We're Always Learning New Things with Ken Alexander: Part 2

[polecat]

It looks like Ken and Lori are using you for their entertainment. I would use caution in posting on their blog in the future.

The more Lori posts, the more I think she really HATES men and does all she can to portray them in a negative light.

Oh, absolutely. And the "all women think they're better than men, etc." post really underscored that for me. She's got some pious flea up her heinie about submitting because it's godly (or something), but she does not respect her husband or any other man from what I can see.

[formergothardite]

I was Christian for decades, it was only after I no longer was a Christian that I realized that most of what I viewed as persecution was actually just a persecution complex.

You asked how I would feel as a mother if I saw someone calling me a child abuser. I would be horrified and I would look to see why they called me that. If it was because of a blog post that presented me in a negative light and left out important details I would be blaming the blogger, not the people who called me a child abuser.

[Tesseract]

Dear CM,

Please refer to the history of the world for thousands of years of persecution, uh, everywhere. Also, please see current world news for the same. You could google North Korea and many middle eastern countries for a start.

If this country is finally figuring out that men by virtue of penis are not the only ones who can run things as a matter of course, and may not hurt other men, women or children in the name of their religion, it is about dang time.

Please take all of that into serious consideration the next time you advocate or support those who advocate keeping the wimmins at home, pinning a "difficult woman" against the wall, punishing a "rebellious wife" or striking a bitty child.

Also, please consider how unfair it is to put men, by virtue of penis, in leadership positions they do not necessarily want nor have the skills for. Consider how abusive it is to hold their salvation as hostage to their performance, and consider how that sets things up for abuse.

And finally, remember the seemingly simple, but significant tale of the Sneetches.

[Cabinetman]

Our post & the comments attached have been deleted along with my comments on the dishwasher thread.

[Want More Babies]

Want More Babies - I just wanted to let you know that I'm holding good thoughts for you. I hope the days ahead have some bright spots in store for you.

Thank you. Believe it or not, I can tell how well I am doing by my responses to certain blogs and websites. I am going on a mini vacation so that should help. :)

[usmcmom]

Thank you. Believe it or not, I can tell how well I am doing by my responses to certain blogs and websites. I am going on a mini vacation so that should help. :)

Good for you. A little vacation will be a wonderful thing. I don't know where you live but if you've had the kind of winter that we've had in my corner of the world, I can certainly see how that could have added to your struggles. Enjoy every minute of your little vacation.

[salex]

Our post & the comments attached have been deleted along with my comments on the dishwasher thread.

Interesting.

I am sincere in my hope that no one was really stalking you. (Even if I did say your mother dresses you funny... )

[formergothardite]

Our post & the comments attached have been deleted along with my comments on the dishwasher thread.

Honestly you deserve an apology post after presenting you as an abusive husband who did this all on his own instead of a husband of a wife who is mentally ill who is under the care of doctors and therapists.

[childerowland]

This is interesting. So, you are upset that in this day and age the government marginalizes you as they did women 200 years ago. You are saying that it is wrong. But, you want women, in this day and age, to behave as those very marginalized women from 2000 years ago. Wow.

Yes, indeed he does. In the comments section of a recent post at 'Always Learning' (lorialexander.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/thinking-we-are-better-than-our-husbands.html#idc-container), he writes:

Is it possible I ask you, that you do not fully comprehend what is behind feminism? That you do not understand what those who started and continued the movement believe? Is it possible, that they use you as a pawn in their game?

Is it even possible that what you consider "oppression" in many cases is not oppression?

Having this discussion the other day with a woman her response was, "well throughout history men have ruled the world" and her thinking was that men have done this out of an evil and sinful nature. Not to say there wasn't some of that, but my response was maybe men have ruled the world because they were supposed to rule the world. They were created for this very thing, scripture clearly teaches that. Scripture clearly teaches God's heirarchy of order. God>man>woman.

Folks can choose to not believe the Bible. They can choose to ignore the Bible. But you cannot read the Bible honestly and not come to that conclusion.

Ah, the good old days! When men were allowed to 'discipline' their wives without any criticism from misguided feminists. They were even permitted to beat their wives - it was legal! But I'm sure men were very benevolent about it and only beat their wives when they were being really difficult, right, Cabinetman?

Here is Cabinetman (in the comments section) on the importance of keeping women fully dependent on men (lorialexander.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/a-career-just-in-case.html):

(No Lori's post is about the damage the back up plan causes to the family and husband and wife & marriage. It is not different. What I don't think you are understanding is the back-up plan does replace the person. It replaces the time and energy you can give to them. It replaces the importance of them & it replaces the dependence you have on them.

How many wives leave their husbands each year (remember over 50% of marriages end in divorce with women initiating 70% of them) because they can. Because they have a back up plan. I won't even get in the daddy government back up plan. Do realize how much pain this causes to men, women and children. 90% of marriages can make it, but we are half that number because women have back up plans financially and because men can find sex on every street corner. Sure the 10% there would be some pain, but that is what family and church are for...that also creates dependence. I'm about as independent cuss as they come and that is hard for me but scripture teaches us dependence on one another as believers is needed, even more so for one flesh marriage.

Cabinetman on how higher education is bad for women, and (again) the importance of women being dependent on men (comments section, lorialexander.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/feminist-founder-changes-her-mind.html#idc-container):

I'm glad that you were right for your husband by his standards. However, I will stand by my post that most husbands who are interested in loving leadership and desire a submissive wife, who take biblical teaching on marriage seriously, at the best think of education as a wash, and in many, many cases a negative. Most college courses/teaching is the equivelent of a man watching porn. It ruins your brain about God/men & women/etc. 90% of the college courses out there are bad for a woman's thought life and will change the way she views her husband, marriage, God, etc.

Lastly, "independence" is definetly a turn-off for most men looking for a wife who take biblical teaching seriously. I did not say the ability to be independent or handle life if it was necessary. but independence for indendence sake. I am was not looking for a wife who could be independent of me, that sounds horrible to me. I want a wife that is very much dependent on me and I on her. You cannot be one, or a head and body, without being dependent on one another. Again you are making the assumption that I want a mindless zombie following me around, nothing could be further from the truth. But what I don't want is an "independent" woman, and thankfully my wife is not. My post to Fran was to dissect these nuances that everyone seems to be missing about what I am trying to say.

His fixation on the importance of women being dependent on and remaining less educated than men is disturbing, and doesn't do anything to make me believe that his post on his own marriage was 'mischaracterized' in any way. Cabinetman has no problem voicing his beliefs on the inferiority of women - and he most likely votes according to those beliefs - and yet we're the offensive, dangerous ones? I grant that his writing is better than Ken's, but I think Cabinetman is the more misogynistic and potentially dangerous of the two.

[dawbs]

Interesting.

I am sincere in my hope that no one was really stalking you. (Even if I did say your mother dresses you funny... )

well your mother smells of elderberries. :nenner:

[Tesseract]

Childerowland wrote:

His fixation on the importance of women being dependent on and remaining less educated than men is disturbing, and doesn't do anything to make me believe that his post on his own marriage was 'mischaracterized' in any way. Cabinetman has no problem voicing his beliefs on the inferiority of women - and he most likely votes according to those beliefs - and yet we're the offensive, dangerous ones? I grant that his writing is better than Ken's, but I think Cabinetman is the more misogynistic and potentially dangerous of the two.

Thank you for posting those quotes. I want to think the best, but my bullshit detector has been activated on and off as he has answered. I don't read LAiaM's blog, so this definitely adds context.

[OkToBeTakei]

I've said it before but it needs repeating. My 11 yr old daughter and ALL her wee pals together are less dramatic than Ken and this guy.

[Cabinetman]

Yes, I believe all those things. I said from the beginning, we have very different beliefs. My goal was not to change your belief system but communicate I was not abusing my wife. My wife shares my belief system and we are both consenting adults. I do not want to take away your opportunity live as you'd like.

You also did not highlight that I want to be dependent on my wife.

And you did not highlight that the message was for those who believe in headship and submission. I was not talking to you or anybody at Free Jinger, but a young woman that shares my beliefs that wanted a husband that shared her beliefs.

Yes, I believe in headship. Yes, I think women are needed at home if they have children. My wife and I both believe that men are supposed to lead, as do most of Lori's audience. We are not trying to convert you to our way of life or religous beliefs. We are talking to women who want to live the life and faith, emphasis on want.

To be clear I believe in equality of worth in God's eyes and hold my wife's life and happiness greater than my own. But yes, we both believe in gender roles for those that are married and for those in the church that AGREE to it. It's a choice folks. If it's not for you, it's not for you. But it's not like i was hiding what I believe.

[Pam]

Yes, indeed he does. In the comments section of a recent post at 'Always Learning' (lorialexander.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/thinking-we-are-better-than-our-husbands.html#idc-container), he writes:

I chose to read the Bible honestly, and absolutely DID come to a different conclusion, that being that God intended male and female humans to be CO-RULERS of the world, equal partners in a joint venture, not for males to rule the world INCLUDING ruling over females. Genesis 1:26-28:

"26 Then God said, 'Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'

27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, 'Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.' "

[2xx1xy1JD]

I have asked Lori to remove the stories. That is the best I can do.

As far as re-examining our relationship with the Alexanders:

I believe in a lot of what they teach.

I disagree with some of what they teach.

What we do going forward, we will do with much prayer and make sure we communicate much more effectively and not let people fill in the gaps with their imaginations.

As far as internet searches, look for Cabinetman. Read what I wrote. Read what my wife wrote but seriously is there a public document that you need to be viewing with our names and address on it. I wouldn't do that to a single person here why would you feel the need to do it to me? Is reading about our "real" life necessary. Our views are out there. I have clarified them the best I know how here. What I believe is as clear here as on any other site on the internet. If you want to attack what I believe, you don't have to have my name and address.

Some of you keep asking, why would you think we are coming looking for you? Because you did. Someone even asked if we should "out" them. Combine that with the names I've been called and the accusation made and 2+2 usually equals 4, not always but usually. And it's scary. You ask why? What if holding your beliefs Ken & Lori got to decide if you got to keep your kids or not, or whether you go to jail or not. How would you feel about them being the judge and jury on your family. It's not laughable. I told you my liberal/feminist mother works in the social services. I know the bias against christian families and to men labeled abusive and it's real. We have had friends loose their kid for year for abuse. They were great (non spanking parents), the baby had had a broken bone that happened during birth. They had to hire a CSI guy to prove it was not an injury they inflicted. A year without their child and 50k later they were proven innocent. Your hear everyday here in America now that teaching kids creationism is child abuse. Same with homeschooling. Folks, whether you know it or not folks on your end are no more tolerant than folks on my end. And they do just as much damage to folks that disagree with them. We live in a world now where winning about ideology is more important than the truth or the people involved. As a christian man in a liberal world I am guilty until proven innocent and what happens to my family in the meantime?

1. I don't blame you for asking Lori to take down those posts, which misrepresented your story.

2. I can't speak for anyone else, but I have no interest in your real life identity. The only time here that I showed an interest in real life stuff was with another blogger who used her own name, and made it quite clear that she was both a paranoid and psychotic racist and that she lived and worked in my city, about a 5 min. walk from my old home. [i never did anything.]

3. I have worked in child protection. I'm not going to claim that the system is always perfect and totally free of any bias, but you are mixing fact with paranoia. I speak out when I see fear-mongering, because it actually causes problems (like parents doing things in a blind panic, like refusing to answer a simple question from a social worker when there is nothing to hide, simply because they looked on the internet and freaked out).

4. It is perfectly legal in the United States to homeschool your child and teach creationism, as long as you follow whatever the homeschooling regulations are. The only recent case where authorities had an issue with educational neglect that we discussed was the Lev Tahor case in Quebec, and the concerns went WAY beyond just the creationist curriculum. [it's a cult, there were allegations of serious physical abuse and forced underage marriages, and the educational neglect was so severe that teens couldn't answer the most basic questions about anything.]

5. Bad forensic experts are a problem in the legal system. They are not a reason to get rid of child abuse cases. They are a reason to put experts and their evidence under tighter scrutiny, even and especially in those really horrible child abuse/child death cases. There was a rogue pathologist here who caused a ton of wrongful convictions. It wasn't Christian families who suffered - in many cases, wrongful convictions and wrongful child apprehensions affects those who are poor, some ethnic/racial minorities, those who are seen as single parents, and those who don't come across as squeaky clean due to alcohol or drug issues. See our concerns about punitive "fetal protection" laws, and malicious prosecution of a black teen who had a stillbirth.

6. I'm the one who said that Ken's advice based on their presentation of your story was potentially dangerous. Ken, in a previous post on "discipline and leadership", had suggested pinning an out-of-control wife against the wall, and Lori then offered your story as some sort of proof that this sort of approach was a good idea. In my experience, physical confrontation with someone who is genuinely "out of control" due to mood disorder, psychosis or substance abuse come quickly cause things to get out of hand, and people can get badly hurt.

[Cabinetman]

I chose to read the Bible honestly, and absolutely DID come to a different conclusion, that being that God intended male and female humans to be CO-RULERS of the world, equal partners in a joint venture, not for males to rule the world INCLUDING ruling over females. Genesis 1:26-28:

"26 Then God said, 'Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'

27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, 'Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.' "

And that is fine. It was your right to come to that conclusion. I have no problem with that. I don't think you are right, but I respect your right to come to that conclusion. Again, I was not speaking to folks that do not believe as I do, but someone who does and was looking for a husband and asking what signals she was sending more or less that could be sending off the wrong message.

This is my question then for all of you: Are we allowed to our beliefs?

[formergothardite]

CabinetMan, honest question, are you not upset that Lori misrepresented your story to the point that it made you look like an abuser instead of a husband of a mentally ill wife who was under the guidance of doctors and therapists? I would be very upset if someone did this to me.

As long as women(and men) are freely choosing submission and are happy in those marriages then I have no problem with is and I have told Ken this over and over and he kept pretending I didn't say it. But my question is, is it really a choice to submit if the woman has been told since birth that this is the only way or God will ruin her life, so she is only do it out of fear? Is it really a choice if the woman fears that her husband will verbally or physically assault her if she states her opinion or wants a different sort of marriage? Is it really a choice if a man is told that he MUST lead, even if he isn't good at it and doesn't want it? The problem is that many time both men and women are manipulated using religion to be in a type of marriage that they don't want and aren't happy in.

[Hane]

Cabinetman, how can we NOT "leave [you] and [your] family alone"? We have no idea what your names are or where you live.

Poor whiny little MRA.

[polecat]

This is my question then for all of you: Are we allowed to our beliefs?

I understand that you may be feeling attacked. But do you realize how histrionic this sounds? If you live in the U.S., you are certainly entitled to your beliefs *as long as* they do not infringe on other people's rights. iow, you are allowed to believe in a flying spaghetti monster, but you are not allowed to sacrifice children to the FSM. You are allowed to believe in wifely submission as long as you are not beating your wife into submission. You are allowed to believe that bald eagles are the personification of Satan. You are not allowed to go out and kill bald eagles in an attempt to bring Satan to heel.

And while I'm addressing that, I'd like to point out that regardless of what you believe, we are just as entitled to comment on those beliefs. So you can say that you believe that turtles are actually responsible for HIV, and I can laugh at you. The same is true for you. I can say that I believe that strawberries are causing people to become fat, and you are welcome to point your finger and laugh uproariously.

No one is interfering with your beliefs. They're commenting on them. Believe whatever the hell you want to believe, and people will say whatever the hell they want to say. If you want to stand in the gap, then you'd better get a thicker skin.

[samurai_sarah]

I have asked Lori to remove the stories. That is the best I can do.

As far as re-examining our relationship with the Alexanders:

I believe in a lot of what they teach.

I disagree with some of what they teach.

What we do going forward, we will do with much prayer and make sure we communicate much more effectively and not let people fill in the gaps with their imaginations.

As far as internet searches, look for Cabinetman. Read what I wrote. Read what my wife wrote but seriously is there a public document that you need to be viewing with our names and address on it. I wouldn't do that to a single person here why would you feel the need to do it to me? Is reading about our "real" life necessary. Our views are out there. I have clarified them the best I know how here. What I believe is as clear here as on any other site on the internet. If you want to attack what I believe, you don't have to have my name and address.

Some of you keep asking, why would you think we are coming looking for you? Because you did. Someone even asked if we should "out" them. Combine that with the names I've been called and the accusation made and 2+2 usually equals 4, not always but usually. And it's scary. You ask why? What if holding your beliefs Ken & Lori got to decide if you got to keep your kids or not, or whether you go to jail or not. How would you feel about them being the judge and jury on your family. It's not laughable. I told you my liberal/feminist mother works in the social services. I know the bias against christian families and to men labeled abusive and it's real. We have had friends loose their kid for year for abuse. They were great (non spanking parents), the baby had had a broken bone that happened during birth. They had to hire a CSI guy to prove it was not an injury they inflicted. A year without their child and 50k later they were proven innocent. Your hear everyday here in America now that teaching kids creationism is child abuse. Same with homeschooling. Folks, whether you know it or not folks on your end are no more tolerant than folks on my end. And they do just as much damage to folks that disagree with them. We live in a world now where winning about ideology is more important than the truth or the people involved. As a christian man in a liberal world I am guilty until proven innocent and what happens to my family in the meantime?

To the bolded: YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY CHRISTIAN ON FJ!

Sorry for shouting. Quite a few of FJers are Christian. Listen to them. They know their stuff.

[childerowland]

You also did not highlight that I want to be dependent on my wife.

But you wouldn't go so far as being financially dependent on your wife, would you, which is what you advocate for women. Completely financially dependent and preferably as uneducated as possible. Your idea of dependence on your wife is probably as abstract as your view of the sexes being 'equal in worth'. And yes, I am very suspicious of a man whose ideal wife is one who is dependent on him in all respects and who would therefore find it very difficult if not impossible to leave him if he treated her badly.

We are talking to women who want to live the life and faith, emphasis on want.

Actually, a lot of Lori's frequent commenters disagree with much of what you write. As far as I recall, most commenters took offence at your post on how you nobly managed to get your anarchy-against-marriage-committing wife back under control.

[Cabinetman]

CabinetMan, honest question, are you not upset that Lori misrepresented your story to the point that it made you look like an abuser instead of a husband of a mentally ill wife who was under the guidance of doctors and therapists? I would be very upset if someone did this to me.

As long as women(and men) are choosing submission and are happy in those marriages then I have no problem with is and I have told Ken this over and over and he kept pretending I didn't say it. But my question is, is it really a choice to submit if the woman has been told since birth that this is the only way or God will ruin her life, so she is only do it out of fear? Is it really a choice if the woman fears that her husband will verbally or physically assault her if she states her opinion or wants a different sort of marriage? Is it really a choice if a man is told that he MUST lead, even if he isn't good at it and doesn't want it? The problem is that many time both men and women are manipulated using religion to be in a type of marriage that they don't want and aren't happy in.

Am I upset with Lori? No. It was poorly communicated, partly my fault. We should have written something from scratch. I do not believe their intentions were as you all believe. I do not believe them evil people, obviously everyone here disagrees with me. I have things I disagree with them about but I do not believe that had bad intentions.

Since about 5% of girls are told they must submit as they grow up these days, I don't see it as a huge problem to begin with. I see the bigger problem, as examplified in my posts here that the husbands are still supposed to die for his wife but the wife's responsiblity is not taught. I was told yesterday by one of your members that God expected me to be willing to die for my wife and children, but I doubt that same lady believes she is to submit to her husband? Why is one side of the bible verse being taught but not the other?

I know there are women out there that submit out of fear, but I do not believe most of those are from those in the fundamentalist christian community. In other words, not because of her religion is she being oppressed. Are there some, you bet. But there are just as many women (more) eating men alive and spitting them out thru the divorce and legal system. Does one justify the other, absolutely not. I am against both wholeheartedly.

