I’m a Figment of Your Imagination: Or, My Husband Doesn’t Post Often, But When He Does He Stirs Up Trouble

It is well known that Christian women who subscribe to traditional notions of marriage don’t actually have any of their own ideas, being no more than puppets of their husbands. Well known to everybody except me, apparently, as I learned with surprise that I was not in fact the author of the blog post “Counseling, Feelings, and the Roles of Husband and Wife” which I have also discovered promulgates a dangerous, harmful model of marriage in which the wife’s feelings are not the ultimate authority. And now, here to explain more about the kind attention lavished on my post is that prime example of toxic masculinity, my husband.

***

An opening salvo declaring my wife toxic, abusive, and unsafe to be around greeted me in a post titled “How Not to Resolve Marital Issues?” My wife had just forwarded me a link to the blog “No Longer Quivering” which purports to be “a gathering place for women escaping and recovering from spiritual abuse”, but appears to be nothing more than a venue for a woman named Suzanne to spew hatred against those with opposing views.  She had stumbled across one of my oppressed wife’s blog posts and had concocted a loathsome image of my wife from it.

I commented that my wife was none of those awful things and was actually quite great. Suzanne decided I, rather than my wife, was the one that wrote the post and she was “pretty sure [my wife] didn’t exist” My wife posted a single comment declaring she wrote the post and wishing everyone the same marital happiness she has.  Suzanne decided I was controlling my wife and advised her to divorce me. Then she banned both myself and my wife from posting further comments.

We were told we were too young to give marriage advice and threatened with an investigation from Child Protective Services. Suzanne lectured us about how the First Amendment gave her the right to say nasty things about us, and then deleted posts and banned users she disagreed with.  At no point was there a hint of civility or basic comprehension of anything my wife or I wrote.

That same day, on another of Suzanne’s blogs, she posted “Nothing Bitcher[sic]… than a man.  Currently my husband happens to be crankier and bitchier than two drag queens fighting over the last wand of mascara in Rite Aid. Or if you find that offensive two Trump fans fighting over the last MAGA cap if you like.”  She then explained how her elderly husband was recovering from pneumonia and how back in the bad old days at her old church, she would have treated and cared for him.  But now she realizes the error of her past ways and has a new philosophy: “That’s on him. Me, I’m moving through my day and tasks like a boss…  Learning that I am not responsible for anyone’s emotions but my own has been incredibly freeing.”  This is the abusive spiritual background she is a survivor of.

But mature adults understand that a successful family often requires self-sacrifice for the benefit of others. Once when my wife was blinded for a day after our son scratched her cornea, I took off from work and cared for my family. Following Suzanne’s advice, I should have walked over to her, shrugged my shoulders, and said, “That’s on you. I’m going to go through this day like a boss.” It’s obvious why Suzanne hates large families; she’s far too selfish to survive in such an environment.

As Christians, we are expected to minister to individuals like Suzanne. However, given the hateful nature of her comments, refusal to listen to the facts, and banishment of opinions different from hers, it is impossible to reach her. In this century, Christians have dealt with people like Suzanne by being civil or ignoring them, believing their incoherent and hateful ramblings to be no threat. But even people armed with fluffy pink hats will win when no one stands up to oppose them, and we have increasingly seen the insane accepted as normal and codified into law.

In contrast, we note Jesus talking about “broods of vipers” (Matt. 12:34) and Paul telling his theological opponents to castrate themselves (Gal. 5:2). Similarly, what a difference it made when Brett Kavanaugh and the Covington Catholic boys stood their ground. Their opponents concocted ridiculous attacks on them, mocked their responses to those attacks, threatened them and their livelihoods– and failed.

In the spirit of fighting back, having been banned from Suzanne’s blog, I present my replies to her commentary below on the topics of the existence and agency of women who do not parrot liberal talking points, Christian sex, Suzanne’s patronizing response to my wife, and the need for CPS investigations.

Is Heidi Dave’s Sock Puppet?

