Smrt Lernins

Why is the world filled with things that suck?

I give you, for example, some things that suck [with some non-sucking things to cancel out a little of the badness]:

• The Tennessee Senate: Sucks. [This church in Kentucky does not suck]

[Note: Delaware also does not suck]

• Texas and Oklahoma: Both Suck. [Planned Parenthood does not suck, however, so consider donating to them or to your local non-CPC women's clinic -- I'm a big fan of the Feminist Women's Health Center, so you oughta donate to them, too]
• Crazy wives/mothers of cop-killing “sovereign citizens”: Suck. [No, there's nothing to cancel out this amount of suck.]
• The “Ladies Against Feminism”: Suck. [However, No Longer Quivering doesn't suck.]
• LZ Granderson: Sucks. [And if you need to know why, read this and this -- Shakespeare's Sister and Pigtail Pals don't suck.]

I’ll now go back to my regularly scheduled reading of BBC articles about the Assize of Nuisance and conditions of privies in medieval London, ’cause that shit stinks a little less than a lot of the above.

I’m so glad that people like Ken Ham exist, to make sure that we heathens can learn the valuable lesson that not believing in [his specific flavor of] God leads to violence, lack of compassion for our fellow man, and an overall absence of morals. Without billboards, how would we non-[or wrong denomination of or too liberal of]Christians ever understand what we’re missing out on!

Personally, I’m pretty darn tired of being told that, because I’m not [evangelical/conservative/specific denomination of -- take your pick] Christian, that I have no “moral convictions.” I have many moral and ethical convictions. I have a strongly developed sense of right and wrong, of just and unjust, of good and evil, and also of what parts of your life are my business (how you interact with me or others, for good or ill) and which parts aren’t (what you believe in your heart/mind, what you do with your body, what you do in your bedroom). I’m a moral individual, but my morality doesn’t including hating you on spec, devaluing your life because of what you do or who you love or what choices you make for your body, or threatening you (either directly, with violence, or indirectly, with vengeance from some divine origin).

I’m terribly afraid of the pervasiveness of the belief that a person can only be moral if s/he does believe in a very specific and narrow set of ideas, if s/he does feel that hate towards the Other (only they don’t say they hate YOU, see, just your “sin”), if s/he does think the ones who don’t believe as they do are going to burn in hellfire. Is that what morality is? Really? Frankly, I don’t see how teaching children to hate [gays/women who want reproductive freedom/abortionists/other races/other religions/other nations/insert your threatening Other here] instills the sort of morality that would keep the boy in that billboard from pulling the trigger. In fact, I think that flavor of morality — the one where only your morals are “real” morals and only those who believe in them are the “real” and worthy people — is exactly the thing that encourages the more mentally-fragile among you to pull the trigger.

Christianity isn’t the sole source of human morality. Believing in God doesn’t prevent violence. It doesn’t stop crime. It doesn’t magically make a person or group good. On a grander scale, look at history and the atrocities done in the name of one [big G or little g]od or another. On a smaller scale, Officer Daddyman arrests people every week who believe in God, who have tattoos of crosses/Jesus/Mary, who attend Church, who use the Bible as the basis for hatred of specific groups or justification of certain actions, who think it’s ok that they act like total douchebags in their life because they’ll reap a divine and heavenly reward simply for believing in Jesus. Morality/ethics can find their origin in faiths outside of Christianity or non-religious spirituality, in cultural and social roots, in familial teachings, from individual or shared experiences, in an inherent and biologically programmed sense of right and wrong that we are finding that even small babies possess. We don’t all need to include Christian “character building” curricula into our homeschooling lessons in order to raise children with strong moral conviction and good character.

Morality can (I argue that it must) be flexible; what is wrong for my situation may be right for yours. Morality must change, too. Morality has to grow up. It can’t be as simple as “my God good, your God bad, so my way good, your way bad.” As our humanity evolves, our morality must evolve with it, changing to include a world much larger than the narrow and tiny set of experiences and values in which we were each, as individuals, raised. As we ascribe more humanity to the Other, the ones not exactly like us, our morality has to expand to include them. Morality, ethics, values, and collective humanity are all much, much too large to fit onto a billboard.

