19...isn't enough?

Really?  The Duggars are still leaving the size of their family "up to God," according to their interview in People magazine.  What possible justification could they have for this after 19 children, 2 cases of preeclampsia, 4 cesarean sections, a micropreemie whose future is still uncertain, and gallstones?  Oh, that they put their faith in God, of course!

In my previous post, I mentioned (okay, raved about) No Longer Qivering, a blog about the Quiverfull movement and patriarchy.  After reading so much insider information about the lifestyle and the destruction it causes, I can no longer just shrug and smile sadly about Michelle and Jim Bob's decisions regarding birth control.  It's not cute, or sweet or even adorably naive.  It's sad.  It's crazy.  It just goes to show how brainwashed they are by their extreme religion and the recommendations of some of the authors and pastors within it.

I once just figured that they were truly a "what you see is what you get" kind of family, but that was just wishful thinking on my part.  I love babies and for much of my life, all I could think about was having babies and becoming a mother.  I never imagined that my first baby would be born when I was 28.  My goddess, my own mother had 5 children by that age!  I'm 30 now, trying for #2, when my mom had #6 and was done adding to her family.  So I compulsively watched shows like A Baby Story, Maternity Ward, House of Babies, and later Kids by the Dozen and the Duggar family specials.  I was obsessed with the latter two.  Even though my conscious self never wanted more than 4 children, I watched these shows in envy.  I had wanted to have my first baby by 25, and some of these people had 4 by then.  They ran their homes like clockwork, had as many babies as they wanted, and seemed to have the family closeness that I had as a child and want for my own family.  It was more than addictive.  It was seductive.  The religion I rejected as a small child contained the possibility of so much that I wanted...and yet it was never enough for more than just a daydream.

I've said before that I would love the certainty of Christianity.  Knowing that the world is so black and white must be so reassuring.  And though I was raised Catholic (and not even strictly Catholic) rather than in a more conservative sect of Christianity, I knew even at 8 years old that the Christian religion demanded too much.  I saw it, even then, as unfair and too restrictive.  As soon as I found out what sex was I knew I wasn't waiting for marriage.  I had no intention of ever going to church again the moment I was no longer being forced to.  I thought the mythology was boring and that many of the lessons were ridiculous.  I hated the authoritative nature of it, and I scoffed at the idea of someone making a sacrifice for such ideology.  I thought you would have to be stupid to give up family life for service as a priest or a nun, and that only those who were gluttons for punishment would bother to "save themselves for marriage" or fast for Lent.  Why bother?  There was so much freedom to be had outside of religion, so much unrestricted fun to be had guilt-free.  So I willfully left, dragging my family with me, by the age of 15.  Mom just couldn't take the fighting about it anymore, since dad would ground me for a week for misbehaving in church.  I was supposed to "prove myself" the next Sunday by being a proper young lady during services.  Instead I was perpetually grounded.  Dad, being a big kid himself, hated grounding me that much, and mom started to feel like it wasn't worth the effort to drag all 6 kids (my minions who I'd turned against church, as well) through a boring hour of church where we all did our best to amuse ourselves to our parents' embarrassment.  It was dumb.  Mom was a real martyr for carrying it on as long as she did.

So why did I even think for two seconds that an even stricter version of this religion had any appeal?  That's crazy!  Well, it helped that I wasn't living it, so all I saw was the pretty package presented on TV of a large, close, happy family.  I had a boyfriend (now my husband) who wanted only two children and wouldn't let me start our family until we were done with college (which was taking forever) and married.  Through all of the ridiculousness, all I saw was a woman who was allowed to have as many children as she wanted, when she wanted them.  Ultimately, I think that's where my obsession stemmed from.

I have to wonder if, after I have my second child, would I even want any more children if my husband gave in and let me have as many babies as I want?  I don't know.  I'll probably never know, since he's pretty staunch about only wanting two.  I wish I could know in my heart if I'm just fighting him and clinging to my dream of having (what I think of as a) medium-sized family, or if I really truly won't feel complete until I have birthed a fourth child.