 Note how the supposed defenders of women cannot believe that my wife can think for herself.  If a woman has a non-leftist thought, she has to be controlled by a man!  This isn’t even a conservative vs liberal issue here — it is the sane versus the insane.  My wife identifies as a classic liberal, but her thoughts are nothing like these leftist wackos.

 Marital Sex is Yucky

Look, when you start off with calling my wife an abusive, toxic person, I think a little levity is preferable to recriminations. Plus, I’ll admit I know that the thought of a wife happily having sex with her husband is like kryptonite to leftists. The proper way is for wives to demean their husbands’ sex drive and hand out sex like candy when their husbands do what they want.

 Sex is a wonderful gift from God for married couples, yet these women are repulsed by it. We are not commanded by God to go to counseling. We are commanded to have sex with our spouse. Why is it that even Christians focus on watching movies together, watching sports, or doing other “bonding” activities and neglect this greater gift from God?

 Disappointed she didn’t comment on my size—leftists can’t even insult correctly. It’s possible that this comment and another about enjoying 5 minutes of “joyless Alexander-style” sex were just throwaway insults, but this kook may really believe she can deduce our sex life from my wife’s blog.

Suzanne Patronizes My Wife

(My comments are italicized)

“Thanks for showing up and replying. I was pretty sure you didn’t exist based upon several factors.

Factors like an affinity for incoherent conspiracy theories, poor reading comprehension, and shoddy analytical skills.

First, how old are you and how long have you been married?

Hey, you finally realized that you should just ask questions instead of making assumptions!

 Your advice to never to go to any type of counselor…

My wife and I never gave this advice.

…really sounds like something straight out of the mouth of someone younger, uneducated or very sheltered and male.

Zero for four; my wife is none of these things.

All this time I’ve been reading and approaching your words as something by someone at least 30….When you get to post 30 years and no divorce let me know and I might listen.

Done and done.

 Even Lori Alexander claims that only older women should be handing out life advice. I don’t necessarily agree with her, but I think if you are going to hand out marriage advice it behooves you to be married a long time successfully first.

Who’s Lori Alexander? (Note from Heidi: I read Lori Alexander, but Dave’s only heard of her from me.)

You need to gently remind your husband that the First Amendment exists

Thanks.

 and that disagreeing with someone on what constitutes healthy and unhealthy mental hygiene breaks no laws.

You learn something new every day.

As much as I disagree with much of what you say on your blog does not mean I would not support your right to do so. Any time you post on a public forum, like a blog, you are opening yourself up to public scrutiny.

Really, my wife was foolish not to expect to have been called abusive, toxic, and a danger to women.

Particularly in the press. As a daily columnist with Patheos I’m going to dissect why I think something does not seem right. I am all for healthy relationships and against anything that even gives a slight appearance of abuse.

Abuse like your blog posts?

You have two choices, admit and realize that not everyone is going to love you and applaud your words. Or go offline. That’s it. EVERYONE that writes gets enormous pushback and that’s how it is. Me, George Will, Patty Davis, Andrew Hall and all of the other Patheos writers and everyone else in the universe. It’s life.

I think Suzanne feels guilty about what she said to my wife, and she’s trying to deflect. Clearly, my wife knows that people were going to disagree with her, given that the first sentences of her blog post were “If you consider yourself a feminist, you won’t like this post. Be warned! Heck, maybe I’ll offend you if you don’t consider yourself a feminist….”

 This is not about disagreement. This is about basic civility.

Now that we have all of that out of the way I have to say I have some concerns.

So do I.

The big thing we’re for here in NLQ is keeping people out of abusive relationships of all kinds, spousal, faith community, you name it.

Relationships with Suzanne?

Here’s were [sic] I’m hoping I’m wrong.

There was something you weren’t wrong about?

But…. your husband is the one that reacts to disagreeing with your blog…

No. I react to you being uncivil to my wife.

…and his replies here seem to hold a hint of menace. I hope, and pray, that you’re not in a controlled against your will situation here. His making sure you post here seems rather convenient.

You just asked my wife to “stand up for her own words”! Now her reply suddenly means that I’m controlling her.

Please, if you are in a relationship that holds any manipulation, control or abuse, please do not settle for it.

Wow, that escalated quickly. You try to defend your wife, and suddenly you’re an abuser. She’s not making a strong case for counseling.

There are people that would be willing to help you.

Not you, since you banned her right after this comment.

Your words in your blog worry me because they seem to come from a place of control and manipulation.

No woman who thinks differently from you could possibly be thinking for herself!

There are very few women out there whose reaction to saying something is wrong react that sex is needed or wanted, or that a woman’s feelings do not matter at all. That’s what abusers say.

But that’s not what my wife said.

 CPS Investigations

“Hello, CPS? I’d like to report some children in danger from their mother. I’m not sure if she exists or she’s actually her husband, but the kids are definitely in danger.”

Forget Self Esteem; Self Respect is a Virtue

The idea that a high self-esteem is the key to healthy child development has, quite properly, fallen by the wayside. Indeed, it is foolish to imagine that trying to instill any one character trait–even if it’s something demonstrably good, such as resilience or perseverance–will lead to decreased crime, increased mental health, and other good outcomes. And the truth is, in Western cultures at least, society is only too happy to foster our narcissistic tendencies to believe that we’re pretty awesome; it is, fortunately, pretty rare for children to come from a home in which they’re told they’re worthless.

But in throwing out our notions of building up self esteem as the key to good parenting, I think we need to be careful not to throw out a similar, but not identical concept: Building self respect. That is to say, we recognize ourselves as a human being, and treat ourselves with the respect due a human being.

Merriam-Webster’s lists “self esteem” as a synonym for “self respect,” but “self respect,” to me, does not involve constantly telling myself or my kids that I am awesome, I am special, I have unlimited potential, or all the other crap with which the proponents of self esteem filled children’s heads. It is not inflationary, nor does it involve counting all that is owed to oneself. It is neither pride, which assumes that we are the center of the universe, nor vanity, in which our egos are dependent upon the praise of others.

Instead, self respect recognizes that, as a moral agent, we have obligations to behave to ourselves and to others in a decent way. Self respect means that we don’t sit around in piles of filth, because that’s no way to treat ourselves; instead, we clean up. We don’t moan and whine about our lack of talent in some area, but do our best. We don’t lie, rob, kill, gossip, or harm ourselves with drugs or alcohol because such behavior hurts other human beings, and also ourselves.

Self respect means feeling good about ourselves when we have accomplished something worthwhile. It also means that when bad things happen to us, we respond to them with sadness or anger or other negative emotions, but we do not allow these bad things to destroy us. It means that we can elevate duty above pleasure, and try to improve ourselves. It makes us accountable.

Now, all of the foregoing makes it sound as if we ourselves are the ultimate moral arbiters of this universe, and all good is to be judged by the good done to us human beings. I do not believe this is so; I believe that the ultimate standards of morality are those set by God, revealed in the Bible. But even someone who does not believe in God or the Bible has written upon his heart the notion that there ought to be some objective standard by which his actions are to be judged, and the common grace of God is such that for many of us, notions of self respect will keep us from being as wicked as we could be. It is an unconscious, and perhaps unwilling, acknowledgment of human beings as made in the image of God.

We can therefore see how damaging a childrearing philosophy is that consistently belittles the child, or humiliates or degrades her. And just as damaging is the idea that the child is a Little Emperor who can do no wrong, for in puffing up her self esteem we give her no chance to develop respect for those around her, or for herself. I do not believe that cultivating self respect is The One True Key to raising a good, happy, successful person, but I do think that we ignore this quality at our–and our children’s–peril.

 

A New Perspective on Dr. King

Race in America can be a tricky discussion, as can the part that various famous figures have played in American history. The latter tend to be flattened into caricatures, then either worshiped or demonized; thus, we have Martin Luther King Jr, a martyr for civil rights and the brotherhood of man, vs. Martin Luther King Jr, the serial adulterer who didn’t take proper care of his family.

This sort of caricature is necessary when introducing new concepts to small children, because a great deal of oversimplification is necessary for them to comprehend it. You can’t have a nuanced discussion of King’s place in history without covering slavery, in general and in American history; racial relations in the 19th and 20th century; the Civil War; the different perspectives of black American intellectuals; what is signified by “African American,” “black,” and “people of color”; the development of various theories of race, genetics, socialization, and types of capacity; Ghandi; Martin Luther; communists, the FBI, and Malcolm X; the subjective nature of historical scholarship; etc.

However, oversimplification can lead to outright falsehood, as in a discussion of the Pilgrims not even mentioning religion. (The King was being mean to some people, so they decided to go to America so he couldn’t be mean to them anymore.)

And then we have the children themselves, who show an amazing capacity for forgetfulness, distortion, and inversion, as one of my kids did this past Friday. I asked my daughter, “Are you still learning about living and nonliving things?”

“No…today we learned about…I forget his name….”

“Martin Luther King, Jr?”

“Yes, that’s right.”

“So tell me what you learned about him.”

“Dark-skinned people used to be able to do all sorts of fun things, but then he changed that.”

“Fun things? Like what?”

“They used to get their own drinking-fountains, and they got to sit on the back of the bus. But then he had a dream and stopped that.”

“And was that a good thing?”

“Yes, because then the light-skinned people got to do fun things, too. And he’s not real…wait a minute, he’s real, but he’s not alive anymore, but his dream is still alive.”

I have read many essays on Martin Luther King, Jr, but this is the first time I have been introduced to him as liberator of the deprived light-skinned people. My first reaction is that no matter how you simplify a concept for a child, the child can still get hold of the wrong end of things. Ultimately, however, this little tale demonstrates that for a child, “learning” is something that takes place continually but not continuously; it occurs by fits and starts, new information supplanting, supplementing, and illuminating the old, until at last a child arrives at adulthood knowing, we hope, at least something true about the world.

For the Umpteenth Time, Folks: Children Are People

Commentator Matt Walsh discusses a highly restricted set of topics (transgenderism is sick, abortion is murder, men need to man up, feminists hate men, ADHD is overdiagnosed, the Left is hypocritical), sometimes combines arrogance and naivete in an unlovely mixture, and takes too many words to get to the point. Nevertheless, I enjoyed a recent article in which Walsh explains why Duncan Jones shouldn’t use Twitter to express regrets over having children, or moan about how awful it is to have to take care of children.

Let’s take a look at the tweets Walsh was critiquing.

I have 2 kids. 2 1/2 years & 9 months old respectively. I’ll tell you something I never see anyone admit… they are exhausting, frustrating & life-destabilizing. They are rarely fun. Sure, smiles are great, hugs are lovely, but it’s HARD & not obviously a good choice in life.

This is where people feel compelled to say “i wouldn’t change it for the world!” But you know… Of course I’d reconsider! It’s exhausting! Its banal! It’s like looking after a dog you can’t housetrain. What it is, is that it is. & they are mine. Hopefully they turn out ok.

In what circles does Jones travel, that he’s never seen anyone admit that kids can be frustrating and exhausting? I write this post having come back from the doctor’s office with an antibiotic for my youngest kid’s ear infection, as well as a nebulizer for his RSV. The nebulizer involves keeping a mask on the child’s mouth and nose for about 10 minutes, a few times a day. About the time that my husband and I were hoping to enjoy his birthday dinner in a nice restaurant, we shall instead be trying to restrain a screaming 2-year-old in an effort to clear his bronchioli. So yes, I, like Duncan Jones, like Matt Walsh, like just about every parent ever, am fully aware that taking care of kids requires enormous amounts of time, energy, and money.

This isn’t some grand new truth, but a cliche. But the more bothersome part of the tweets is that Jones seems to doubt that his becoming a parent was a good choice, because his kids just aren’t providing fun and amusement commensurate with the difficulty of raising them. And the heart of Walsh’s critique is that if we cannot find joy in our children, it is the fault not of the children nor of parenting, but our own selfishness.