Only those with an exceptionally limited worldview would even try.

How can someone ever feel ok with the concept of “breaking a child’s will?” How do you write those words without vomiting on your own keyboard? What is wrong with these people? Because no decent human being would to that to a child.

Ok, Christians — you want to know one area where I think you reasonable, compassionate folks need to speak up and put a stop to something? THIS. Someone is invoking your name here. Worse, they’re invoking your God’s name and what is supposed to be your God’s holy word, and they’re using it to justify repeatedly hitting a child and then expecting the child to be happy about it. You need to stand up for your God and your Christ and put a stop to this. Non-religious people like me aren’t heard by these monsters. They might hear you, though. You need to tell these…these…things to stop hitting their children in the name of God.

“If she does not obey the 1st time, quickly, & w/a happy heart, she will get spanked. So, she has been spanked 10x today.”

Your child is THREE, you monster. Yes, monster. You are a monster. You have arbitrarily decided that a three year old can “obey” perfectly and happily every time and that if she does not, she deserves to be hit. You have hit her ten times in one day…not for doing something like putting herself or others in danger, but because she didn’t immediately obey and then be happy about it. You are a monster. You do not deserve children.

“she gets spanked 3x each time (b/c she is 3)”

You hit your daughter once for each year of life. You are sick. You are a monster. You are hitting your daughter for failing to be happy. You are hitting her three times for each time she isn’t happy and you are claiming to do it in the name of Godliness.

“After a spanking, she always wants to hug me”

Perhaps because your daughter needs reassurance that you don’t hate her. After all, she’s only three and you are hitting her ten times a day. You are hitting her because she isn’t smiling and acting happy when you give her commands. Of course she needs to hug you. How else will she know you love her? It isn’t through your other actions, because your other actions are monstrous. Have you also considered that (since you admit later that you do ask her if she wants to hug you), she might also terrified of being hit three more times if she tells you no?

“I group obedience, submission, respect, etc. when I mention all of those things. For example, I talked back to my bosses and did not respect them (NOT GOOD) and submission to my dh is a struggle at times – I want to help my children with those things (esp. my girls)…”

Why especially your girls? So that they’re prepared to be beaten by the domineering husband you’re programming them to marry? You are beating the “will” out of your daughter so that her husband won’t have to do it for her? Does your husband hit you because you don’t submit well enough? I wouldn’t be surprised, since that also seems to be pretty normal in these circles. Is that what you want for your daughters? You want them to be mindless slaves?

Another monster on this thread commented: “I always said to mine, “When Mommy spanks the bottom __________” and my kid would finish the rest of the statement with “…it makes the heart sweet.”

You, madam, are another sick individual. You are perverse and what you are doing to your children is despicable. You’re teaching them to equate a beating with love. You are telling them you hit them because you love them. You are telling them that hitting them makes them “sweet” and more lovable. Do you want to make your children into victims of domestic violence? If you do, congratulations! You’ve found the method.

Christians, I implore you. Please, PLEASE. Only you can intervene. I am not a Christian and thusly, my words will be meaningless to people like this. You, however, might be able to make a difference. I am so grateful that so many self-identifying Christians, even those who are from a more Bible-literal tradition, have stood up and said that this woman’s behavior is inappropriate. Christians like Daisy, whom I absolutely cherish as a gem amongst the rubble of the internet, are the ones who can make changes. You are the ones who can make a difference. Christianity is your belief system, not mine. It’s your culture, not mine. I’m a stranger, an outsider, who can only judge and comment from without. You have to make changes within that culture. You, as a group, need to continue to shine light on these darknesses and say “This is NOT God’s love.”