Either way, I'm happy that I'll never know the back-to-back pregnancies, multiple cesarean sections, complete exhaustion of keeping up with so many children, and submission to patriarchy that these women in the Quiverfull movement are subjected to.  The multitude of miscarriages that they often face toward the end of their childbearing years is heartbreaking, and the lack of support and empathy is horrific.

No, I can't be angry at the Duggars for their conviction of faith.  They are sheep.  They have been conditioned to blindly follow, without thought, where their religion leads.  Sheep are dumb creatures.  They'll walk off a cliff if that's where they're led.  And it's now clear to me that one doesn't just decide to become a sheep.  It's a slow process of taking away independent thought and chipping away at self-identity.  I can't be angry at them when they're doing only what they've been told is right and good.

Nope, it's the fundamentalist Christian religious movements that are so destructive.  It makes promises it can't deliver, sets impossible goals and ideals, demands more than one can give, and still makes good people determined to stick with it to their deaths.  Sad.

My new addiction

Anyone who really knows me understands my fascination (cough...obsession!) with the Duggar family and the Quiverfull movement that is the underlying cause for their supersized family.  Well, I finally found something better than 18 Kids and Counting which satisfies my need to know more about the movement and the ultra-religiousity that motivates people like the Duggars to seemingly withdraw from society and normalcy to pursue a creepy "closeness with God."

The blog is called No Longer Qivering.  It's misspelled on purpose because there is no "you" in the Quiverfull Movement...at least not for the women who belong to it.  It's the blog of a woman and a few other contributors who left the movement.  It's their stories about how they fell into such an extreme lifestyle and religion, the horrors of living such a life (depression, overwhelming expectations, constant pregnancies and pressure,) the first clues that lead them to realize that this life was killing them, and then their final escape back to "the real world."

I just can't get enough of it.  I check it multiple times a day for updates and new stories.  There is so much about that life that I never thought about, so many compelling little elements and horrifying details that are (of course) not part of the Duggar family's public face.  It makes me really wonder what's going on once the cameras are turned off.

Patriarchy was the biggest surprise to me.  I mean, I understood that women were second class citizens in most of Christianity, and certainly within the Quiverfull movement, but I never understood that QF and patrirchy pretty much went hand in hand, one seldom existing without the other.  It amazes me that in this day and age there are women in the US who blatantly reject feminism and women's rights.  They think that it's wrong for a man to ever be in a subordinate position under a woman.  Therefore, women should avoid any profession outside the home, should always be submissive to men, and should especially never challenge the authority of their fathers or husbands.  Just like in the old days, a girl is the property of her father until she is married, and then she passes to the authority of her husband.  Sometimes, a courtship is arranged between parents who want to join their families, and as long as the boy is agreeable to the match, the two are married.  There is the slightest veneer of choice on the girl's part in all this, but by the time in her life that courtship comes around, she is so conditioned to submit to her father that she'll likely agree to the match her father is so clearly approving of, even if she doesn't care for or she's not particularly attracted to the boy.  Sad, huh?

There's so much more!  I could literally read this site for ours every day and not get through all there is in a week.  I just can't pimp this blog enough.  Oh! And Vyckie, the main contributor, is writing a book all about her life and her story.  So, for the time being you can read much of Vyckie's Story on her blog for free.  But once her book deal goes through, she's going to take it all down.  Take my advice: visit this site!

It's a little late but...