“In my experience, kids are the most difficult when you try to relegate them to the background so you can do something else with your time. Of course, sometimes it is necessary to do other things, like sleep, or work, or have an adult conversation, or spend some time with your spouse, or watch a movie that isn’t about talking animals or princesses. That’s when they can feel especially frustrating and burdensome. But if you find that your children are always frustrating, always a burden, “rarely fun,” and generally “life-destabilizing,” that’s probably because you are trying to keep them in the background and out of your way far too often. If you find no joy at all in parenting, it’s almost certainly because you have made no effort to actually focus on your kids and invest yourself in them. You are trying to live as if they don’t exist. Children will absolutely “de-stabilize” that sort of lifestyle, and rightfully so.

“I’m not saying that we should be completely focused on our children all the time. They do need to learn that the world doesn’t revolve around them. But it doesn’t revolve around us, either.”

Now, I do not think that parents need to be their kids’ playmates very often, unless maybe the kid is an only child and too young to go play with other friends. But it is important to spend time with them and make them feel a part of your life and household, even if they’re “helping” with a chore that would take far less time without their assistance. It’s important to teach them, by precept and example.

It’s important to help them realize that they, too, are human beings–not accessories that can be put away when not in use; not little godlings to be fawned on and worshiped; not toys or pets or machines or anything but people. To treat them merely as expensive nuisances is to deny that their own viewpoints are just as valid as yours, and to regret their existence is repugnant.

 

What Do Children Know That We Don’t About a Silly Book?

I like some poems and can quote a fair number of them, but have no true “poetic” sense.  This left me feeling like an impostor when discussing poetry with others who do seem to have a proper appreciation of poems. I experienced a recurrence of this feeling when reading The Happy Man and His Dump Truck, a children’s book from the mid-20th century in which an unkempt man gives a pig and some other animals a ride on his dump truck. There is no conflict, no antagonist, no complexity to be resolved. The pictures are brightly colored, but nothing special. There is no seductive rhythm, no soothing repetitions, no rhyme or language-play. It is, however, a favorite of my children, it has stayed in print for more than half a century despite garnering no awards or critical attention, and I have spent far too much energy trying to figure out why. One review from Goodreads express the same sentiment:

“I have to admit, I am at a loss to explain the enduring popularity of this book at Goat Central. My wife, who originally had our copy when she was a toddler, tells me it was one of her younger brother’s favorites when he was two or three years old, and now the Bean can’t go more than two or three days without this one coming right back into rotation. It could be Tibor Gergely’s illustrations, which have an interesting, kind of Asian feel to them at times (the dog sliding down the dump truck has a definite Chinese dragon feel to him). It could be Miryam’s use of repetition, which effectively takes the place of the usual rhythm and rhyme one finds in Golden Books from the forties and fifties and does it one better, with more subtlety in diction (if not in content) than I’m used to. Whatever it is, the Bean adores this book. It may hold the current record for most times read. If not, it’s in the top five.”

Perhaps it’s the combination of dump trucks and animals (which make animal noises at the end) that enthralls? I’m not sure, because other books with trucks and animals have not enjoyed the same popularity.

I am unable to dismiss this book the way I do Brecker Bunny Asks for Help, which is a vilely-written, preachy, pamphlet-type “book” that employs some of the lamest, most wretched doggerel imaginable to teach children not to play with lighters. (After reading such gems as “Brecker and his buddies are just like you and me, and they are also super smart about fire safety” I wanted to light a pile of paper towels on fire out of sheer spite.) My middle son loves this book because it’s got bright illustrations and fascinating-to-him discussions about burning things, and I understand his liking even while having none of my own.

But it is not just my son who likes The Happy Man and His Dump Truck. My other kids do, as well. Kids who come over to our house and read this book like it. It’s got an average rating of 4 1/2 stars on Amazon. I do not hate the book the way I do some other children’s books–especially Brecker Bunny–but there’s clearly something missing in me that would allow me to respond with the same enjoyment that children do when they read this book. Perhaps it is merely that I know too much about what “should” make a good children’s story, but I can’t help feeling that if I’ve gained in literary appreciation I’ve also lost something as shown by my inability to take pleasure in the man giving farm animals a ride. Ah, childhood! Ah, adulthood!