ETA: TulipGirl has some excellent suggestions for resources for Christians who want to put a stop to this particular subset of pseudo-Christian parenting:

http://parentingfreedom.com/discipline/

http://www.freewebs.com/suffer-the-little-children/therodorshebet.htm

http://www.wholeheart.org/

Families Where Grace Is In Place by Jeff Van Vonderen
Heartfelt Discipline by Clay Clarkson
Relational Parenting by Ross Campbell
Grace Based Parenting by Dr. Tim Kimmel

Last weekend, my parents attended the Rally to Restore Sanity. Because they’re super awesome, they flew up in the morning, rallied, and flew home in the evening. On one of the flights, my mother found this tucked into the Sky Mall magazine:

She almost stuck it back in the magazine, but then decided she needed to bring it home to show it to me.

The site advertised on this card is…well, it’s sort of everything that freaks me out about Christianity (and I honestly have no idea what flavor of Christianity this site is promoting, just that’s it’s tongue-speaking, “Whore”-fixated whackadoodle). Of course, I wouldn’t be able to look up the website while on the airplane, because come on. Have you seen how much the airlines cost to use their special Internet connection? *pshaw* So you can feel free to visit the site and marvel and/or gawk, but we’re going to focus solely on this card, since we’re on a hypothetical airplane right now.

So. Yeah. This card.

Now, I appreciate the need some folks have to spread God’s love and advertise for Jesus and all that, but I’m questioning:

A) The effectiveness of Sky Mall magazine proselytizing.
B) Whether a quote about God (who, presumably, is in Heaven, right?) calling us to Himself is the right choice for an airplane, considering how many people have a fear of flying and/or crashing. I don’t know about you, but I’m thinking, “God is great, but I don’t want be “going to Jesus” (dot com or otherwise) right at this very moment. I’d really prefer to land at my immediate destination.”

I have some alternate suggestions for the GoingtoJesus.com people that they might consider putting on their cards instead:

“God’s love helps you fly the friendly skies without turbulence.”
“God is calling you to Himself…eventually. For now, have a nice, safe flight!”
“Going to Jesus, but changing planes in Chicago en route.”
“God always fits in the overhead compartment.”
“God accepts your extra baggage — no charge.”
“No snakes on this plane. Just Jesus.”

Oh, business card proselytes! A little word of advice from a secular homeschooler: I appreciate the sentiment of wanting people to feel close to Jesus, but try not to freak people out on airplanes, ok?

Reading a particularly disgusting thread on the WTM forums at the moment, entitled “What would happen if….70% of women, who hold full-time jobs, left the work force? Just for fun-what do you think would happen?”

In a stunning display of everything wrong, sexist, and just offensive on that forum (and in homeschooling AND in that “traditional” Christian mindset), one user replies, “More men would be gainfully employed and therefore better able to *properly* provide and care for their families,” and multiple users comment with the “I agree” icon.

Yes, let’s say that again. Let’s say it in big bold letters. “More men would be gainfully employed and therefore better able to *properly* provide and care for their families.”

Women leaving the workforce would be a GOOD thing, because then men could have jobs and be providers. It’s WOMEN keeping men from having enough jobs. It’s WOMEN who keep men from being “proper” providers. THOSE TERRIBLE WOMEN! I might just go puke a little right now. But sure, why not? I’m sure this plan would work out beautifully for everyone as long as you:

• Forget all the single parents families. They deserves to be wageless. Only MEN should provide for their families. If you don’t have a man, that’s your fault. You probably ran him off or you should have turned a blind eye to lying/cheating/abuse or you’re a slut for getting pregnant without a man.
• Forget the lesbian families. They’re going to hell anyway. If only they’d repent and get a MAN to provide for them.
• Forget the families where the mother’s education and training are higher, and she can get the better job. Education is wasted on women, anyway. Men should get all those jobs.
• Forget the families that need two incomes to stay afloat. Men can take a second or third job now that they’re available. That’s what a real provider does, and God knows, a woman can’t be a real provider.
• Forget the families where the man has been injured on/off the job, has developed a chronic illness, or  has some other health concern that limits or precludes his ability to work. Pshaw. I guess those guys oughta just suck it up. Shake it off, boy, it’s just a truck.
• Forget the families where the mom is simply happier at work and dad is happier at home. Women who aren’t happy at home have something wrong with them. Men who don’t provide for their families have something wrong with them, too.
• Forget the families where the man is just plain worthless and won’t work.
• Forget the families where the parents have little education, few job skills, and already work several minimum wage jobs to get by. What, dad can suddenly add an extra 12 hours to his day to pick up a fourth or fifth minimum wage job, to make up for the one that mom doesn’t have?
• Forget the families where one or both parents are incarcerated. All those kids being cared for by mom only, by grandma, by aunties? Well, it’s not like we really want the children of criminals to grow up in anything less than abject poverty, right? Keeping those kids in as low an income as possible will definitely make sure they grow up to not follow in their parents footsteps!

