Pearls' Article: Too Young To Spank

[Rosa]

I feel like, books are objects. If someone gives one to me or I see one in the thrift store and buy it, I get to throw it in the trash if I feel like it. I'm not wiping it off the face of the earth - just reducing available copies by one. I mean, the copy of Dr. Dobson's big book of child raising I was given as a baby gift being in the landfill instead of on my shelf doesn't mean his voice is silenced.

Though if I had my way the only extant copies of Train Up a Child would be in academic libraries' anthropology or history collections.

[BabyFullOfSin]

Six month old

"defiance"

"suffering you inflicted"

"significant pain"

"fearful"

"emotionally disturbed"

= fucking sadistic

I'm glad to live where this kind of behaviour is illegal

[alba]

I feel like, books are objects. If someone gives one to me or I see one in the thrift store and buy it, I get to throw it in the trash if I feel like it. I'm not wiping it off the face of the earth - just reducing available copies by one. I mean, the copy of Dr. Dobson's big book of child raising I was given as a baby gift being in the landfill instead of on my shelf doesn't mean his voice is silenced.

Though if I had my way the only extant copies of Train Up a Child would be in academic libraries' anthropology or history collections.

Burning or otherwise destroying a book is symbolically different from just throwing it out, though. Burning especially has a history of being used hand-in-hand with censorship to stifle opposing voices. Throwing it out just suggests that a person has no use for it, whereas burning or otherwise destroying is actively geared at obliterating the object. Symbolically, then, destroying a book is about destroying the means by which the thoughts and ideas within are communicated. This is why I'm generally opposed to book-burning (I even yelped when watching a film in which people burned books for warmth, because they're powerful symbols of freedom of speech).

If a copy of the Pearls' book fell into my hands, though, I'd burn it to cinders.

[apple1]

Of all the big names in the Quiverfull movement, I consider the Pearls by far the most dangerous. Children have DIED because their parents followed the Pearls' methods of "child training." The Pearls' influence extends beyond the small, fringe Quiverfull movement. "To Train Up A Child" has been in print since 1994 and has sold over 600,000 copies. If each of those copies represents a family with at least two children... Well, you do the math.

THAT!

I just have no words for what I think of the Pearls. I am continually amazed that the people who follow or recommend them (example - a link to NGJ on the Duggars' website).

[indigospeakeasy]

Hmm. I've read their book, and I remember distinctly that they advocated spanking a 7month old for throwing tantrums at the table. I was a christian at the time and I thought their thought process was bizarre and twisted. No way was I hitting my 7 month old for being "rebellious", "manipulative", or anything of the sort.

[fluttershies]

I too am glad to live where the Pearls' methods are illegal - in the UK you cannot use anything but a bare hand to smack a child, and you must not leave a mark.

[JaChelle Sugar]

Six month old

"defiance"

"suffering you inflicted"

"significant pain"

"fearful"

"emotionally disturbed"

= fucking sadistic

I'm glad to live where this kind of behaviour is illegal

Holy mother of the institute of fuck.... :evil: