My life as a daughter of Christian Patriarchy
Deep within America, beyond your typical evangelicals and run of the mill fundamentalists, nurtured within the homeschool movement and growing by the day, are the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements. This is where I grew up.
I learned that women are to be homemakers while men are to be protectors and providers. I was taught that a woman should not have a career, but should rather keep the home and raise the children and submit to her husband, who was her god-given head and authority. I learned that homeschooling is the only godly way to raise children, because to send them to public school is to turn a child over to the government and the secular humanists. I was taught that children must be trained up in the way they should go every minute of every day. I learned that a woman is always under male authority, first her father, then her husband, and perhaps, someday, her son. I was told that children are always a blessing, and that it was imperative to raise up quivers full of warriors for Christ, equipped to take back the culture and restore it to its Christian foundations.
Christian Patriarchy involves the patriarchal gender roles and heirarchical family structure, while Quiverfull refers to the belief that children are always a blessing and that big families are mandatory for those following God’s will (some eschew birth control altogether). While these two belief sets are generally held in common, they can technically exist separately. Now of course, not everyone who holds these beliefs actually claims the term “Christian Patriarchy” or “Quiverfull.” My parents certainly didn’t. In fact, I never heard those terms growing up. What matters is not the name that is claimed, but the beliefs – the beliefs outlined above.
My parents were originally fairly ordinary evangelicals. Like so many others (it’s a very common story), it was homeschooling that brought them to Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull. They began homeschooling for secular reasons, and then, through homeschool friends, homeschool conferences, and homeschool publications, they were drawn into the world of Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull. It starts slowly, one belief here, a book there. For those who are already fundamentalists or evangelicals, like my parents, the transition is smooth and almost natural. Suddenly, almost without realizing it, they are birthing their eight or ninth child and pushing their daughters toward homemaking and away from any thought of a career.
Why are these movements so enticing to evangelical and fundamentalist homeschoolers? Simple. Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull offer the enticing image of the perfect family and the promise that you can make a difference and change the world, raising up an army for Christ, without ever leaving your home. Organizations like Vision Forum and No Greater Joy promise parents perfect families in very explicit terms. If you follow the formula, you, too, can be like that pretty picture or happy face in the catalogue. They are the huckster traveling salesmen of the homeschool world, but this time they sell dreams.
The actual experience for children growing up in the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements varies dramatically because every set of parents is different. I happened to have a mother with never-ending energy and a father who was naturally fairly laid back. That meant that my home life was pleasant and my childhood happy. Others, though, have mothers who are debilitated by pregnancy after pregnancy and fathers who quickly become tyrannical and overbearing. These children may not have a very happy upbringing at all.
While my upbringing was fairly happy, it was anything but normal. For one thing, I was homeschooled. For another thing, I grew up with a dozen younger siblings. Other families commonly have seven, eight, or nine children. A few have as many as eighteen or nineteen. While there are some very fun things about growing up with so many siblings, the sheer size of the family means that daughters of Christian Patriarchy have little privacy and many chores. And since they don’t go to school, their time with friends is limited and their time working by their mothers’ sides is maximized. By the time I was twelve, I could fix meals for the entire family, keep the laundry going, and essentially run the house single handedly. When I was fifteen my parents went out of town for a week, leaving me in charge of the younger siblings. Later when I was in high school, my mother had a hard pregnancy and was completely incapacitated for a month. I ran the house and homeschooled the younger children without a problem. I practically raised some of my younger siblings. And yet, this endless list of chores and expectations and responsibilities is seen as the natural order of things, rather than as a problem.
Daughters of Christian Patriarchy are essentially servants in their own homes, but this does not mean they are necessarily miserable and unhappy. While some daughters of Christian Patriarchy rebel and inwardly resent how they are being raised, most don’t. Most accept what their parents teach them as true, and look forward to their wedding day as the beginning of their lives. This was me. I was perfectly happy to help with my younger siblings and cook for a dozen and do load after load of laundry. At age ten, twelve, or fourteen, I was being trained to be a “helpmeet” to my future husband, preparing for my life’s role by working alongside my mother and serving as junior “helpmeet” to my father. I dreamed of my wedding constantly, and thought of what a wonderful wife, mother, and homemaker I would be. A wife and mother was all I wanted to be, because any dream of anything else was nipped in the bud before it ever took root. I truly believed that this was what God wanted of me, and that serving my family and raising my siblings was serving God. And I gloried in it.
Families in Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull place extreme importance on maintaining their daughters’ sexual and emotional purity. Sex before marriage is held to be sin, and sex before marriage also damages a daughter’s marriage prospects. Girls are told that the best gift they can give their future husbands is their virginity. And we’re not just talking sex here: Most couples in Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull circles don’t kiss before marriage, and some don’t even hold hands or embrace. Furthermore, this virginity is more than just physical; it is emotional as well. Girls are urged not to “give away pieces of their hearts” by becoming emotionally entangled with boys their age. Every teenage crush becomes suspect and dangerous. Dating is out of the question, as it is considered to be “practice for divorce.” Instead, daughters of Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull find husbands through parent-guided courtships, trusting their father’s guidance and obeying his leadership. Marriage is seen as a transfer of authority from the daughter’s father to her husband.
Growing numbers of parents in the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements are keeping their daughters home from college. They argue that college is wasted on daughters who are never supposed to hold jobs or have careers anyway, and that it distracts them from serving others and learning homemaking skills. Furthermore, they contend, college corrupts daughters and fills their heads with ungodly thoughts of equality and careers. This phenomenon is called the Stay At Home Daughter movement.
I, however, was sent to college. Yet it should be remembered that this did not initially mean that I dreamed of anything outside of the role I was taught God had laid out for me. Rather, I felt that college would prepare me to be a better wife and mother, and especially, a better homeschool parent. For this reason, in those families in the Christian Patriarchy movement who do send their daughters to college, nursing and teaching, which are seen as naturally feminine and excellent skills for future mothers and homeschool parents, are favored courses of study. And of course, it is understood that even daughters who attend college remain under the authority of their fathers and must obey them, even after they turn 18. After all, their fathers are their godly authority. God speaks to daughters through their fathers and daughters are bound by God to obey their fathers.
You have to understand just how deeply these beliefs are implanted. Even though I began questioning my parents’ beliefs halfway through college, I was so inculcated into their mindset that I did not even think of having a career or being other than a stay at home homeschool mom until four years later. Even though I have been out for years and am now in my mid twenties, I still feel like I am a failure because I only have one child. I feel that if I don’t have five or six kids, I am somehow a flop and a dud. In my brain, my worth as a woman is still tied to the number of children I have. I know these brain patterns are bullshit and I’m working on eradicating them, but they are still there. And in my conversations with other daughters who have left, I have found that I am not alone in this.
By now, you may be wondering, how is this possible? How can parents indoctrinate their children in this way? The answer, I would argue, is simple: homeschooling. By homeschooling, these parents can control every interaction their children have and every piece of information their children come upon. My parents called it “sheltering.” The result was that I knew nothing of popular culture or the lives of normal teens, besides that they were “worldly” and miserable while I was godly and content. I had no idea that normal teens would see the amount of chores I did as unfair and oppressive, and even when I did realize this, I took pride in it, for the amount of chores I did and my cheerfulness in doing them showed my godliness.
Furthermore, by homeschooling us my parents could completely control what we learned. I studied from creationist textbooks and learned history from a curriculum that taught “His Story,”beginning with creation, Noah and the flood, and Abraham and his covenant with god, showing the hand of God moving through the six thousand years of the earth’s history. I never had anyone tell me to dream big, or to think outside the home, or that with my talent and intellect I could have a brilliant career. Everyone around me believed the way my parents did, including all of my friends, who, after all, were without exception children of my parents’ friends. They encouraged me in my steadfastness of belief and held me up as a paragon of virtue. Why would I desire anything else?
It didn’t help that I was taught that those outside of our beliefs, including humanists, environmentalists, socialists, and feminists, were evil selfish people who were destroying our society, and that Christians who did not share our beliefs were “wishy-washy” and “worldy.” There is a very “us versus them” mentality at work in Christian Patriarchy. They were the enemy, the agents of Satan out to destroy belief in God and pervert the world. They cared only for themselves and their own desires and were not to be trusted. I was taught further that the world outside was a scary and dangerous place. If I stayed under my father’s authority, I would be protected and safe.
You also have to remember the sense of purpose that accompanies the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movement. We were raised to fight the enemy, be that Satan or the environmentalist, socialists, and feminists, to come against them in spiritual warfare and at the polls. This is why Michael Farris, a proponent of Christian Patriarchy and the leader of the Home School Legal Defence Association, founded Patrick Henry College in 2000 to train homeschooled youth in the law and government. There were more interns from Patrick Henry College in the Bush White House than from any other college. Put simply, their goal is to take over the country, instituting godly laws ruling according to Christ’s dictates.
While the goal is to take back the world for Christ through the polls, force is never completely ruled out. I was taught that someday the government might take away our rights entirely, become a dictatorship, and crack down on everything we believed in. My father used to point out the armory to us and tell us that that is where we would mount the resistance when this happened. Force, though, was to be a last resort. In the meantime, my family campaigned tirelessly for conservative political candidates and attended marriage rallies, pro-life marches, and second amendment rights meetings. I dreamed of someday being a politician’s wife, supporting him in his bids for office and attempts to restore the country to its godly foundation. The world was framed in terms of good versus evil, and I had a role and a purpose.
Taken together, these beliefs comprise a comprehensive worldview that gives those within it a sense of purpose and provides simple answers to complex problems. It can be very attractive. While the world is a complicated place, Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull explain exactly what your role is and what you must do to please God and carry out his will. It provides you with a formula for raising perfect children and upholds order and hierarchy. You know what your role is, what you are to do, and where you are going.
One last point to make is that evangelicals believe essentially the same things as the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, they just don’t take it to the same extreme. Evangelicals believe that husbands are to to be their wives’ spiritual heads, but in practice their marriages are generally fairly egalitarian. Evangelicals believe that children are a blessing, but in moderation. Evangelicals believe that children should receive a godly education, but most of them send their children to public schools. Evangelicals believe that adult unmarried daughters should honor their parents and listen to their advice, but they don’t expect them to always obey it. Evangelicals believe that men and women are different, and that children need their mothers at home, but most evangelical women work outside the home. Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull simply take these beliefs to their natural – and radical – conclusion.
Perhaps now you have a better understanding of the world of Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull and the minds of those within it. While some leave, like me, many stay. I watch my younger sisters echo my parents’ beliefs, speaking of the importance and protection of fatherly authority and planning to eschew birth control entirely, and my heart breaks. In my next installment, I will explain why I left and what you can do to help others in situations like mine.
About the Author
Libby Anne’s blog is Love, Joy, Feminism: One Girl’s Journey from Patriarchy to Freedom.
This is a world view that I’m not familiar with having grown up in New England during the 60’s and mid 70’s. It is obvious tht home schooling during the past 30 years has skewed American politics to the far right. Thanks for the intro to the Libby Anne blog Ophelia.
[…] case you’ve missed it – I posted an article at Other B&W by the author of the Love, Joy, Feminism blog. It’s a must-read. She tells […]
Libby: I read your bio at LJF, and I find the image of your parents quite poignant. They sound like basically decent, intelligent people whose lives have been distorted by this vicious dogmatism that forbids them to be their own best selves (to say nothing of the damage it commands them to inflict on the next generation), and that’s incredibly sad.
And at heart, it’s a fearful way of seeing the world — one that doesn’t believe that their God’s Truth can stand on its own two feet, and persuade the world on its own merits, but instead must keep its adherents isolated from outside ideas, and scheme to impose itself on society by power achieved through stealth. IOW: this movement doesn’t really have faith in its own gospel.
Er… ok, maybe it’s me, but I don’t understand what “… what you can do to help others in situations like mine.” means. Help what?
Libby, it sounds like you had a pretty darn great childhood by your account. Among other things, you learned to be hardworking and selfless, and apparently, you have are now a well-educated, thoughtful person who cares about others. These things don’t come naturally. You have your parents to thank in large part, and their choice in how to raise you.
Before going on your suggested crusade, I encourage you to meditate more on these things, including what you are implicitly saying about the women who chose this way of life. It comes across as terribly arrogant because the implication is that their way of life, their total self-giving to their families, the physical, mental, and emotional toil they put into raising large families and, on top of that, schooling them, is somehow less valid, less noble than pursuing a career in, say, advertising (or any other such occupation).
Being a man, I am truly humbled by these women. In my estimation, their vocation as mothers and educators is far more noble than nearly any occupation I might choose (I happen to be in software). After reading your post this morning, I was downstairs, and my wife was giving herself in teaching our children. It honestly made me quite angry that you denigrated her in this way. I can’t imagine how your mom and sister must feel when you look down on them and treat their choice as unworthy of women.
I am a Catholic and not part of the movements you are talking about. I did grow up as an evangelical Protestant, but I and my wife freely chose to have a large family and to homeschool, not because we fear the broader culture or want to control our children’s lives totally, but because we feel it is the best way for us to fully live our vocations as human beings, Catholics, spouses, and parents. Our children learn about evolution, they get to watch normal kids shows and movies, they get to go out and play with kids both within homeschooling circles and without.
Neither of us were homeschooled or part of these movements. We chose homeschooling because it seems the best way to guarantee a high quality education for our children, both in secular subjects but also so we can ensure that religion is not unnaturally segregated from the rest of their lives. My wife has a BA in English, and she really enjoys teaching our children. She knows that at any time, we can freely choose to send our children to school.
We don’t practice artificial birth control. You act like this is an evil, but we find it to be a great good, not just because of the children we have (we’re expecting our fifth now) but also because it enables us to wholly give ourselves to each other. It increases our intimacy and love, not diminishes it. We practice NFP.
My kids seem to be happy. I suspect if asked, they would say so. They do know that other people live differently (from their friends and from TV). They do have chores, but everyone of them does as soon as they are able. It is part of learning to be fully human, that life involves work and, more importantly, that we all give to each other to make the world go round. We regularly receive compliments from strangers on how well behaved and well spoken our children are.
But this is not really about us. I just wanted to give you a window into our lives, our choices, our experiences of what you seem to denigrate so freely here. We’re a very happy family. My wife wouldn’t have things any other way. She is intelligent and free, and she chose this way of life. So please, again, reconsider, ponder this more before continuing down the path. Unless there are real abuses and, for example, forcible constraining, these people don’t need “saving.” If they are like you, they may find when they grow up that there is another way they prefer. Such is the way of things.
I wouldn’t overplay the psychological burdens you say you have. There are so many worse things to struggle with in life than these. If you want to liberate women, consider devoting yourself to freeing the many women are are truly in slavery, as sex slaves in the sex trade, for instance. Consider those poor women who were abused by their dads, step-dads, uncles, and their friends–women who truly do need help.
Peace.
Ambrose, to me it seems both arrogant and condescending that you would assume that the writer hasn’t already “meditated” aplenty on her views. The fact that she reaches a different conclusion than you doesn’t mean she just hasn’t thought about it enough.
Well, ditto. I was going to wait for Libby Anne to reply if she wanted to, but since she hasn’t yet – I have to say I think that was a very crude reading of the article.
Ambrose, thanks ever so much for mansplaining reality to the OP. I’m sure she needed you to tell her how to view her life and family. And she really needed you to stand around and criticize her for saying things she never said. She definitely needed you to put her in her place and let her know that her “psychological burdens” are all in her head, and aren’t nearly serious enough to worry herself over. Thank you so much for letting us know what problems are severe enough to care about, and for telling us how much your life rocks, even though it is, by your own admission, not remotely the same life SHE was discussing.
Incidentally, I don’t understand – if you think that a vocation as an educator and caregiver for young children is so important, why aren’t you doing it?
Ambrose – you say you are humbled by women who embrace the vocation of running households and mothering many children. That is fine, but… you need to be equally humbled by women who dedicate themselves to study then go on and pursue careers of all kinds that benefit society. I am fearing you see that as selfishness, rather than a huge gift to the rest of us…
Then again, Libby’s point about her mother’s energy (and her own shines through) struck a chord with me. You say your wife is happy raising lots of children – that’s great! One is plenty for me – I don’t have lots of that kind of energy, and I don’t do well without time on my own, and intellectual stimulation. Nor is raising a child the best that I have to offer the world, I do pretty well, but really my talents lie in other directions. In fact it’s only by homeschooling that I’m really able to offer her anything that I happen to be particularly good at.
Libby – I understand where you are coming from, but I wish you would add some kind of qualifier when you critique homeschooling. I think you got caught up in a part of the evangelical movement that tries to ‘own’ homeschooling. There is a big, wide world of secular homeschoolers of all kinds out there, many start out because school fails to meet their children’s educational or psychological needs. I took my own daughter out of school after she became seriously depressed, I’m continuing because she wants to and it fits in with our current lifestyle of world travel. I take the presence of knowledge of all religions, secular ethics, evolution and the use of contraceptives (to name a few) in my curriculum for granted – my daughter knows more about all these things than she would in public school. Her friends are in a variety of educational settings, though I suppose what they do have in common is that many come from multicultural, international families like ours. As for chores… well, we live light, and try to make sure there aren’t too many of those for anyone. Really, it couldn’t be more different from the lifestyle you put forward as being practically a definition of homeschooling. It would be nice if you could criticize a named type of homeschooling or abuses that can arise in homeschooling the same way that we might criticize specific aspects of school life such as bullying without invalidating the whole enterprise. Our family are atheists – we really don’t need people jumping to conclusions about us when they hear the word ‘homeschooling’.
I did reply, but I think cyber space swallowed up my comment!
Ambrose Little:
You seem to have completely misread my article. I will address your comments point by point.
“Libby, it sounds like you had a pretty darn great childhood by your account. Among other things, you learned to be hardworking and selfless, and apparently, you have are now a well-educated, thoughtful person who cares about others. These things don’t come naturally. You have your parents to thank in large part, and their choice in how to raise you.”
Actually I am a well-educated thoughtful person who cares about others because I have broken free from my parents’ views. If I’d stuck with their views I’d still believe in pseudoscience and oppose social justice in politics. I’d still believe that everyone who didn’t think exactly like I did was going to be tortured for eternity. That whole well-educated and thoughtful caring thing you say you hear? That is my doing, not my parents’ doing.
“Before going on your suggested crusade, I encourage you to meditate more on these things, including what you are implicitly saying about the women who chose this way of life. It comes across as terribly arrogant because the implication is that their way of life, their total self-giving to their families, the physical, mental, and emotional toil they put into raising large families and, on top of that, schooling them, is somehow less valid, less noble than pursuing a career in, say, advertising (or any other such occupation).
“Being a man, I am truly humbled by these women. In my estimation, their vocation as mothers and educators is far more noble than nearly any occupation I might choose (I happen to be in software). After reading your post this morning, I was downstairs, and my wife was giving herself in teaching our children. It honestly made me quite angry that you denigrated her in this way. I can’t imagine how your mom and sister must feel when you look down on them and treat their choice as unworthy of women.”
How very condescending. What makes you think I haven’t meditated on these things? Let me tell you, I have. I have meditated on these issues and meditated on these issues to excess. If you look around my blog, you will see that.
You discuss the self-giving of women and the “emotional toil” of raising a large family – if a woman chooses that, okay. But honestly, you want to know what I really admire? The woman who pursues a career and simultaneously raises children. I don’t think that women have to give up a career to raise a family any more than men do. So I support your wife’s right to make whatever decision she freely chooses, and I’m glad you admire her, but I’m not going to jump up and down and act like she’s doing something oh so much more amazing in sacrificing herself for her family rather than balancing a career with raising a family. I admire balance between self and others, not never-ending toil and self sacrifice.
“I am a Catholic and not part of the movements you are talking about. I did grow up as an evangelical Protestant, but I and my wife freely chose to have a large family and to homeschool, not because we fear the broader culture or want to control our children’s lives totally, but because we feel it is the best way for us to fully live our vocations as human beings, Catholics, spouses, and parents. Our children learn about evolution, they get to watch normal kids shows and movies, they get to go out and play with kids both within homeschooling circles and without.”Neither of us were homeschooled or part of these movements. We chose homeschooling because it seems the best way to guarantee a high quality education for our children, both in secular subjects but also so we can ensure that religion is not unnaturally segregated from the rest of their lives. My wife has a BA in English, and she really enjoys teaching our children. She knows that at any time, we can freely choose to send our children to school.”
I never said that all homeschoolers followed Christian Patriarchy (they don’t) or that I think homeschooling should be outlawed (I don’t). I do think homeschooling is problematic in that it allows parents to completely control what their children learn and who they meet, but I have seen people homeschool well. That said, on average homeschoolers do not score better than their public schooled counterparts, and I think that there is something to be said for the socialization a child receives in public school. I honestly don’t see anything good about homeschooling that you can’t achieve by placing your children in public school and at the same time being involved in their education.
“We don’t practice artificial birth control. You act like this is an evil, but we find it to be a great good, not just because of the children we have (we’re expecting our fifth now) but also because it enables us to wholly give ourselves to each other. It increases our intimacy and love, not diminishes it. We practice NFP.”
Actually, I have used NFP and have found that it decreases my husband and I’s ability to “wholly give ourselves to each other.” This is because NFP requires couples to abstain during significant portions of the month if they are not ready to conceive, and let me tell you, abstaining is very frustrating. Furthermore, NFP may not be “artificial” birth control, but it is birth control. I am fine with people having large families if they actually want them, and if they plan to nurture each child as an individual and allow them to crow up and have their own lives and own beliefs, but to have child after child because they believe they have to or simply to churn out soldiers for Christ? That is what I am talking about here.
“My kids seem to be happy. I suspect if asked, they would say so. They do know that other people live differently (from their friends and from TV). They do have chores, but everyone of them does as soon as they are able. It is part of learning to be fully human, that life involves work and, more importantly, that we all give to each other to make the world go round. We regularly receive compliments from strangers on how well behaved and well spoken our children are.”
Bully for you. I’m glad your family is happy. I would point out that I am not against children doing chores (within reason) and that my siblings and I also always received complements on how well behaved we are. I am not sure what your point here is.
“But this is not really about us. I just wanted to give you a window into our lives, our choices, our experiences of what you seem to denigrate so freely here. We’re a very happy family. My wife wouldn’t have things any other way. She is intelligent and free, and she chose this way of life. So please, again, reconsider, ponder this more before continuing down the path. Unless there are real abuses and, for example, forcible constraining, these people don’t need “saving.” If they are like you, they may find when they grow up that there is another way they prefer. Such is the way of things.”
I’m glad you’re a very happy family. My husband, daughter, and I are also a very happy family (even though – gasp! – we both have careers!), so I’m not sure what your point is. Also, I’m not sure what “path” you think I’m going down, but I have done LOADS of pondering. Again, have a look at my website.
In addition, this is where I think you haven’t fully read my article. I’m not talking about forcible constraining, no, but I’m also not talking about a world where kids can simply choose another way of life if they “prefer.” You talk about how your wife “chooses freely” to stay home. These girls don’t do that. I was taught that I HAD TO be a stay at home mom, and that I had no other choice. I was taught that having a career wasn’t an option. I was taught that women must always remain under male authority, and that that meant that I had to obey my father without question even as an adult. There is no “choice.” I’ve only gotten to where I am today by leaving, and let me tell you my parents made that process extremely painful. They made me choose between my family and my freedom, and I left home not knowing if I would ever be allowed to see my siblings again. Furthermore, a growing number of daughters in this movement are being kept at home from college so that they won’t be exposed to ideas outside those of their parents. There is a huge emphasis on conformity and control.
“I wouldn’t overplay the psychological burdens you say you have. There are so many worse things to struggle with in life than these. If you want to liberate women, consider devoting yourself to freeing the many women are are truly in slavery, as sex slaves in the sex trade, for instance. Consider those poor women who were abused by their dads, step-dads, uncles, and their friends–women who truly do need help.”
This is incredibly condescending. Just because women face problems elsewhere as well does not mean that Christian Patriarchy is somehow not a problem or that it should not be combated. You dismiss the pain I and others have suffered from the ideology of Christian Patriarchy with a wave of the hand and act as though there is no real problem. Well I have news for you. There IS. And as long as this problem remains, I WILL speak up.
Pen – You are right that I should have qualified better, but I will point out that I never said ALL homeschoolers follow Christian Patriarchy. I have found though that the influence of Christian Patriarchy is widespread in the homeschool world (including HSLDA), and that secular homeschoolers are often in the minority (or perhaps this is just the midwest). I understand how homeschooling might work well for the individual family, but I really don’t like the idea that it’s the only okay method, or that public schools are these horrible awful people (and there are some who teach this, though clearly not you). I am going to put my daughter in public school, at least in part because I want her to have the diverse and (relatively) uncontrolled social life I never had. I regret not having all the opportunities and experiences other kids had.
One more note: I should probably have been clearer that just because my childhood was fairly happy does not mean that there were not problems. Furthermore, when I began to question my parents’ beliefs all hell broke loose and they made my life completely miserable. After all, they believed that as an unmarried daughter I HAD to obey my father, even though I was several years past 18. And they did everything they could save force to get me to do so. There is an extreme enforced conformity and an element of control I did not notice as a child, because it was not until I was an adult that I dared to step out of line.
THIS.
Ambrose, put your money where your mouth is, buddy.
“mansplaining”? Really? .. Next..
@Else and Ophelia, I’d say your reading of what I wrote is pretty crude.
The basic gist of most of the comments to me here are “you disagree, so shut up you arrogant MAN.” Well, no, I won’t. I wrote respectfully to the author of this article. What I wrote stands. I started out saying she’s obviously well-educated, thoughtful, and cares about people; nothing in that says I think she’s incapable of thinking it through or that coming to a different conclusion than mine means she hasn’t thought about it enough. I was, on the other hand, offering more data for her to consider, particularly in regards to things like homeschooling and not using birth control, which were blanket disparaged, along with having large families and women staying at home to care for them.. That is to say, perhaps there are those who do these things where it isn’t ideal or ends well, but may be it is possible to choose those things and still live a healthy life, even by modern standards.
@Pen, no in fact I do not think that all choices of occupation are equally noble. Some seem more noble than others–e.g., doctors without borders. I chose mine because it was a way for me to reliably support my family; my education is in the study of history, but I figured that wouldn’t provide as well as software. I seem predisposed to do well with software, so it made sense for me. Do I think that making business software is as noble as, say, motherhood or education, nope. So shoot me. I’m not pretending it is.
I can’t be a mother. I can’t afford to stay home and homeschool. I say kudos to stay at home dads, too. That’s a sacrifice I don’t make, and I respect them for it.
I was raised by a single mom. I saw first hand the compromises she had to make, not by choice but out of necessity. I am not saying you can’t be a good parent and hold down a career. I would say it calls for unfortunate compromises, both for the parents and the children, especially when one parent can’t be home with the kids.
In addition to witnessing this first hand as a child, I have also known too many moms in the workplace who feel so very torn between their work and their children. Many feel that they *have* to work, that they have no choice, not because they are taught that by their parents but rather by society at large, one that makes them think that staying at home to be a full-time mom is not worthy of them, a society that portrays an “American life” that very few, if any, could attain with just one parent working.
Look, I’m not going to tell you that you shouldn’t have a career. I am not going to tell you that you can’t. I think you should be free to choose. I also feel sorry for the many women who *have to* work and would rather stay at home with their children. I do think that being a stay at home mom is a noble choice, especially if you homeschool, too. I think it is a shame that there are those who do not think that this choice is noble, especially when those people are women.
@Libby, I’m sorry you felt I was condescending to you. That was not my intent. I was attempting to offer you another perspective on some of the things you appeared to be denigrating, as I mention above. I certainly do not hold with the coercion approach. On the other hand, I do think parents have a right and a duty to both protect their children and raise them up as they think is best, even if that way is at odds with the prevailing culture. You are surely right that homeschooling is a way for parents to exercise control, but as you can see by Pen’s reply, I was not the only one who saw a blanket condemnation of homeschooling.
The data I’ve seen does not accord with what you say on the quality of a homeschool education vis a vis public schooling, but that’s beside the point. There is no guarantee homeschooling results in better education; we can agree on that. Socialization is a concern, but there are plenty of solutions to that concern for a parent who wants to raise a well-rounded person.
@Everybody, I’m just a passing guest on this blog; I found it because someone I know shared it on Facebook, saying it was “scary.” I offer you these thoughts as an outsider (clearly), and I suppose that predisposes people to be hostile. I’m not here “mansplaining” or condescending or whatever. It’s just my point of view, added to your own. That is the purpose of comments on blogs. I saw (and I think if you look, you will too) some blanket condemnations of a way of life: women choosing to have large families, not to practice artificial birth control, and choosing to homeschool. I wanted to offer that it is possible to have these things and still be quite happy and whole and healthy in our society. I would go as far as to say that women freely choosing to submit to their husbands is fine, if they so choose.
The particular problems/extremes that seem to plague the Christian Partriarchy are not inherent in these things, and I object to generalizing from that following’s use of them. The problems appear to be more based in cultishness.
If there is real coercion, then I would agree, that’s a problem. I grew up around folks who thought similarly (though there was no formal movement as described here). They certainly taught the submission thing, but no real coercion was involved that I saw. I defend their right to teach this and to teach their children this, but I would not defend real coercion.
Parents will be parents. They tend to want their children to follow in their footsteps when they grow up. There are many stories about parents flipping out when children don’t follow the path they had for them, be it to be a doctor, to take on the family business, to keep the faith, or whatever. They will exert whatever influence they have to convince their (adult) children. Do I think it’s better for parents to support their children’s choices? In general, yes; at the least, they should acknowledge their adult children are free humans and still love them despite their making choices the parent doesn’t agree with. The reality is that parents are humans and often fail in this respect. This is not peculiar to the Christian Patriarchy; it may just seem worse because it is counter cultural.
I certainly can’t judge any one individual’s subjective turmoil caused by this group/their teaching. But if we are *generalizing*, and asking what we should invest our time in when it comes to “saving” women, I do think there are much, much worse things for women (such as I mentioned). I understand it is natural to choose a cause close to one’s heart, but looking at things objectively, I would say we–as a society–should prioritize our efforts based on apparent objective severity, and that’s why I suggested the other causes instead of this one. I apologize for speaking as though I was downplaying your personal turmoil, Libby, and if this is your personal cause, I can understand that choice.
So that’s it for me. Unless there is some pressing thing that needs further comment, I’ll bow out and let you continue on your merry way without me.
Peace.
Okay, one more briefly, in case it wasn’t clear. Godless Heathen et al, it is entirely possible to admire and be humbled by someone else’s choices without making them for yourself. I freely admit that there are more noble career choices than my own.
As for being a mother, I cannot do this due to my nature as a man. So, I am free to admire motherhood in all its glory without it impugning me or my choices. And I do.
On the other hand, I try to be a good father because that’s the card I was dealt in this respect, and I must be accountable for that. And to be honest, this effort at being a good father, and husband for that matter, played largely into my career choice…
“The basic gist of most of the comments to me here are “you disagree, so shut up you arrogant MAN.” Well, no, I won’t. I wrote respectfully to the author of this article.”
Except you don’t disagree based upon your experience as somebody raised Quiverfull , you disagree based upon your experience as a Catholic parent. You don’t have the perspective she has, and she wasn’t even talking about you.
As for “respectfully”, you did no such thing. You were condescending and patronizing. You didn’t use profanity, but you did everything you could to derail the conversation, up to and including “it’s all in your head” and “there are more important things to worry about”.
That’s not respectful. That’s RUDE.
She didn’t denigrate anything. She didn’t post “homeschooling parents are all abusive” or “anybody who chooses to stay home with their children is stupid”. She wrote a post about her experience and her upbringing. Neither did she post anything disparaging about people who make choices other than hers, unless they keep their children from making choices of their own.
But you took a post about one thing, pretended it was about you, and decided to educate us about why she’s wrong about people who are nothing like the people she posted about in the first place. And when called on it, you proceeded to offer a fake apology (not “I’m sorry I was condescending” but “I’m sorry you THOUGHT I was condescending”, because “you’re all hostile”) and tell us, again, why we’re all wrong and you’re right.
One person in this group is hostile. It’s not the person you think.
“As for being a mother, I cannot do this due to my nature as a man. So, I am free to admire motherhood in all its glory without it impugning me or my choices. And I do.”
Strawman. Nobody asked you to be a mother. We asked why you “are humbled” by “women” who choose to be full-time educators and caregivers when you are perfectly capable of making the same choice. You need a uterus to give birth, not to change diapers, wipe noses, and teach the ABCs. (Nor do any of the other things your wife does every single day – and if you have kids, SOMEbody has to do the cooking, and the cleaning, and the childcare. There are many many ways to divide the workload, but every human in the world has to deal with this or get somebody else to do it for them.)
@Uly, it seems to me that questioning my motivations is derailing the convo. I was not fake apologizing for condescending, I was real apologizing for the miscommunication that occurred. I did not intend to be condescending, so I won’t apologize for that. See, I am not even fake apologizing for being condescending–because I wasn’t.
“she wasn’t even talking about you”
Oh, but she was. She painted a bleak picture of homseschooling. She illustrated problems with large families. She said it breaks her heart when they talk of not using birth control. These were all used as evidence in the main argument to condemn the CP movement. The problem I have with it is what it implies for others who practice the same things (but don’t share the problems of CP).
You may think I’m being overly sensitive, but on a regular basis here in NJ, there are attempts to form new laws to regulate homeschooling. In Germany, where my wife is from, it is outright illegal; parents have been jailed for it. So when someone paints such a terrible and bleak picture of homseschooling, no matter what her main point is, it is a problem for those of us who do homeschool, as Pen points out as well. We regularly have to justify our choice to homeschool to people, and this kind of talk doesn’t help at all. Libby has since clarified some on this point.
Having large families is counter cultural these days, so those of us with them are regularly expected to defend our choice to do so, so I am sensitive to that and want to offer balancing evidence about that. Highlighting problems with them, implying that somehow it is not a good choice for women, is a problem to me. That is what I responded to. Further clarification has shown that was not the intent, so I can let it go.
Not practicing birth control is a valid choice in life. Libby later drew an important distinction–between artificial and natural. My original objection was to this generalization about not using birth control, which easily is contrived to mean artificial because most people don’t even consider natural family planning. If you say “birth control,” they think the pill and other such forms. So it is normal to associate with that as someone who chooses not to use it. Anyways, since she clarified, I would drop that objection–I do think that people need to be responsible in their choice of how many children they have, even if they don’t use artificial birth control…
I’d say at this point we can drop these issues because they are indeed not the main point, and each has sufficiently been clarified through this conversation.
Lastly, I still maintain that unless there is real abuse, real coercion, and real slavery, that there are bigger fish to fry as a society. By her own account, people in these groups are as happy as the next group. By her own account, at least some women are allowed to go to college. By her own account, she made the choice to choose another path, as difficult as it was.
I certainly did not say it was all in her head. She said it was in her head–that she struggles with thoughts. To that, I offer that she is not alone. My wife struggles with being accepted for her choice to be a stay at home mom. Our contemporary society has taught her that it is not worthy of a woman to do so. It is difficult, something to struggle with. It’s not easy, and I’m sure Libby’s struggles are not easy on the other end of the spectrum.
But if you tell me that these kinds of difficulties are on par with real abuse and real slavery, I do take issue with that. I do think that if we’re going to improve the lot of women in the world, we should start with these more severe situations. If you disagree, I’m fine with that, but I don’t see how saying this is condescending or patronizing. It is just my point of view. Take it or leave it. At least it is more data for you to consider.
Ambrose:
“Oh, but she was. She painted a bleak picture of homseschooling. She illustrated problems with large families. She said it breaks her heart when they talk of not using birth control. These were all used as evidence in the main argument to condemn the CP movement. The problem I have with it is what it implies for others who practice the same things (but don’t share the problems of CP).”
Um, no. I did none of these things. I said that this movement uses homeschooling to isolate and indoctrinate, not that all homeschoolers are like that. I said that it’s a problem to have such a large family that older children have to raise the younger ones, or to have a large family because you think that’s what God says you have to do, or to have a large family because you want to create little robotic “soldiers for Christ,” not that large families ARE the problem. And it does break my heart to hear my sisters talking of not using birth control, because they believe that God has ordered them, as women, to have child after child with no spacing or break whether they want it or not (and like I said, NFP IS birth control). This kind of idea should break your heart as well.
“You may think I’m being overly sensitive, but on a regular basis here in NJ, there are attempts to form new laws to regulate homeschooling.”
Yes, I do think you are. As to homeschool regulations, you should WANT homeschooling to be regulated so that abuses don’t happen. Regulation is not the same thing as banning homeschooling, and it will not end your freedom to homeschool – it will simply ensure that those who claim to be homeschooling really are giving their children an education. And if you are doing so, why would you worry about regulations?
Ambrose:
“It is just my point of view. Take it or leave it. At least it is more data for you to consider.”
I assure you, I have already heard all this data before. You seem to think I live in a bubble. I know plenty of people who think just the way you do. I’ve heard all your arguments. I simply disagree.
“My wife struggles with being accepted for her choice to be a stay at home mom. Our contemporary society has taught her that it is not worthy of a woman to do so.”
I support women’s choice, so of course I support your wife’s choice to stay at home. Why wouldn’t I? I actually think that it’s important for our society to make it easier for women to stay home if they so choose, whether it’s for a few years while the children are young or until the children are grown. Today, if a woman steps onto the “mommy track” it’s really hard for her to get back onto the career track, and that I think is a major problem. A woman like your wife should be able to choose to stay at home for some period of time and then be able to go back to work later without suffering too many consequences. I think the workforce needs to be more flexible and understanding of parents – both mothers and fathers. And there are tons of feminists who agree with me.
Thanks for the further clarifications, Libby. I agree we have more to do in order to make it easier for both working mothers and fathers to be more present with their children.
About the family planning thing, we agree that responsible family planning is important. Among those in Catholic circles, there are similar challenges when the ban on artificial birth control is understood as have-as-many-as-you-can. And we also deal with the side effect that there ends up being some kind of weird competition along those lines. I don’t mean to imply that NFP is easy by any stretch, but I still think it is better than the alternatives.
As for homeschooling regulations, you ask the same thing that proponents of regulation ask (no matter what the question is, it seems). “If you are doing the right thing, why would you care?”
For homeschooling, I specifically care because the regulations tend to constrain the parents’ choice in curricula to what the state selects as normative. That kind of defeats part of the purpose of homeschooling. For instance, I think that more emphasis on liberal arts, reading the great works of literature, philosophy, history, and art.
It also adds undue burden of recording and reporting for those who are doing the right thing anyways.
More generally, regulations in general mean you have to have staff to realize them, which means more government spending, and that is problematic, especially in this economy.
Of course, I’m not entirely opposed to homeschool regulations for the reason you cite. There are certainly those who abuse the system. I would not be averse to taking on the additional burdens to serve the greater good in this way if it came to it. It remains to be seen, though, if the abusers of the system are in a sufficient number to warrant more regulation. It’s a non-trivial matter, and we should have strong, hard data before we invest the government in it, IMO.
“See, I am not even fake apologizing for being condescending–because I wasn’t.”
You were. If you don’t want to acknowledge it – don’t say “sorry”.
“Oh, but she was. She painted a bleak picture of homseschooling. She illustrated problems with large families. She said it breaks her heart when they talk of not using birth control. These were all used as evidence in the main argument to condemn the CP movement. The problem I have with it is what it implies for others who practice the same things (but don’t share the problems of CP).”
No, she wasn’t. She was painting a bleak picture of HER childhood. She was talking about a problem with large families that SHE knew. She said it breaks her heart when they talk about not using birth control because they don’t have a CHOICE to use birth control. She was talking about CP families who do things very differently from how your family does things, using specific examples. She wasn’t talking about you.
“You may think I’m being overly sensitive, but on a regular basis here in NJ, there are attempts to form new laws to regulate homeschooling. In Germany, where my wife is from, it is outright illegal; parents have been jailed for it.”
I don’t think that, and wouldn’t say it if I did. I think you’re misreading, and you’re condescending, but if she were saying what you think she’s saying you’d certainly be correct to be concerned, and you’re allowed to be as sensitive as you like.
“Lastly, I still maintain that unless there is real abuse, real coercion, and real slavery, that there are bigger fish to fry as a society”
Well, there IS real abuse and coercion in some of these families (many of them – any time you’re isolating your children from the world, that’s coercing them because they don’t have enough information to make accurate choices), and you are NOT the arbiter of what is and isn’t important enough to worry about. Seriously, dude, that right there? That’s derailing the conversation. This is such a commonly used “debate” tactic that it’s been neatly catalogued right here: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/#moreimportantly
“I certainly did not say it was all in her head. She said it was in her head–that she struggles with thoughts.”
No, not in those words. You said “I wouldn’t overplay the psychological burdens you say you have.” as though she doesn’t know what burdens she does and doesn’t carry, nor how much emphasis to put on them. (Also, they’re just psychological, that is, not “real”.)
“I do think that if we’re going to improve the lot of women in the world, we should start with these more severe situations.”
Funny thing, humans are capable of doing multiple things at once. It is actually possible to help end slavery in Haiti WHILE ALSO working against CP in the US. It’s possible to help women in Afghanistan WHILE ALSO helping women in America. Your argument is like saying “It’s no good to pick up litter until we save the rainforest”.
” If you disagree, I’m fine with that, but I don’t see how saying this is condescending or patronizing.”
Because you’re telling other people what they’re allowed to consider important, and how they can prioritize their energy. You don’t have that right.
“It is just my point of view.”
Phrased very rudely.
“Take it or leave it.”
On the subject of leaving, didn’t you do that already? With a whole dramatic flounce about how mean we all are? (By which I can only imagine you mean me, probably because I have little to no patience with rude people and no inclination to try manners when I doubt it’ll work.)
Though honestly, I don’t know why I bother, the OP is clearly more than capable of defending herself.
“Marcel” wrote:
“Er… ok, maybe it’s me, but I don’t understand what “… what you can do to help others in situations like mine.” means. Help what?”
Help women and men and children get out from under the bondage placed on them by these spiritually abusive teachings. Women are taught that if they do not stay home under “authority”, have as many kids as their bodies will produce, homeschool all those kids, and unquestioningly obey her husband no matter what (divorce is not allowed), then she is not in “God’s will” and will be cursed in this life and perhaps the next. Women have no choice in how they live their lives. And God is used to control them. Men are taught that unless they “lead” and control and provide for their families, no matter how many kids they have that they can’t afford, they are “feminized” and out of God’s will. They are told that they are solely responsible for every choice their wife and kids make. If the wife isn’t submissive enough, it’s the wife’s fault, but the husband is spiritually responsible for her choice. If his children “rebel” and choose to leave the family’s belief system, the fathers are held responsible. Children in these movements, be they male or female, are commonly excommunicated for choosing another way of life, even if they remain Christians. I know several people who have not been allowed to see their little siblings, who they practically raised, for months even years now.
Do you still think these people don’t need help, as your question implied? Do you still not know what “helping” them might mean? Helping these people can mean any number of things, as I’m sure Libby Anne will talk about. I can think of so many people who helped me out of many of these same beliefs, just by being friends, offering support, showing me that the god I was taught that required these things is a figment of someone’s imagination and used only to control people. (And I’m still a Christian…I just worship a vastly different God than the one who was held over my head for most of my life.)
Ambrose –
“It remains to be seen, though, if the abusers of the system are in a sufficient number to warrant more regulation. It’s a non-trivial matter, and we should have strong, hard data before we invest the government in it, IMO.”
It’s actually kind of hard to get “hard data” when entire states, like the one I grew up in, have zero homeschool regulation at all. Yes, ZERO.
As for the regulations, I’m not talking about mandating which specific curriculum to use, I’m talking about making sure that children are actually being educated. There’s a difference.
@Uly, you seem to misunderstand the point of argumentation and rhetoric. It is precisely to bring the other side to your point of view. It is not “forcing” your view on anyone to argue for it. Libby, by posting on a public forum, is trying to convince others to come to her point of view. Me, by posting a response, is doing the same. I have every right to try to convince anyone of what I think is important and worthwhile. It is not rude to do that. I have done nothing but speak to the issues, offer other points of view, and argue for them. (And thanks to you, defend myself.)
I said I would only continue to respond if there was a need, and if you’re going to continue with the ad hominems, I will continue to respond.
And in any case, your continued claims about my motivations are ad hominems that do indeed derail the convo. You imply that because I was (purportedly) condescending that somehow what I said can safely be ignored. I am sorry that you and Libby took it as condescending. I am sorry for that misunderstanding, but I will not apologize for doing something that I didn’t do. We could argue all day about this; there really is little point. I know my motivations, and you can either take my word about them or not.
If you want to discuss the issues rather than my tone, my motivations, let’s talk. Libby, as you have noted, is fully capable to defend her viewpoint, and we’d be able to get to something resembling a resolution quicker without your interference.
@Libby, that is indeed a pickle (to get the data); there are states that do regulate, and perhaps the data could come from there, as well as from the outcomes (e.g., homeschoolers’ success in colleges and careers).
In NJ, they have in fact proposed controlling the curricula (by requiring it to be approved by the school system).
@Ambrose – Requiring curriculum to be approved by the school system actually makes sense. That way students will not learn out of science textbooks that teach lies and BAD science. That is not the same as mandating one specific curriculum. It’s about quality control. And who knows, maybe New Jersey already has regulations that catch people who are not educating their kids. Realize that many many states have no regulations at all. In general, homeschool regulations need strengthening, but this varies by state because current regulations vary by state.
All I know is that while I got a decent homeschool education, I have seen so many kids who were, and are, failed by homeschooling. I am right now trying to figure out how to help a girl who should be a senior in high school but hasn’t actually been taught anything since fourth grade, when her mother became ill due to pregnancies and she had to take over running the house. She desperately wants to graduate high school with a diploma, but how can she? Her parents expect her to spend her time cooking, cleaning, watching the children, and working for the family business. Her parents also don’t believe that she will be independent when she turns 18, as they believe that she will remain under her father’s authority. She would like to leave when she turns 18, but she is afraid to lose her younger siblings and even if she does leave, what is she supposed to do with no education to speak of? THIS is what I’m talking about. THIS is why we need homeschool regulations (after all, this can only happen because the state this girl lives in doesn’t have any regulations AT ALL).
On a different note, Uly has every right to give her input in this discussion. I appreciate her voice.
Okay, Libby. Thanks. I understand better where you’re coming from now.
About Uly, I never said she has no right, although she said that to me.
” It is not “forcing” your view on anyone to argue for it.”
And I never said you were. Please do not put words in my mouth.
“I have every right to try to convince anyone of what I think is important and worthwhile.”
Sure! You do NOT have the right to tell other people that what THEY consider important is NOT important, or that they should worry about other things because YOU know better than THEY do about what is of importance. And that’s what you did.
“I have done nothing but speak to the issues, offer other points of view, and argue for them.”
Other points of view that were entirely off-topic.
“And in any case, your continued claims about my motivations are ad hominems that do indeed derail the convo.”
I have made few, if any claims about your motivations. I’ve made few, if any claims about what you are as a human being. I have, however, repeatedly called you out on what you have said here. When you tell people that they should worry about “more important things”, that is being rude. When you tell people that they shouldn’t talk about their experience or upbringing because, after all, it doesn’t reflect your life, that is being rude. When you argue against things that the OP never said in the first place, and repeatedly claim that she did, that is being rude. I don’t need to understand your motivations to understand the results – you’ve succeeded in making it all about you.
” I am sorry that you and Libby took it as condescending”
We didn’t take it as condescending. It WAS condescending. You may not have consciously intended it that way, but it was.
“I am sorry for that misunderstanding, but I will not apologize for doing something that I didn’t do.”
If you are walking down the street, and a little distracted, and you step on somebody’s foot, what do you say? Do you say “I’m sorry your foot was in my way!” or “I’m sorry you think your foot hurts” or “I’m sorry you feel that I’ve hurt you, but I really did nothing wrong”? You didn’t mean to step on their foot, of course, so you didn’t do anything wrong… right? So why do you say “I’m sorry I stepped on your foot!” to them?
Because even if you didn’t mean to, you did hurt them.
If you accidentally wish somebody a Merry Christmas when they’re Muslim, and they get upset, maybe you think they’re silly. But do you say it to their face, or do you say sorry? I do the latter, because that’s just the kind thing to do. If it’s important to them, and not to me, surely I can be the one to change how I speak!
If you post something condescending, and multiple people say that, and reply about how you were, and you go “Oh, I’m sorry you THOUGHT I was condescending”, that’s not helping things. That’s just compounding the error.
“If you want to discuss the issues rather than my tone, my motivations, let’s talk.”
Fine, let’s see. You could address my statements where I asked about why you gender the act of raising and educating children. You could explain why you think she wasn’t describing a group of people among whom abuse and coercion aren’t common, or why you think isolating your children in the way she describes (not homeschooled in the normal way, but very limited social interaction and no higher education, with children (especially girls) expected to obey their parents until they’re safely married off) isn’t inherently coercive and worthy of concern.
Of course, that assumes you want to settle things. There are several points the OP has brought up that you haven’t addressed either.
Ambrose # 14 –
No. I said yours was crude because of all the unwarranted assumptions, such as that Libby Anne hadn’t already thought about the issues. Consider for instance your second paragraph –
“Crusade” is a provocative choice of word; “I encourage you to meditate more on these things” is deeply patronizing given that the article itself demonstrates that she has already thought about them a lot; the “terribly arrogant” is simply your take; “advertising” is a provocative choice of career.
And the rest of your comment is like that. It’s not a careful reading, it’s a very crude one.
@Uly, it seems to me you’re putting words in my mouth. I am indeed sorry that I hurt you, Libby, or anyone else by my words. I did not intend to be condescending, and since it was taken that way and thereby harmed you all, I apologize for that harm caused by the miscommunication.
I just reread my original comment, and I just don’t see the condescension. The bulk of it is offering data from my life on issues brought up in this post, even though those have largely since been clarified and are now moot.
I do understand the objection about my opinions on what is worth our time, and I already apologized for how I originally phrased that. I don’t think it is wrong or rude to argue for other people to see your point of view, even if it is a matter of convincing them to think of something else as more important than what they currently see as important. I do see that it is ineffective to do so in the way I did here because it clearly puts people on the defensive. Lesson learned.
I chose to respond or not respond to some things because I think they could be rabbit holes and would indeed derail the convo.
As of writing this, I think that Libby has clarified her thoughts more on the things that seemed most objectionable to me. She says nothing I offered was new to her, and I say that’s a good thing. All I had to go on was what was in the post, and it wasn’t clear that she had run into others who live happily with large families, homeschooling, with stay at home moms outside of the CP movement. I shouldn’t assume she had because it is not that common in our society, so it’s not a matter of condescendingly thinking she’s in a bubble but honestly considering that may be she hadn’t run into folks like us and, as I said, giving her potentially more data to consider along these lines.
Based on what has been offered in this thread, I am more convinced that the CP movement is more problematic than it at first seemed. If women are truly coerced into this way of life, it is a problem. I just think we need to be sure of that before encroaching on the rights of parents to teach children their belief systems; that is a slippery slope. But ultimately, it doesn’t matter if I am convinced. If what I offered didn’t impact Libby at all, then so be it. All I asked was that she consider what I had to offer before moving on, and that’s done.
I truly am sorry that the thread took the turn it took because of the trouble and pain it has caused. I’m just imagining how quickly this could have been resolved if I had chosen a few different wordings. Sorry guys. I really am out, for good or ill, now. I have no more energy left for this.
The condescending shit didn’t stick the flounce…
Just for the record, Ambrose – you didn’t hurt me, and I doubt you hurt anyone else. You didn’t cause me pain, either. What you said was irritating rather than pain-inducing. Thanks for the apology though.
But I really think you ought to be able to see the condescension in your first comment – it was in telling Libby Anne to think more, which assumes that you know 1) how much she’s thought and 2) that it isn’t enough. That just is condescending. It might be worth saying anyway about a piece that is obviously thoughtless – but Libby Anne’s doesn’t fit that description.
[…] This article first appeared on Butterflies and Wheels. […]
[…] Read more → butterfliesandwheels […]
Libby,
Thank you for taking the time to write this article. As a proud father of four who are being taught Biblically in all matters, I intend to print and discuss this entire article with my daughters. My wife and I have tried to teach our children to study and reason from Scripture and your own personal difficulties should be very helpful in allowing them to see the resulting life of a young woman as experienced and narrated on the other side of the fence. For the record, my children are all pro-patriarchal, pro-family, pro-homeschool, pro-authority, pro-Christian, pro-purity, pro-marriage, pro-courtship/betrothal and pro-servanthood (men and women alike).
One point I would like to make though regarding your comment: “Evangelicals believe that husbands are to to be their wives’ spiritual heads, but in practice their marriages are generally fairly egalitarian. Evangelicals believe that children are a blessing, but in moderation. Evangelicals believe that children should receive a godly education, but most of them send their children to public schools. Evangelicals believe that adult unmarried daughters should honor their parents and listen to their advice, but they don’t expect them to always obey it. Evangelicals believe that men and women are different, and that children need their mothers at home, but most evangelical women work outside the home. Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull simply take these beliefs to their natural – and radical – conclusion.”
The “evangelicals” you speak of sound like a bunch of hypocrites that have one foot in the world and don’t even realize what they are compromising. I wish I could print and distribute your letter as an example for those in the Body who know what the Word teaches and then do not act on it. It will definitely be useful material for several weeks to come.
Blessings,
Daniel
[…] while back, Arby, at The Homeschool Apologist, addressed an article by a homeschooled anti-homeschooler. It’s a good post, and defends homeschooling pretty well, but I think that he concedes too much […]
[…] few days ago, I read this post. I came to it from this homeschooler’s blog and I went back and read the original post, […]
OMG, It’s such a shame for men to use Christianity to justify slavery of your own daughters.
Amberose Little,
Out of everything Libby wrote, you didn’t make one comment about the abuse or degradation she suffered. It’s like you didn’t even see it. You spoke not one word about her being devalued, isolated from society, made into a full-time servant and nanny for her family, her deprivation of a quality education, etc. Did none of that concern you? Or was it just not important enough to you to comment on? Other than to say her emotional and psychological abuse doesn’t warrant the concern of physical or sexual abuse perpetrated against women so everyone really shouldn’t be up in arms about it.
Daniel,
Please do take her article home and distribute it to your family, to your friends, to everyone that follows your unchristian life style. I know God works miracle and somewhere there is a young girl that needs to hear about Libby’s escape so she too can have hope for a better tomorrow. Christ died for the spiritual freedom of all men and women, yet you would put your daughters and wives back into bondage. Paul says it’s better if women don’t marry to focus on glorifying God but you give them no other options and tell them they serve no other purpose. Scripture says to love your wife as yourself, as Jesus loves the church for which He died on the cross to cleanse all sins from their spirit and the eyes of God, yet you value nothing but their home-making skill and womb as if you, discarding their value as cherished daughters of the most high. Then for both your wives and your daughters you disregard their spiritual gifts, the leading of the holy spirit of their eyes, and their righteousness as new creatures in Christ and you emphasize the lie of their sinful ways, sinful natures, nullifying any meaning of Jesus’ death on the cross. And you call yourself as Christian? Is there another book I’m missing? is there a Bible Part 2 that only religious fanatics are allowed to purchase? I’m a daughter of Christ and God loves me beyond all understanding and values me beyond all measure. I was set free from sin by Jesus’ death on the cross and because of His resurrection I have the promise of every-lasting life. I died to the law when I was born again and I am guided by the Holy Spirit. If your wife and daughters don’t believe that, don’t understand that, you are not Christians. You’re just seriously confused.
[…] Christian Patriarchy Posted on September 5, 2011 by Libby AnneOn Saturday I had a post published on Butterflies and Wheels, so I thought I’d share it here as well. My goal was to explain some of this to people one the […]
I was homeschooled. Our church was leaning toward Christian Patriarchy, and there were several families who raised there children in the way Libby Anne describes. I actually remember Doug Phillip’s father, Howard Phillips coming to speak at our church several times. I think he was running for president at that point. My parents were a little more moderate than some of there peers — I was actually allowed to go to public high school. I give them a lot of credit because they received a lot of criticism for that decision.
Being homeschooled in that type of environment really sucks… for everyone really. For the the kids because they never learn to jockey for social status and don’t generally know how to handle confrontation, and for parents, because they wind up disillusioned and depressed when their kids wind up pregnant, alcoholics, resentful, and just generally screwed up.
Want a sure fire way to get your kids to resent you and hate Christianity, raise them in a homeschooled Christian patriarchy. It’s funny for me to watch now as these pompous, arrogant homeschooling parents have there adult children turn on them, and to just watch as there worldview crumbles.
Just seems like an awful lot of work and for what? I know first hand what the end result will be.
Ambrose Little……I think that your comment would not have been well received no matter how you said it, considering that you are a man and it seems to me like that automatically makes you unqualified in some people’s minds to speak on these issues. You are right to defend your homeschooling family, esp. in light of such legal attacks as you mentioned. And I am happy to see a husband who loves and admires his wife and admits that some paths are indeed more noble than others, no matter how unpopular that may be in a society that says there are no absolutes.
I was raised with my parents in a totally secular home until they divorced when I was 11. My Mom is an atheist and my dad is agnostic. I am an only child as well. My mom raised me to believe that women and men are the same and that I can do everything better than they can. She went to college, and worked very hard with her Masters degree. I was left at home alone a lot. I grew up wanting to know God and longing for truth. The grass isnt always greener on the other side! I think feminism ruined my parents marriage and hurt me growing up. I always wished my Mom could stay home with me like my friends mom did when I was little.
I am now married and we are expected our second child this nov, they are both girls and will be 20 months apart. We do plan on homeschooling, and we are Christians. I will expose them to idas contrary to our own only because I think its important for them to be prepared to face those challenges.
Ultimately, many people grow up and disagree with how they were raised and do things another way with their own family. To me, it seems like Libby Ann’s parents simply did what they felt was best. I really wish that Christians, esp. Christian women who chose to live as her Mother did, were not treated like brainwashed fools who need to be saved or educated by secular feminist women. Feminist women will yell and scream at the even the slightest implication that they are unable to ‘”think for themselves” (as we see in this comment section) but are more than willing to level that accusation at women who disagree with them.
I didn’t get too far in these comments, but Ambrose Little, your first comment was on the mark. Thank you for standing up for people of faith and not treating them as helpless lambs to the slaughter, but as intelligent beings who make choices according to our interpretation of God’s will. Unbelievers misunderstand the reasons behind obedience to Christ. I think the author was very intelligent and well-reasoned, but lacks the Holy Spirit. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” (Pro. 9:10) She has presumptuously portrayed all evangelical Christians in general as radicals, which fits with her feminist outlook, but that is not a fair assessment of our faith or of God’s grace. For the record, I am not a part of any kind of “movement” concerning family planning, but my husband and I do raise our children to love the Lord. God bless you all!
Ambrose is a kook. Everyone point and laugh. HAAAAA!
Because of the way boys are taught to act in this world-bc of men like Ambrose (he thinks IT makes him brilliant, lol) I will only ever have daughters. Christian boys really are embarrassing and they don’t even know everyone laughs at them. Haha.Anyway, about the important stuff: There are 50 mil women missing from the planet. Just bc a female “belongs” to you doesn’t mean you can help her individually. You can’t. To help one woman, you just have to stand up for women’s lib. Your daughter is not more specialler than other women, dudes who wake up to just how screwed women are. You can’t help her now. It’s too late. You built this. Now all you can do is join the right side. Or don’t and the movement will go on winning without you. People know about the emotional incest bwtn Christian moms and their icky little sons who think they’re entitled to a broodmare and sprogs. And people know that Christian men rape and mentally mess up their daughters at a higher rate than the general population. They are using misogyny in a desperate attempt to silence feminists and ex-quiverfull women so no one finds out about the sick deeds that the church RUNS ON. Fact.This has helped me make up my mind: I will only ever sway for female babies. I will never raise a male, whatever that takes. If two successive generations choose to have no children or only girls, the WAR ON WOMEN WILL BE OVER IN 20 yrs, maybe less. Woohoo! XD (Look up ova fusion and female sperm, quiverfull boys. Try not to have a stroke.)
May I suggest readers look at the essay I wrote on Tenets 22 & 23 of Vision Forums “Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy”. The essay is long (16 pages) and should be downloaded and then read.
http://dividingtheword.wordpress.com/essay-on-tenets-22-23/
I know I’m a little late on reading this article, I just found it but um WOW?
I’m not really sure where you have any reason to complain? I was raised COMPLETELY opposite of you. I was raised by the world. By a single full time working mother, obsessed with sex and men. Who put me and my brothers aside so she could “do her thang” My father wasn’t even in the picture. He was an alcoholic drug addict. By 16 all I ever wanted was attention from guys, that’s all I cared about. I was raped, harassed, abused, and went through failed relationship after relationship thinking my life was over because no one would ever love me. Geeze poor poor you! You seemed to have had a wonderful child hood brimming with happiness and love and respect! Maybe if you had been brought up like I did, by the world, you would see this wonderful opportunity of knowing and loving the one true God and the Bible as an amazing opportunity! How wonderful for you! What could you possible complain about? Now at 28years old married with 4 children of my own, sadly unable to have any more than that because of damage to my “insides.” I could only DREAM of giving my children that life of ease, of knowing your purpose and calling, of knowing the LOVE that is Jesus Christ, having 2 parents that LOVE them and want the best for them! Shame on you for trying to take the rights of those who WANT a better life for their children and themselves than what the world has to offer, just because you THINK you know better? You want the world? How is it working out for you? In this twisted world where God doesn’t exist, where the tyrannical government continues to break us and destroy this once free nation. Shame shame. I’ll be praying for you. This is just sad.
I wish I had been raised in the “awful” manner in which you had. I was an only child to an alcoholic and a depressed, enabler. I went through the public school system and received what could only be termed an inferior education at best. I won’t go into what my life was like as a young adult, bed hopping, drinking etc. I was so lost and so dysfunctional.
You come across as an ungrateful, arrogant, self absorbed twit. You are in your 20s and now you think you know everything. You should be ashamed to come forward publicly against your parents like this. They did what they felt was right and even if you don’t agree with them they had the right to raise you in this manner. They loved you and gave you a happy childhood. Doing chores, and helping run the house prepared you for life outside of your family. It gave you the life skills necessary for the real world.
So what you didn’t get to experience sex, dating, drugs etc. You are better off!
Also many of us evangelical Christians do not adhere to the quiverfull or to this Patriarchy you speak of. We certainly do not. Yes we homeschool but my daughter is not sheltered from the world and neither are the other homeschoolers we associate with.
You need to get over yourself and thank your parents for the good job they did and the sacrifices they made.
[…] to treat his erection problems. But the attitudes and beliefs about women that encourage men to see daughters as apprentice wives and their sexuality as his make it very easy justify all manner of oppression and abuse just as my step-father justified his […]
[…] Libby Anne is a former daughter of Christian patriarchy who has emerged as a prolific writer and critic of the movement. From the summary of her upbringing: […]
I see a few people who have grown up raised by very narcissistic, alcoholic and abusive parents commenting here and shaming the author for criticizing her upbringing because they suffered “true” abuse unlike her. and Ambrose brought up the most extreme injustices against women. But I contend that these people are missing something here. Abuse doesn’t have to be outright name calling or physical/neglectful in nature. It can be very covert emotional abuse which is just as insidious. My father used to systematically treat me like I was just I unable to think rationally or correctly if I didn’t agree with his belief system, and he wasn’t in the patriarchy movement but was evangelical. my motheabsent self absorbed and an sent but then became sick and died early, so I formative teen years with an invalidating father. This all set me up to not trust my own judgment and ended up setting me up for an abusive marriage to a man who did the same things in the name of God. By the time I left him, I was a shell of a person. There are a couple of books by Lundy Bancroft and one called The Verbally Abusive Marriage that discuss the issue more in depth. Also, google Emotional Blackmail. This kind of thing has happened to me and it is horribly abusive.
people need to understand that we need to stop even the least obvious forms of abuse as it then leads women to suffer under the more violent forms as Ambrose suggested. If a woman can’t trust her own judgment,if she is surrounded by only those who believe the “man knows best” attitude, she will think that SHE is the problem, not the others or even the belief system. She will then suffer the injustices done to her because she is only a woman and doesn’t know better. She will also endure damage to her self respect because she feels it is her duty to do so.
I am finally coming out of the fog of this mindset. It has paralyzed me in so many aspects of my life because I am trying to learn how to hear from The Lord for myself. I am also now aware that the Gospel of Christ is Grace, and I have Steve McVey to thank for truly shining a light on what Christ’s death and resurrection meant for us. We CANNOT be good enough to get into heaven on our own, which is why He died in the first place. No more Do’s and Don’ts, just loving God because I want to, not because I am afraid to not do so. It is true freedom.
Thanks for the article. I don’t believe your story. Rather, I don’t believe your story is entirely honest. Maybe it is what happened in your life. Maybe it’s how you view it now? For as much as you seem to recount some good times, there clearly is some bitterness you’re working through. A few questions. What is normal? With information at our fingertips, isn’t college a waste for the vast majority of those saddled with student debt? But hasn’t attending college and amassing debt become common? When the sheet is being drawn over our faces for the last time, will those we shared our lives with remember us because we had a brilliant career or because we positively impacted their lives with the gifts and talents we served and touched others with? When a boy gets it on with a girl for the first time, who is he focused on pleasing? When a man gets it on with a woman for the first time, who is he focused on pleasing? Don’t get me wrong. There are some good guys our there, but is that by accident? Is it better to raise girls with an open sexual life where she will likely not orgasm on a regular basis, if at all, until she is well into multiple relationships? Should women be satisfied with being pursued, wanted and desired only? Is being pawed and slobbered over…… repeating the worn out lie “I love you” and in two minutes rolling off; does this have to be the acceptable dating ritual climax? Well isn’t it? Hasn’t our society from kindegarten to graduate school essentially taught that in order for a woman to be equal and free, she must give herself sexually, expecting nothing of significance in return? Isn’t this normal? Does it matter that young men are raised in a society which no longer requires honor of them? Does it matter that when prostitution is legalized the number of rapes diminish? I will take the leap and say that if we were honest about all this, when prostitution is not available the next best thing in the minds of most men is “dating”. Isn’t it….. really?
Omg ppl. Libby, good for you for speaking up. My parents were crazy religious with the exception of letting me attend public school, thank god! But in every other way sound the same and they were also abusive in the “right” way according to the idiots commenting here. This type of control breeds a great environment for rape because kids have no access to anyone that will help them. I can’t say that that type of abuse wAs any more or less damaging than what u lived through Libby. As someone whose experienced both they were both equally bad and in fact made the sexual abuse worse because of the lack of help and being told how much less important you are for being female. That goes hand in hand with any abuse.
Also Mike you’re being ridiculous. This isn’t a choice between purity or perversion as u seem to think. There is a middle ground for respectful sexual relationships for girls out there. There was plenty of rape and being made to feel like a sexual object in my lovely Christian home. And although I wasn’t allowed to be sexual as long as the “right” male wanted to rape me that was fine because he was the male in control of me and my femininity.
[…] homeschooling circles. It’s everywhere. Libby Anne at Love, Joy, Feminism writes about it frequently. It’s considered good practice, and often the reason that parents keep kids home. My parents […]
Thank you for this. I was the oldest son of 7 children in a very similar household. It all seems fine when your a kid because you don’t know anything else. Once you’re 18 the pressure becomes intense if youre a guy. I can’t imagine the psychological back lash for females.
Thanks for the great article, Libby Anne, and website. I have been researching this whole patriarchy movement and its damage, including at my church (an independent Christian church in Silicon Valley, California). I was recently kicked out and ordered to be shunned after discovering a fellow member was a convicted member on Megan’s List of sex offenders. The pastors/elders have put him in positions of trust and parents and other adults have no idea he’s a sex offender. The pastors/elders have defended him, defended him touching children, and even invited him to attend our church’s basketball camp for children and to work as a volunteer! The senior pastor said the sex offender was coming off Megan’s List. His supervising law enforcement agency – The Sheriff’s – called that “a total lie”. They contacted the California Attorney General’s Office, in charge of our state’s Megan’s List, who also called it “a total lie”. My pastors/elders banned me from church property, services, having contact with members because I was supposedly “bringing an accusation against an elder without cause” because the Attorney General and the Sheriff’s called the pastors/elders statements “total lies”. The pastors/elders demanded that I have no more contact with this sex offender’s supervising law enforcement agency or the Attorney General, not disclose the name of the church, not disclose the names of the pastors/elders, and that I was “to submit to their authority as [my] elders.” They also told me that a mother at church had no authority over her children, that if her husband said the sex offender could touch his children, then that was fine and she was “to obey” and “to submit” to her husband! OK, we’re in California and it’s a criminal act, including for a mother, to not protect her children. She can be arrested and prosecuted for misdemeanor or felony child abuse/endangerment/neglect and get up to 1-year in jail or 6-years in state prison and have CPS take away her children and put them in foster care.
Patriarchy is a lunacy!
Good grief, what a mess.
Ive been thinking about homeschooling and really appreciate your perspective. I’m now worried about joining a co-op with parents that follow this cultish belief.
But as a Christian I wanted to comment on your second to last paragraph about evangelical women believing essentially the same principles and how the quiverfull movement “simply takes these beliefs to their natural, and radical conclusion”. At first glance I’d agree they have the same principles, but after thinking about it I really disagree that quiverful is the conclusion of those principles (submission, godly education, etc). There’s a whole lot more Bible than the women in this movement seem to know about. Maybe they read the rest of it, but they seem to have put their “gender role identity” glasses on and just interpret anything else through that lense. I think one of these quiverfull fathers might pass out if their wife “considered a field and bought it” (as the proverbs 31 woman is said to have done).
It seems as if the quiverfull movement for women really isn’t much about their relationship with God, personal prayer, or even Christ dying on the cross, but a religion developed around some verses on a woman’s role in marriage, which leads very unfortunately to the incorrect belief that the “authority” of a husband somehow makes him a god -infallible and not someone to ever question or rebuke.
As an “evangelical” Christian woman, I went to work because there are other Bible verses about women working that quiverfull ignores. I have the freedom to send my kids to public school because “train up the child in the way he should go” does NOT say “your child must be schooled at home”. In fact there are several verses about a believer’s freedom to choose on disputable matters. I guess what I’m trying to say is my choices as a wife and mother can and should be directed by God and his word, but they are SO secondary to who I am as a Christian.
It’s like this group took the portions of the Bible that are essentially “helpful advice for marriage and parenting,” and blew them up into “this is WHO you are.” (Maybe as a backlash against feminism in part?) It’s certainly ridiculous that they expect God to “win” by numbers (I don’t know what God they are reading about – the one that sent 10,000 soldiers home in Judges so Gideon would only have an army of 300? Or the God that time after time let women wait with barren wombs until one special child was ready to be born?
Anyway, sorry if that was all over the place. I really just wanted to clarify I do not believe evangelicals are just “wishy washy” Christians that would be quiverfull if they were more serious. There is a real Christian argument against the way they do things.
Also, I taught high school for 8 years so I’d like to think that even if my three daughters are homeschooled I’m comfortable with them having secular friends and exploring and challenging the world around them. I actually trust that God is better able to reach their hearts in this way than I am by smothering them with rules about being someone’s wife or parent when they are 10.
Libby,
Your article was great. I only have one issue with your article, your negative attitude with homeschooling. Sadly, yes, your parents were the sheltering (us vs. them) type of homeschoolers, and that really is no good, as there is no freedom to really learn who you are and why your are here. However, as a Libertarian, I do believe people have the right to homeschool. I also believe that not all homeschoolers, and certainly not all homeschoolers of faith, are as exclusionary as the Quiverfull and CP folks are. I have 3 kids. All have been homeschooled. We, however, are unschoolers. We are the kind of homeschoolers that annoy a lot of homeschoolers of any persuasion, religious or political. I, for one, am glad that I have the freedom to choose this way to bring up my kids. My eldest chose to go to public high school. He wanted to try it out, and though much of it was a bunch of bullshit, he was able to find the good and stayed all 4 years and graduated. My middle kid was kind of in and out of school and finally decided he was done with all the social crap and left in the middle of 9th grade to finish up at home. My last kid isn’t interested in school at all. Her friends are all desperate to be dating, at 14, (which she thinks is nuts) and she’d rather sew her next cosplay costume for the DragonCon fan convention in Atlanta. Maybe it’s the parents who give their kids the freedom to find out who they are, who are the best homeschooling parents. After all, homeschooling, in and of itself, is not the enemy to understanding the world. It’s the parents and societal structures…even schools themselves (surprisingly)…who stand in the way of young people learning who they really are and why they are here.
Rachel
[…] more business opportunities there, than these Christian girls have right here in the US. Check out this excellent explanation from Libby Anne, who grew up in a very similar family and is still, years later, trying to escape from that deeply […]
[…] this breeds daughters who know nothing but subjugation to male […]
[…] Libby Anne, a former Quiverfuller herself who now writes at Patheos’ Love, Joy, Feminism notes that: “I learned that […]