Jump to content
IGNORED

Question(s) about SAHDs


Pclee

Recommended Posts

So, to bring up a question that I had in the "Ask an Asian fundie..." thread:

Do we have any substantiated proof that SAHDs have weird, incestuous relationships with their fathers?

I know the Botkin sisters had some kind of game going on at the Father-Daughter teaparty, where they shaved the dads and stuff, but it was a game.

Jim Bob's girls keep their hair long and curly (at least in earlier episodes) because their dad liked it that way.

The Morton girls and other et cetera fundie daughters are "kept" at home as slaves by their parents and not allowed to marry because the parents need someone to do the dishes and watch the babies.

I've heard that some fundie fathers actuallly track their daughter's cycles on public calendars in the home (but please, someone needs to provide a direct link to a video or something where it's actual proof, not hear-say, because that's totally R.I.D.I.C.U.L.O.U.S. without back-up).

Coming from a fundie background, I think that while these father-daughter relationships may be "off" in some cases, I can vouch for most of these families that the relationship between the dads and girls are normal, old-fashioned, loving ones. I know fundies tend to use gross terminology sometimes, like "falling in love with daddy" or "giving your heart to your father" ... (and I wouldn't use those terms with my dad, it's WEIRD!) but I don't see any proof of there being any slavery or ownership of their viriginities, etc as has been claimed here.

Maybe I'm just not getting something that everyone here does (but I've kept up on FJ a long time! lol)

Is it possible we've gotten into the habit of labelling fundies a certain way just because we're used to it, after we've fired a misconception for a long while?

;) ;) ;) No hard feelings here. Just looking for opinions/ideas. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we have any substantiated proof that SAHDs have weird, incestuous relationships with their fathers?

Coming from a fundie background, I think that while these father-daughter relationships may be "off" in some cases, I can vouch for most of these families that the relationship between the dads and girls are normal, old-fashioned, loving ones. I know fundies tend to use gross terminology sometimes, like "falling in love with daddy" or "giving your heart to your father" ... (and I wouldn't use those terms with my dad, it's WEIRD!) but I don't see any proof of there being any slavery or ownership of their viriginities, etc as has been claimed here.

The "terminology" is disturbing because words have meaning. People intentionally choose certain words to invoke certain ideas, emotions, etc. Using the term "falling in love with Daddy" is disgusting to hilt, because the words "falling in love" have meaning. That phrase is used to evoke images of romantic love. Romantic love includes a sexual love, and the idea of fathers and daughters sharing a sexual love is FUCKED UP.

Maybe I'm just not getting something that everyone here does (but I've kept up on FJ a long time! lol)

Is it possible we've gotten into the habit of labelling fundies a certain way just because we're used to it, after we've fired a misconception for a long while?

With all due respect, I think you're "not getting" it because you are completely immersed in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "terminology" is disturbing because words have meaning. People intentionally choose certain words to invoke certain ideas, emotions, etc. Using the term "falling in love with Daddy" is disgusting to hilt, because the words "falling in love" have meaning. That phrase is used to evoke images of romantic love. Romantic love includes a sexual love, and the idea of fathers and daughters sharing a sexual love is FUCKED UP.

With all due respect, I think you're "not getting" it because you are completely immersed in it.

Yes to all of this. Like, romantic terminology is often used in reference to Jesus and sometimes to the Holy Spirit, and that is fine by me and I sometimes think of God in terms of that, but father/daughter? No, not ever. And I love my dad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pclee, I've seen your "Ask an Asian Fundie" thread, so you're likely a different type of fundie than the American ones we FJers normally see.

Since I'm not totally familiar with Asian cultures and I don't know which country you're in, it's possible your culture just doesn't allow for the daddy-worship American fundamentalism (and, to an extent, mainstream culture, i.e. the "daddy's girl" meme). In American fundamentalism, Dad is Boss, and Mom is more like a senior worker, or a supervisor over the kids. Pretty much everything revolves around the father, since he's supposed to be the breadwinner, main disciplinarian, and head of the household, so of course fundies take this and their obsession with not having sex to the extreme: Dad is the absolute monarch of his house, and it is his divine right to do whatever he damn well wants. He quite literally owns his wife and children, especially the daughters. And because they interpreted some perfectly valid scientific studies in a very twisted way, in order for girls not to go off being whores, they have to develop a very strange and creepy relationship with their fathers. Which leads to purity balls and rings and courtship that's basically up to the wishes and whims of the Fatherlord.

That's why you see the public charting of menstrual cycles in ATI and the daughters shaving their dad. Those are things that are questionable in any romantic/sexual relationship, but are utterly inappropriate in any other relationship, especially a father/daughter one.

Unlike holierthanthou, I think you don't get it because you're in a very different kind of fundamentalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

razingruth.blogspot.com/2010/04/part-16-puberty.html

Scroll down to the last paragraph.

That was downright horrifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

razingruth.blogspot.com/2010/04/part-16-puberty.html

Scroll down to the last paragraph.

