitizen]

Here are some questions I'd like to see them answer:

3. Do they believe that crushes are wrong? How do they define crushes? I think they'd probably think that crushes would be wrong because it'd mean you weren't emotionally pure before marriage. But if you like someone's personality (as you would if you're friends with a guy) and you think he's attractive, how is that any different from a crush? Crushes are more or less unavoidable if you're friends with nice, smart, funny, and attractive guys, so I wonder how they'd handle that. I know they've said that they think of guys as brothers in Christ and that they try to think of the guys' future wives, but when it comes down to it, a crush is still a crush. If a guy you like ends up with someone else, it's still going to hurt, even if you don't officially have "designs" on him.

What I don't get is, if a guy is fully single - not engaged to or even courting anyone at all - and you like his personality a lot already as a friend, and you think he makes a great brother in Christ (so you've maybe had some good experiences working on Godly service projects with him or admired his studying in church or whatever it is), and you're trying to "think of his future wife" - why on earth can't you imagine YOURSELF as his future wife??? And maybe even let someone in a position to forward things along KNOW THAT??

Or to put it more plainly from my secular worldview, if you're constantly thinking "I can't date anyone because I have to save myself for The One," how do you FIND The One? I mean, I can understand the idea of not dating casually, of making sure to tell the guy that you're looking for a serious relationship and maybe hoping he's The One, would he be willing to date you on that basis and hope for the best? or even having a third party do it, but it seems that these people want a 100% guarantee that they will get married before they even dare to imagine even considering someone in a romantic light at all.

...which brings me back to my usual question, why don't they just have official matchmakers and be done with it? But I suppose the answer is because they have the weird romantic fantasy notions straight out of fairy tales, where all you have to do is sit around and the Prince will show up right on schedule. :roll:

[FundiesInMyFamily]

You rock, Demgirl!! Can someone sane tell me why in the hell I would want advice about "boys" from a 25 year old virgin whos never been in a room alone with a boy nor had any interaction besides a side hug from her brother??

I akin it to me being a bacon loving carnivore writing a vegan cookbook !!!

[gardenvarietycitizen]

I'm just so sad for the two of them. I can't even snark too much.

I mean, it's not really a tragedy to be unmarried at 25 in the real world. I got married at 29, and women are (statistically) getting married at later ages - something that correlates with lower rates of divorce. So, I'm not brokenhearted that they're not married.

This too.

I suppose I am sad that they're not married, a bit, but it more relates to the rest of what you've written. I don't feel bad for 25 or 30 something normal socializing women, because you know they have all the chances they want to find someone (I say this as someone who was married at age 38). What makes them sorta sympathetic "old maids" is just the way they're being kept trapped at home in an artificial world where the market is skewed really young. They seem "old" because their world defines them like that, only.

I agree the best thing would be for them to get out into the real world. If they did, they might end up married too!

And yeah, I can't imagine calling myself "girl" unless it was with other women my age I've known SINCE we were all girls and it's a reunion sort of vibe. Same place I use the girly word for "I". But to random strangers on the internet? Hell no.

[Rue]

The whole "boys" and "girls" thing drives me crazy. I grew up Gothard and he always said "young ladies" and "fellas" and that drove me crazy too.

[tehgoobster]

There is no way you'd get an honest response to that letter (which, while funny, is slightly lacking in subtlety--and I'm sure those girls are bright enough to pick up on it). Rather, Anna Sophia would grit her teeth, plaster on a fake smile, and then compose the following response, cribbed from her previous online postings and running something like this:

Dear Waiting,

Thank you for your letter! People sometimes ask why we, at the ages of 22 24 and 24 26, are not yet married. The only answer we can give is that God has not ordained for us to be married yet, and that is, like all His other works, “very goodâ€; we are enjoying the extra time to labor with our family, to prepare ourselves more fully, and to “occupy until ‘he’ comes.†As much as we pray for godly marriages, there is much to rejoice about in the calling of visionary daughterhood.

My desires to one day be a wife and mother are still alive and well, but they must bow to God’s will. They may be fulfilled soon, or much later on… or they may not be fulfilled at all. If our desire to be placed in marriages really springs from the belief that we will be more useful to God thus, then we won’t feel let down if He decides to deploy us somewhere else. He knows where we will be the most useful to Him.

God is in control of your future, and His plan is being worked out day by day. The marriages that He has ordained to happen right now are happening, despite the fears of a “marriage crisis.†Dying an old maid is not the fate most to be feared. There is nothing people can do to make the right marriages happen before God intends them to, and there is no use crusading or going on witch-hunts when it’s God’s sovereign plan we’re up against. This should be a great relief to us: “Seeing that a Pilot steers the ship in which we sail, who will never allow us to perish even in the midst of shipwrecks, there is no reason why our minds should be overwhelmed with fear and overcome with weariness.†(John Calvin)

I laughed when I read that because that looks exactly like something they'd write. They should hire you as a ghostwriter if they ever get tired of writing. :lol:

[tehgoobster]

What I don't get is, if a guy is fully single - not engaged to or even courting anyone at all - and you like his personality a lot already as a friend, and you think he makes a great brother in Christ (so you've maybe had some good experiences working on Godly service projects with him or admired his studying in church or whatever it is), and you're trying to "think of his future wife" - why on earth can't you imagine YOURSELF as his future wife??? And maybe even let someone in a position to forward things along KNOW THAT??

My impression is that they believe that you can "cheat" on your (future) spouse before you're even married. I think they'd probably say that daring to imagine yourself with someone who is not guaranteed to be your future spouse is almost the equivalent of picturing yourself with a married man. I think they believe that you're not supposed to have romantic feelings for someone you're not married to, so if you have feelings for a guy, you're "defrauding" your future husband by having feelings for a guy who's not him, and you're also having feelings for some other chick's future husband. But like you pointed out, this guy could be the girl's future husband, so what then?

My issue is that having feelings for someone you find physically, emotionally, and mentally attractive is more or less impossible, no matter how hard you try. I think people can repress those feelings and fight them off, but you can't repress and fight something that isn't there to begin with, know what I mean? Not only that, but I have a hard time grasping the concept of "defrauding" your future husband before you're married to him. He doesn't belong to you before you're married to him. I mean, that's why there's a difference in the Bible between fornication and adultery, right?

Or to put it more plainly from my secular worldview, if you're constantly thinking "I can't date anyone because I have to save myself for The One," how do you FIND The One? I mean, I can understand the idea of not dating casually, of making sure to tell the guy that you're looking for a serious relationship and maybe hoping he's The One, would he be willing to date you on that basis and hope for the best? or even having a third party do it, but it seems that these people want a 100% guarantee that they will get married before they even dare to imagine even considering someone in a romantic light at all.

Exactly. If you don't allow yourself to feel something for the other person before and during the courtship, it's a total crapshoot. And if feelings are involved, the only thing that sets it apart from serious dating is the heavy parental involvement that's required with courtship. But I think that the heavy parental involvement has more to do with control than it has to do with sparing people's feelings, anyway.

[Shirley MacLaine]

But I think that the heavy parental involvement has more to do with control than it has to do with sparing people's feelings, anyway.

The extreme family involvement really troubles me. I know fundie families don't have this problem because they're all so open and close and blah blah blah ( :roll: ), but I just cannot imagine trying to evaluate whether or not I want to fucking marry someone while sitting there under dad's watchful eye. The way I am with people in front of my parents is, while not fake, not at all a fully accurate representation of me. I'd be afraid I was getting a bit of a tailored version of someone.

[Deleted12]

The extreme family involvement really troubles me. I know fundie families don't have this problem because they're all so open and close and blah blah blah ( :roll: ), but I just cannot imagine trying to evaluate whether or not I want to fucking marry someone while sitting there under dad's watchful eye. The way I am with people in front of my parents is, while not fake, not at all a fully accurate representation of me. I'd be afraid I was getting a bit of a tailored version of someone.

That plus you really need to spend TIME with people to know what they're about.

I've dated a bunch of guys and after a few months decided that they were boring, liars, stubborn, or had other problems that made them Mr. Wrong. You have to get to know people to know these things about them, though. Under an entirely supervised courtship, how do you ever get past the "fun" phase and see what the "bread and butter" phase would be like?