Thank goodness there are a few people with a lick of sense on that board. Best response so far was from Rivka:

The GDP would plummet. The US would drop many immigration barriers in a desperate attempt to prop up the economy and fill huge gaps in the workforce. Tax revenues plunge at the same time that there is a massive increase in the need for public assistance. Female-headed families become hungry and homeless in droves, and unfortunately there are very few social workers or professionally-run charities to assist them because the women who dominate those professions have all gone home.

Your husband will almost certainly get a big raise, but he’ll also almost certainly be pressured to put in 80-hour weeks as his company tries to function with so many fewer workers. Don’t expect to see him much. Don’t expect his increased wage to improve your family’s standard of living, either – in such a dramatic labor shortage, wages for jobs like supermarket checker and gas station attendant will have to go through the roof if those positions are to be filled, and so the prices of basic goods and services will skyrocket. Lots of US jobs will simply move overseas where there is plenty of cheap labor.

Hospitals are plunged into chaos with virtually no nurses; all elective procedures and routine care will need to be canceled while nursing training programs are hastily set up to train some of the new male immigrants in nursing. The death rate for hospital patients soars. Because things like mammograms, Pap smears, and colonoscopies are halted due to the need to prioritize on emergency medical services, the cancer rate climbs. If you have a relative in the hospital, be prepared to go and stay with that person yourself 24/7 to provide personal care, prepare and serve meals, administer meds according to the doctor’s instructions, etc. If you need to go into the hospital and don’t have someone able to sit with you, I hope you survive. There are no more midwives. Your options: unassisted childbirth at home or a virtually unattended (no L&D nurses) hospital birth in a criminally understaffed facility. Maternal and neonatal death rates soar.

At first it seems that elementary schools will have to close, but then they triple or quadruple class sizes so that male middle school and high school teachers can be spread out to cover all the grades. Parent volunteers fill in as best they can. Special needs students suffer the most; the vast majority of OTs, speech therapists, etc. are women, and those aren’t jobs that can be taken over by volunteers.

By the time everything shakes out and we return to some degree of economic stability, 30% of American workers are permanent residents or new citizens born in a foreign country. The huge influx of immigrants is hard to assimilate; they’re so critically needed that they must be welcomed, but U.S. culture returns to the atmosphere of New York City in 1900. Language barriers and lack of experience continue to depress the economy. There are nurses in the hospitals again, but they only speak rudimentary English and most of them are brand new. So the death rate doesn’t exactly go back down again.

And, by the way: women who wanted to work and/or needed to work will not universally find joy in being a stay-at-home wife and mother. Especially not given the increased economic stress caused by soaring prices and the increased workload caused by the scarcity of service workers.

“Just for fun?” It would be a social and economic nightmare. An utter nightmare.

Oh thank goodness! A better answer than “emulate the Proverbs 31 woman” or “sell crafts on Etsy.”

I’m a SAHM (mostly, I do on and off freelance writing/editing work) by choice, because Daddyman and I both felt it was important to have a parent at home, and it made more sense for that parent to be the one who could actually nurse the babies. The idea of all women being FORCED to stay at home is just absolutely terrifying. Seriously, WTMers, y’all are messed up sometimes. Maybe I need to start spending moretime on Secular Homeschool.