And I thought my mum taking me to get my first bra at age 9 (I was an early developer too) was bad. What kind of father thinks his daughter who hasn't started menstruating yet has bloody sheets because of sex??? Horrifying.

I started my periods at age 11 and was still in primary (elementary) school. Because of this the school toilets did not have individual bins in the cubicles, just one big one for paper towels. My mum told my teacher about my periods starting so I could use the female teachers' toilets, and while I was mortified, at least I know it was done for my benefit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pclee, I've seen your "Ask an Asian Fundie" thread, so you're likely a different type of fundie than the American ones we FJers normally see....... ......I think you don't get it because you're in a very different kind of fundamentalism.

Maybe, but in her "Ask me anything" thread, she stated that it is actually a branch of American fundamentalism. She is not American, but the people who started/converted for her church/denomination are from an American denomination. Or at least that was how I read it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here is accusing Patriarchs of physical incest. I have my suspicions about one family, but I have never named them because it's just a suspicion. But they definitely have incestuous overtones in their relationships with daughters, and in some cases it gets very close to or crosses the line to emotional incest. It doesn't have to involve actual touching to be damaging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe, but in her "Ask me anything" thread, she stated that it is actually a branch of American fundamentalism. She is not American, but the people who started/converted for her church/denomination are from an American denomination. Or at least that was how I read it.

That is true, but I can't help but think that even if her denomination started off American, that it's still been heavily influenced by local culture. It's hardly unheard of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently rewatched the 17 Kids and Counting episode where Josh proposes to Anna.

As he goes down on one knee she quickly takes off her purity ring and puts it on her right hand, and Josh says something like "yes, you can take that one off now". Then he puts the engagement ring on the finger.

Incest? No. A squicky middle ground where your father has already placed a ring on your finger til the man (or boy in this case) he approves can replace it? Yes.

Makes me wonder what Suzanna did with her purity ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasnt there a blog posted here a while ago about how the SAHD coudln't wait until she received the poem her dad was writing her for and was really really excited about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Libby Anne at Love, Joy, Feminism is currently doing a serious of posts on emotional incest. You can read the first part here.

Thanks for the link. The Botkins are the first example that I always think of when this topic comes up. It's so weird the way the father and daughters always take the spotlight together but the mother is no more than a background character. I loosely followed them for years before I ever even heard of or saw a pic of the mother. It's like the daughters have completely replaced her any time they are in public. She doesn't even seem to show up in casual blog pictures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google "covert incest" and read the some of the scientific articles that appear then reread your fundy blogs again. I think there is as wide a range of families in the fundy world as there are anywhere.

Judging the way a family works from a blog is probably not fair on the family, as we only see what the particular blogger wants us to see. However, as I read it;

# The Duggar family are ok. Jim Bob loves being loved and definitely enjoys having all the girls around to worship him. However, Jim Bob and Michelle clearly adore each other and have a relationship that is separate to what they have with their kids. The adult-adult relationship is different to the adult-child relationship, as it should be.

# I wouldn't call Razing Ruth relationship with her father "incestuous" as I don't see any attempt by her father to replace her mother with Ruth. Emotionally abusive, yes definitely but not incestuous.

# The Botkin family I find quite disturbing. The mother seems to have withdrawn emotionally from her marriage and has been replaced by the daughters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone, thanks for the insight. I need to read some of those articles linked (but I can't access blogger sites from office.... boo :( )

Kitty, I got to say that I think you may be right about my cultural upbringing being different from the American fundie one. I thought I was brought up in a similar environment, but I may have to change my mind about that. The explanation you gave was GREAT and I will read more into the suggested articles given by the others.

holierthanyou, yes, our church was started by an American denomination, and in a way it makes us less "cultural" (if you can call it that) than other local churches. BUT, now I see that we still are very Asian in our culture compared to American fundies. I don't think that I am completely immersed in fundie-ism. After reading through the responses here, I am convinced that I am not an American-type fundie :?

The people who planted our church did not introduce the "fundie" mentality. The beliefs/standards, that we have similar to the fundies, developed in our own cultural way as we studied the Bible and established our church . I would think the cultural difference is the reason why I don't agree or understand what some of these American fundies believe.

Thanks for the input, I really appreciate the thoughts put here. Keep them coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link. The Botkins are the first example that I always think of when this topic comes up. It's so weird the way the father and daughters always take the spotlight together but the mother is no more than a background character. I loosely followed them for years before I ever even heard of or saw a pic of the mother. It's like the daughters have completely replaced her any time they are in public. She doesn't even seem to show up in casual blog pictures.

No problem. I admit I don't know much about the Botkins, but from what I've read here, it makes me very concerned for the children in that family.

Judging the way a family works from a blog is probably not fair on the family, as we only see what the particular blogger wants us to see. However, as I read it;

# The Duggar family are ok. Jim Bob loves being loved and definitely enjoys having all the girls around to worship him. However, Jim Bob and Michelle clearly adore each other and have a relationship that is separate to what they have with their kids. The adult-adult relationship is different to the adult-child relationship, as it should be.