[Freyacat]

Uh, yeah... My friends and I giggled and talked about "how to understand boys" when we were 13 and 15, not 23 and 25. This is one of the really disturbing things about fundies... they want to keep women acting like little girls forever; they seem to find infantile behavior attractive and alluring. It makes me think a lot of fundie "patriarchs" are just sick pedophiles.

[antifundie]

Also? You really can't learn about people from a book.

Men are all different--just like women! Some men like the whole sex-kitten, meet you at the door in lingerie thing--some don't. Some men cry at the drop of a hat (like my dad!) and others don't. Some over-share, some are shy, some are picky, some like meat, some don't, and on and on and on.

Since I never really had close guy friends growing up, I really had no idea of the variety of men out there. I thought they were all the same--unemotional, respect-demanding alpha males. (Even though my dad isn't really like that)

It was a shock to learn that men get their feelings hurt, that they have emotions (even if they don't express them the same way I do)--that they have needs for love, companionship, affection that is not related to sex, etc. etc. Some like to cuddle! Some need space to sleep! Some don't like playing sports! These variations are what make people (not just men) beautiful and wonderful and interesting, and to try to reduce all men and women to a rigid role denies much of the beauty that exists in humanity. (Ahem.)

So asking women, who yes, have brothers, but who don't have a lot of experience with men about these things doesn't seem like a good idea. I don't think you have to date tons of guys to learn this either. When I was in college, I was friends with four guys--all straight(mostly--I think one was bi)--one was what you would call a "player" (who was also Conservative in his political leanings), one was a genuine nerd (in the best sense of the term), one was a hippie vegetarian who was a liberal, and the fourth would bake when he got upset, and made his lady-love a crocheted scarf for Christmas. So, my point is--while they weren't perfect, they were diverse, and I think were at the heart, good guys, even if they had some growing up to do. But none of them would fit into the VF box, you know?

[GenerationCedarchip]

Also? You really can't learn about people from a book.

Men are all different--just like women! Some men like the whole sex-kitten, meet you at the door in lingerie thing--some don't. Some men cry at the drop of a hat (like my dad!) and others don't. Some over-share, some are shy, some are picky, some like meat, some don't, and on and on and on.

Since I never really had close guy friends growing up, I really had no idea of the variety of men out there. I thought they were all the same--unemotional, respect-demanding alpha males. (Even though my dad isn't really like that)

It was a shock to learn that men get their feelings hurt, that they have emotions (even if they don't express them the same way I do)--that they have needs for love, companionship, affection that is not related to sex, etc. etc. Some like to cuddle! Some need space to sleep! Some don't like playing sports! These variations are what make people (not just men) beautiful and wonderful and interesting, and to try to reduce all men and women to a rigid role denies much of the beauty that exists in humanity. (Ahem.)

So asking women, who yes, have brothers, but who don't have a lot of experience with men about these things doesn't seem like a good idea. I don't think you have to date tons of guys to learn this either. When I was in college, I was friends with four guys--all straight(mostly--I think one was bi)--one was what you would call a "player" (who was also Conservative in his political leanings), one was a genuine nerd (in the best sense of the term), one was a hippie vegetarian who was a liberal, and the fourth would bake when he got upset, and made his lady-love a crocheted scarf for Christmas. So, my point is--while they weren't perfect, they were diverse, and I think were at the heart, good guys, even if they had some growing up to do. But none of them would fit into the VF box, you know?

I know what you mean. My experience of guys used to very minimal though I have a lot of male friends now. Yet even in fundieland, it was obvious that they didn't all fit into the VF patriarch mold. There is definitely pressure to play the patriarch in public, but when we were in youth group (this was before people like Dougie came along to talk about the evils of youth group), you could tell that this pressure took a certain toll on the guys just like the pressure to be Homemaker Barbie messed with our heads.

[Shirley MacLaine]

Men are all different--just like women!

GET THEE BEHIND ME, SATAN

[Kimerical]

I look forward to this book. Immensely !

[Vex]

What are they going to say, really?

Don't touch boys who aren't your father or brothers! Even then, only side-hugs are appropriate.

(If you hug a boy, you're a dirty whore who just cheated her future husband out of your first hug!)

Don't have male friends. This just leads to crushes and emotional impurity.

(Because of course, you can control crushes and no girl has ever crushed on a boy she doesn't know!)

Wait for the Lord's timing, and practice patience.

(Wait for Daddy dearest to find some guy who shares his beliefs, convince yourself you're in love and marry him)

I can't see them putting anything in the book that they haven't already covered, because the topic of boys, waiting, courtship, SAHDaughterhood ect. have been covered to death.

[Oddeverything]

Part of me wants to read this book, as well as their first book, because my life revolves around strange, insane books and the people who write them. That part of me is happy this terrible idea of two unmarried young women who have never dated giving advice on men is going to see fruition.

The other part of me wants to post a Google map to my house so that when Anna Sofia finally cracks and takes a baseball bat to Papa Botkin's knee, she will have a safe house ready.

Seriously, Geoff has no shame. I can't imagine either girl really wants to write this book. I can't imagine Nadia Noor wanted to go on tour seconds after the honeymoon was over and give discussions on a happy marriage. These women are forced to do things that I have to think they know make them look foolish and all the proceeds line Papa Botkin's pockets. I feel incredibly bad that Anna Sofia and Elizabeth are being put in this position again, a position of looking like know-nothing braggarts without self-awareness, when really that description so better fits their father.

And with each inappropriate book they write and idiotic film series they helm, it pushes the possibility of a courtship back even further because how can they court and marry when there is a book or film to be finished and a promotional tour to attend? Papa Botkin should have prayed over the parts of Anna Sofia's brain that control patience and justified homicide rather than her ovaries.

[Brainsample]

I look forward to this book. Immensely !

Kimercial,

Where have you been? Missed ya!

[Deleted05]

Papa Botkin should have prayed over the parts of Anna Sofia's brain that control patience and justified homicide rather than her ovaries.

I've wondered about this before: do you think Daddy had it in mind to turn them into his (pardon the expression) cash cows all along? Or do you think he just realized one day "hey, these girls wait on me hand and foot; what if I built an empire out of telling other little girls how beneficial this lifestyle is?"

[browngrl]

Also? You really can't learn about people from a book.

Men are all different--just like women! Some men like the whole sex-kitten, meet you at the door in lingerie thing--some don't. Some men cry at the drop of a hat (like my dad!) and others don't. Some over-share, some are shy, some are picky, some like meat, some don't, and on and on and on.

Since I never really had close guy friends growing up, I really had no idea of the variety of men out there. I thought they were all the same--unemotional, respect-demanding alpha males. (Even though my dad isn't really like that)

It was a shock to learn that men get their feelings hurt, that they have emotions (even if they don't express them the same way I do)--that they have needs for love, companionship, affection that is not related to sex, etc. etc. Some like to cuddle! Some need space to sleep! Some don't like playing sports! These variations are what make people (not just men) beautiful and wonderful and interesting, and to try to reduce all men and women to a rigid role denies much of the beauty that exists in humanity. (Ahem.)

So asking women, who yes, have brothers, but who don't have a lot of experience with men about these things doesn't seem like a good idea. I don't think you have to date tons of guys to learn this either. When I was in college, I was friends with four guys--all straight(mostly--I think one was bi)--one was what you would call a "player" (who was also Conservative in his political leanings), one was a genuine nerd (in the best sense of the term), one was a hippie vegetarian who was a liberal, and the fourth would bake when he got upset, and made his lady-love a crocheted scarf for Christmas. So, my point is--while they weren't perfect, they were diverse, and I think were at the heart, good guys, even if they had some growing up to do. But none of them would fit into the VF box, you know?

VF folk could never acknowledge this. If people don't fit in a box then maybe some of the rules that make up the box are wrong. If some rules are wrong, maybe all the rules are wrong. You see how it goes. To me it seems that these people are terrified - of life and death. So they have to build all these rules and rigid boxes for people in a futile effort to control some of the chaos they find so terrifying. They seem to indoctrinate their children from birth to be terrified of "the other" or outside world. No wonder they like their women infantile - and all their men strapped into a cage of "manliness". Babies and prisoners have no power. Free adults can be dangerous. I hope that the Botkin girls can find the strength to walk into the real world but I doubt it.