I had to laugh at the announcement of the gender of the Duggar's first grandchild last week. So it's a girl. Haha, the product of frequent, non-orgasmic intercourse. What else could I expect from Christian newlyweds who recommend reading books like Intended for Pleasure by Ed Wheat. Here is my favorite review of this book from amazon.com:

17 of 22 people found the following review helpful: Great book, if you're a mysogynist., January 25, 2009 By C. Teel (Nashville, TN) - See all my reviews I find myself applauding the Wheats' heartfelt attempt at creating a book that breaches the subject of sex and sexuality within the conservative, mainline, Christian world. However, their work falls too far short of being informative, balanced, contemporary, and open to deserve any real recognition. First, their understanding of sexuality is about 25 years past date. They need to update their research. They have nothing in the book about oral sex, mutual masturbation, sex/orgasmic response differences among women, and premature ejaculation. Second, they objectify women to the point of sheer domination. The chapter entitled, "The Perfect Wife" elaborates on why women ought to just "lay back and enjoy it." Frankly, I found it sick and disgusting. The authors claim to be a coequal team, but I don't see it in the writing, I don't see it in the information, and I definitely don't see it in their description of sex as a mutually beneficial act. Their response, as a said above, is basically one that encourages men to dominate their wife by demanding sex whenever they please. For example, at one point in the "Perfect Wife" chapter they say: "If you think your husband seems to require a lot more sex than you do, ponder this illustration: If you were in the desert and you were thirsty, you'd think about a glass of water, wouldn't you? But if you're standing by the refrigerator, and there's an opportunity to push the button and get it any time you want to, the need for a drink is not nearly so urgent. Maybe the reason your husband seems never to think of anything besides sex is that he's "in the desert" and "thirsty" "Sometimes you will be very tired and feeling as sexy as an old sock, but your husband will approach you with desire. Secular therapists say a wife should be able to respond, "Sorry, but I'm just not up to it tonight." My own opinion as a Christian wife is that we can depend on the Lord to give us the strength and ability to be as warm and responsive as our husband desires, no matter how tired we are... ..."Most important, a wise wife will not argue. She will keep her husband peaceful and satisfied and happy by gracefully conceding to his wishes, or deferring to his opinions...A husband usually welcomes the thoughtful opinions of his wife..."(157-159, Third Ed.) This excerpt pretty much sums up why I HATE this book. It was a gift from a friend before my wife and I got married, and I'm surprised that I haven't burned it in effigy. Women are NOT objects who deserve their own voice, and this book promotes a Christianity that oppresses that voice. So, my conscious would not be clear if I did not give a resoundingly negative review for this book on that merit alone. If you want my advice, go read "The Joy of Sex." It has all the medical and psychological facts, and presents an understanding of sexuality that is mutual, equal, and loving. Again, I have to laugh. Christianity has spent its entire history denouncing sex for pleasure. Who thought it was a good idea for Christians to put out their own Scripture-based book on how to enjoy sex biblically? Seriously people, you need to realize that your religion does not condone fun in the bedroom and move on. I think in some ways I'm jealous. I wish I could be so satisfied with the Christian worldview. Everything is black and white, right or wrong. Just follow the rules, and everything turns out the way it's supposed to. Right? I mean, there are still the Christian families who end up with gay kids, the ones whose families break up because one of them isn't happy or leaves the religion, and the ones who have a crisis of faith when something terrible happens that makes them realize that their Christian god and Jesus aren't going to fix it, but if those things don't happen they can hold fast to their religion and declare themselves right about the world. It's seductive, I admit. I would love to feel like I understood how it all worked and that the entire world could be perfect if everyone simply chose my way. I want the security of it, the community of it and the certainty of it. It's just not for the educated. That's one of the reasons I'm not there. The thinking individual is discouraged and pushed aside, their opinion discarded. "They've overthought God. They're thinking themselves out of salvation." Yes, I've actually heard someone say this. I think it was Kirk Cameron, actually. Anyway, I'll take my life of questions instead of answers, lecturers instead of preachers and Halloween instead of Christmas and Easter. It's not as safe and secure, but it's a lot more fun!

My Psychic Son

Does it mean anything when your almost-two-year-old puts his finger on your third eye, looks at you meaningfully and says "Eye," as if telling you what to do? That's what happened to me this morning. It gave me chills. Does this mean he knows what I'm capable of and that I'm kind of being lazy with my craft, or that he knows he has this ability too? Or is this just a case of a toddler pointing to the wrong body part while listing off a word he knows? I would be inclined to believe the latter, except that he really knows what eyes are and I've never seen him point to the wrong thing when he says "Eye."

I've never felt the need to overtly address my religion in my parenting. I was raised Catholic and my parents gave me no choices in the matter. My opinions and feelings were never taken into consideration, and I was resentful. I hated it, and I swore my children would be raised differently. My kids will be introduced to all religions and their opinions and choices regarding spirituality will be respected. Of course, my husband's atheism and my paganism will not be hidden, but there will be no forcing of our beliefs on them. They can see my rituals and participate in my holidays, observe my spellcraft and traditions, all without being forced to participate or believe. I would love my children to follow me on my spiritual path, of course, and they will not be told that they can't participate if they choose to, but I'm not going to make the mistakes my parents did.

Having said that, what does today's experience mean? Should I show him my altar, my cards and my stones? Should I talk to him about the sacred moon and sun, and tell him his first myths and legends? I thought this was something I could easily put off for another year or more, but maybe not. Guess I'm reading D'Aulaires Greek Myths tonight.

Why do we compare ourselves?

I don't think we can help it.  Moms compare themselves and their parenting techniques all the time.  Sometimes I think we even do it without realizing it.  I know I hold my head high when I announce that I'm still breastfeeding my son even though he's nearly two, but I just kind of nod and say that I wish I could afford that or had known back then when another mom says her kid never plays with plastic toys or never used a baby bottle with BPA in it.  

So, since I'm going to be trying for another baby soon, I've been visiting some forums written by lactating women who are also trying to conceive.  The post that really made me feel selfish was from a woman who still hasn't gotten a regular period back even though her daughter is 2 1/2.  So, to improve her chances of getting pregnant, she's cutting her daughter back on nursing.  Instead of letting her nurse every two hours around the clock, she's night weaning her so that her last nurse is when she falls asleep and then she can nurse again after the sun comes up.  Around the clock?  No, I night-weaned my son at about a year old.   I just couldn't take 8 nursings a night.  I was exhausted.  So, to think someone else just put up with this for about two and a half years makes me feel a bit self-centered.  I love my baby, but I just had to sleep.  It was affecting everything I did.

And that's what I know other moms nod their heads and judge you on.  It's those little excuses.  It was just too hard.  I didn't have time.  I needed more "me" time.  I love my baby but I just couldn't handle it anymore.  He/she wasn't responsive to it.  I hate that we're so judgmental and I really hate that I'm a part of that judgmental culture within mommydom.  I want to just hug and understand why another mom chose to go a different way than I did, but I just can't help thinking about the sacrifices I made for my baby and how I know that it's worth it to give up x, y, and z to make sure my baby is happier, healthier, more well-adjusted, more attached to his parents, etc.  I think we as mothers want affirmation for our sacrifices.  We want to know that it's worth it, even though there are no guarantees.  And since we can't possibly know for sure that little Johnny won't have allergies because he was breastfed until two, or that Emily will be more independent because she coslept with her parents and left the family bed when she felt ready, we want other moms to sacrifice with us, or at least acknowledge that what we've done is worth trying.  A dismissive shrug and an excuse makes us feel like we've been judged silly or masochistic for putting forth any effort.  

What's worse is that, even with everything we try to do to make our kids' childhoods the best we can, we still beat ourselves up for everything we can't seem to do or get right.  I know I feel bad whenever someone tells me that their kid uses sign language, which I desperately tried to get my son to pick up.  My infant son actually rolled his eyes at me once when I signed at him and tried to get his hands to make the same motion.  I think I remember crying that day.  It was awful.  I didn't officially give up, but I just signed less and less until I finally stopped doing it at all.  I tried, I really did...but I know that if I had succeeded I wouldn't have understood when another mom told me she just couldn't get her kid to respond to it.  Why do we as moms do this to each other?  We know how hard it is, and we know how badly we want to be perfect and do what's best for our kids, and yet we beat up on each other and then ourselves afterwards.  It's almost like we see what other moms are doing wrong, and we know we're better that that, but then when we see another mother who is doing something better than we have, we just can't bring ourselves to look at the big picture and take into account those things that she has let slide or doesn't consider important.  We just wonder why we can't add that one thing to our parenting repertoire, even though our plates are full.

For anyone who watches 18 Kids and Counting (formerly 17 Kids and Counting) on TLC and Discovery Health Channel, the Duggar mom brings about these feelings in spades.  In fact, I'd go as far as to say it's probably damaging for moms to watch this show (but I'm addicted, so I'll continue anyway.)  She never raises her voice or loses her temper, and she is definitely of the opinion that there is no such thing as too many kids.  The Duggars belong to the Quiverful movement, which is a Christian movement that believes that God should control the size of your family.  On the Montel Williams Show, she actually said, "I think saying there are too many children is like saying there are too many flowers."  All her children are homeschooled, given violin and piano lessons from the time they can speak, and are raised without TV or video games.  Most importantly, she never seems to let the pressure of parenting get to her.  All on its own, she looks like supermom and makes the rest of feel miserably inferior and like pathetic examples of motherhood in comparison.  I would love to add these elements to my own parenting methods.  But I would never want to segregate my children from society with a super fundamentalist Christian homeschool curriculum.  Her children are never allowed to watch TV or movies unless they are specifically approved by fundy mommy and daddy.  The only music they can listen to is gospel or other Christian music, but even Christian rock is too risque for the Duggars.  Oh, and no dancing either.  That might make the men in the room think of sex, which is a big no-no.  They rarely venture out into the real world, and when they do, they do it in packs to help keep each other thinking of Godly ways.  They actually have a code word ("nike") to yell out to the boys if a nearby woman is showing too much skin (as in no sleeves or a skirt above the knees.)  When they hear "nike," all the Duggar boys look at the ground, averting their eyes until they hear the "all clear."  Abstinence only education is just the beginning here.  No, they are expected to save their first kiss for their wedding day.  They don't even date.  A sort of weird, Christian arranged-marriage system is in place.  They call it courtship, but becoming engaged to someone before you even hug or hold hands sounds like an arranged marriage to me.  The oldest Duggar boy just got married on the show, and it was the lamest wedding I think I've ever hear of.  No music, no dancing, no booze.  You have to have at least one of those.  I mean, come on!  And, to top it all off, Michelle Duggar, the great matriarch, doesn't even really raise her kids anymore.  Oh, she raised the first six or so.  But now she assigns the new baby to one of his or her older siblings after he or she is weaned and then the sibling takes over raising them, for the most part.  The older kids do most of the house cleaning, teach the younger kids a lot of their lessons, feed them, clean them and just generally keep them out of their parents' hair.  Seriously, it's like Michelle gave birth to a group of nannies first, and then kids second.

Anyway, taking everything into account and looking at the big picture, I think I'm a better mom than Michelle Duggar.  My kids will enter the real world with open eyes.  If my kid was gay, I think he/she would know that they could tell their parents and be fully accepted without reserve.  My kids are taught that the joys in life have nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky, and that sex is not a dirty or shameful thing.  I will have a personal relationship with each and every one of my kids, and we will have enough resources to send them to college or help them on their way to the best life we can.  Yeah, I yell and lose my temper.  I may not be able to homeschool as I would prefer, and my kids will probably fall into the category of children who watched a little too much TV growing up, but they will not be cloistered in Jesus-dreamland and brought up to not understand why the rest of the world can't be just like them.  I just hope I can raise them to be less judgmental than their mom.