Submission is barely taught in churches. I have been in christian churches for 20 years now. Pastored for three years in three different churches. Attended half a dozen. Visited a couple dozen more. I have never heard submission taught, not once. I have heard women praised on mothers day and father's chewed out on father's day though, probably 18 times.

I admit men have done much damage to women over the years. I do not deny this. But you don't stop teaching submission because some abuse it. You just enforce accountability and discipline the men who do wrong by their wives. For years men did more damage to men that women did to men. I believe now it's close to equal with momentum going towards women doing more damage. You will all disagree with me and that is fine.

I answered as honestly as I know how.

[Hisey]

Cabinetman,

Your wife uses her facebook page to post on Lori's blog. There is personal information on that page, about your business. It is visible to everyone on the internet, not just those on FJ.

If that makes you uncomfortable, you should ask your wife to remove that information.

Nothing personal about you has been posted on FJ, other than your wife's facebook link, which she freely disclosed on Lori's blog. And you acknowledge that it was your wife posting, in Lori's comments. You blew your anonymity yourself.

I understand that you posted under "Cabinetman" with the feeling of some anonmymity. But if your wife posts comments using facebook, and there is personal stuff on that facebook page, then that anomymity begins to erode.

[apple1]

...Since about 5% of girls are told they must submit as they grow up these days, I don't see it as a huge problem to begin with...

Wow. That's quite the verifiable statistic.

(NOT)

...Submission is barely taught in churches. I have been in christian churches for 20 years now. Pastored for three years in three different churches. Attended half a dozen. Visited a couple dozen more. I have never heard submission taught, not once. I have heard women praised on mothers day and father's chewed out on father's day though, probably 18 times.

Another Wow.

This is the first time I have interacted with you, but -

You are either an outright liar OR you are clearly delusional.

And for perspective - I am Christian, and a mother and a grandmother, and I HATE going to church on Mother's Day. Nuff sed.

[Cabinetman]

But you wouldn't go so far as being financially dependent on your wife, would you, which is what you advocate for women. Completely financially dependent and preferably as uneducated as possible. Your idea of dependence on your wife is probably as abstract as your view of the sexes being 'equal in worth'. And yes, I am very suspicious of a man whose ideal wife is one who is dependent on him in all respects and who would therefore find it very difficult if not impossible to leave him if he treated her badly.

Actually, a lot of Lori's frequent commenters disagree with much of what you write. As far as I recall, most commenters took offence at your post on how you nobly managed to get your anarchy-against-marriage-committing wife back under control.

Our house is in both our names. Our business is in both our names. All our cars are in her name. She keeps the finiances. I don't even know how you get to this conclusion.

To be perfectly honest, I can find work to survive in a day, so could my wife. I cannot find someone who loves me and will have sex with me in a day (probably years?). Money=dependence in your book. Love from someone that will have sex me=dependence in my book. If you ask me I am more dependent on my wife than she is one me.

You are confusing two different texts and two different conversations with your last sentence. I have explained our long post. The text above is directed to one lady. Who has asked me to keep posting at Lori's blog, as have many of the ladies. I have offered to quit several times and several gals have asked me to not stop. Yes, I do not sit right with some of her readers.

Listen folks, we can go back and forth. I have honestly answered your questions. From the very first post I made no secret of our belief in headship & submission. If we are going to drag up something and say surprise, see he didn't mean all these things he said in the last day, he was lying. Well no I wasn't. I stated from the beginning what I beleive.

If you all promise NOT to contact me, NOT go looking for us and NOT turning us into authorities because you don't agree with us and think I abused my wife or being vindictive. If that is what you are giving me your word on, then my mission is accomplished. You got the post taken down. I have apolagized for communicating poorly and mischarachterizing some feminist quotes. I have promised to choose my words for carefully in the future and might not even post any longer. We believe what we believe. We aren't going to change that. You can disagree with me on that and I have no problem with it. Can we call a truce on the hate talk and the searching and I will leave you in peace?'

We just want to be left in peace without worries, is that okay?