Even if the relationship between JB and his daughters isn't emotionally incestuous, I still don't think it's a healthy one. The adult daughters are still very much treated like children. An adult woman should have her independence. Certainly, no healthy father-adult daughter relationship involves him setting restrictions on what and if she can do something as mundane as Googling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if the relationship between JB and his daughters isn't emotionally incestuous, I still don't think it's a healthy one. The adult daughters are still very much treated like children. An adult woman should have her independence. Certainly, no healthy father-adult daughter relationship involves him setting restrictions on what and if she can do something as mundane as Googling.

Thanks for pointing that out Maude. I didn't word that as well as I could have.

I like the distinction between parents and offspring in the Duggar house. I see Jim Bob and Michelle going on dates together to maintain their relationship as a very good sign. It is so easy to loose your relationship as a couple when you have other people around all the time.

I don't like the overall set up in the family. JB&M see their offspring as "children" and treat them accordingly. The "children" then haven't developed much past 12-13, the age where they are starting to understand the adult world and can give adult-type answers but are still parroting parents opinions. My 13yrs old sounds like the adult Duggar children but my 15yr & 17yr olds sound far more intelligent. All the restrictions, like only having 25 approved websites, also goes with being treated like a child. I don't know how JB&M think these "children" will be able to make it in the adult world when they are not given the chance to grow up. (Think about Josh Duggar but pretend he is a mid-teen and everything makes sense; poor work ethic, eating all the food he likes and can now afford, photographing everything for instagram as if he is the worlds most interesting person - a lot of my students are like this but they grow past it around 15-16yrs.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like the overall set up in the family. JB&M see their offspring as "children" and treat them accordingly. The "children" then haven't developed much past 12-13, the age where they are starting to understand the adult world and can give adult-type answers but are still parroting parents opinions. My 13yrs old sounds like the adult Duggar children but my 15yr & 17yr olds sound far more intelligent. All the restrictions, like only having 25 approved websites, also goes with being treated like a child. I don't know how JB&M think these "children" will be able to make it in the adult world when they are not given the chance to grow up. (Think about Josh Duggar but pretend he is a mid-teen and everything makes sense; poor work ethic, eating all the food he likes and can now afford, photographing everything for instagram as if he is the worlds most interesting person - a lot of my students are like this but they grow past it around 15-16yrs.)

This is very true. If I'm not mistaken, 7 of the Duggar kids are now 18 or over. They're not "children" but they live and act exactly like the others, even sharing bedrooms with the young toddlers. The restrictions that are still imposed on all of them but Josh are not at all age-appropriate. A 22-year-old should not still be under an "umbrella of authority" that precludes access to all but 25 websites, which is probably about how many people get to see in North Korea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is very true. If I'm not mistaken, 7 of the Duggar kids are now 18 or over. They're not "children" but they live and act exactly like the others, even sharing bedrooms with the young toddlers. The restrictions that are still imposed on all of them but Josh are not at all age-appropriate. A 22-year-old should not still be under an "umbrella of authority" that precludes access to all but 25 websites, which is probably about how many people get to see in North Korea.

You're right about the restrictions on a 22 year old, Miggy. It's not right to treat them as if they have the decision-making abilities of a child or teenager, even in a Christian household. I'm all for parents who treat their grown-up children as adults and give them responsibility accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Google "covert incest" and read the some of the scientific articles that appear then reread your fundy blogs again. I think there is as wide a range of families in the fundy world as there are anywhere.

Judging the way a family works from a blog is probably not fair on the family, as we only see what the particular blogger wants us to see. However, as I read it;

# The Duggar family are ok. Jim Bob loves being loved and definitely enjoys having all the girls around to worship him. However, Jim Bob and Michelle clearly adore each other and have a relationship that is separate to what they have with their kids. The adult-adult relationship is different to the adult-child relationship, as it should be.

# I wouldn't call Razing Ruth relationship with her father "incestuous" as I don't see any attempt by her father to replace her mother with Ruth. Emotionally abusive, yes definitely but not incestuous.

# The Botkin family I find quite disturbing. The mother seems to have withdrawn emotionally from her marriage and has been replaced by the daughters.

The series on emotional incest at Love, Joy, Feminism is continued with a whole post on the Botkins: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/04/emotional-incest-part-2-the-botkins.html#more-2527

Strangely, mothers are left out of the picture almost entirely. You would think that if an adult daughter is staying home to learn to be a homemaker, she should be serving primarily as her mother’s right arm – learning to cook, to run a household, and to care for children. Yet in everything the Botkin sisters have written – in their books, their blog, and even their documentary – mothers are completely missing. Indeed, every chapter of So Much More begins with the phrase “Fathers, Daughters, and…†and in the case of three of the four adult daughters profiled in their documentary, The Return of the Daughters, the mother never even appears on screen.

The Duggars, while disturbing, don't seem to go this far. There's plenty of talking head Michelle, and though the J'slaves seem to be mini-mothers, they don't seem to be min-wives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.