On Respecting Our Children

Besides being funny, the Facebook group Sanctimommy Says What reminds me not to give in to the temptation of mocking others’ parenting styles. As long as the child’s life or health isn’t being endangered, it’s really nothing to me how others feed their kids, make decisions about where they will sleep, or discipline their little ones. In this blog, I try not to take cheap shots at those parenting decisions that are different than mine.

There are exceptions. Americans choosing home birth multiply the risk of their child dying or suffering a major disability. Failing to vaccinate, failing to get real medical care when your child is sick, and hurting or neglecting a child in one’s care are also demonstrably harmful to the child. And whatever our style of parenting, we must respect our children as human beings. What does this mean?

First of all, people who write about their kids should not write that which is denigrating or hurtful to them. I assume that someday my children will be able to read this blog, and even though I’m sure they’ll be much too bored to comb through my posts I would hate for them to come across something that makes their heart clench up. “Wait–Mom–you thought that about me?” The internet is forever, and parents should never give their children grounds for thinking that they were unwanted, unloved, or an inconvenience.

Related to this idea is that children should not be considered means to an end. Your children are not instruments for your happiness, or your chance to live out failed dreams, or your opportunity to demonstrate how awesome you are. Children do bring great happiness, and any decent parent will be proud of their children’s accomplishments, but it is wrong to be so wrapped up in your children’s lives that they are mere extensions of you.

Perhaps a subtler form of disrespect is for parents to interact with an imaginary child, rather than their real child. A parent who allows the two-year-old to set the rules, or expects perfect self-regulation in a three-year-old, is not seeing his actual child. It does a great disservice to children not to recognize their strengths and weaknesses, and to treat them in an age-inappropriate manner. All kinds of parenting styles may lead to this sort of disrespect–from strict parents who expect their 15-month-old to be perfectly still and silent for a 90-minute church service,* to attachment parents who “dialogue” with their toddlers about morality and behavior instead of telling them not to hit little Susie, to tiger parents who become frustrated when their 10-year-olds just can’t seem to grasp advanced calculus. We should expect a great deal from our children, and children rise to meet challenges, but it is counterproductive to say the least consistently to set the children up for failure or be disappointed that they cannot do x or y.

We can also fail as parents when we don’t allow them appropriate amounts of self-determination. Asking a 6-month-old’s consent for changing her diaper is not teaching bodily autonomy, it’s just plain stupid. Setting bedtimes for young children, controlling what foods are kept in the house, having curfews and electronic device restrictions are all reasonable regulations for parents; but as our kids grow, they need to be allowed to practice making choices. Your child doesn’t want dinner? Don’t force her to sit at the table until midnight; some parents allow their kids to get themselves an appropriate substitute, and others just shrug and say that’s fine, but that’s all the food that’s available until breakfast. Let kids wear crazy color combinations if they want, unless the setting is formal or the proposed clothing is not weather-appropriate. Give children some unstructured playtime. On the other hand, do not provide endless candy and sodas for your kids, or allow your teenagers to wear skimpy clothing to school, or let your preschooler set his bedtime.

I have already touched on this, but it is also disrespectful to your children to fail to discipline them. Setting clear rules and having consistent punishments not only helps teach them acceptable behavior, but also gives them the security of an orderly world. A child in a chaotic household not characterized by a just rule of law doesn’t know what to expect–will Daddy give me a treat, or slam me against the wall?–and develops in a dysfunctional way.

And what about love and attention? Children need it, but we should not be making them the center of the universe. People talk about “affluenza” and the ills of spoiling rich kids, who never learn how to get along with others or develop a proper perspective of their place in the universe, but even poorer parents can slavishly devote themselves to preventing their children from crying. This is completely self-defeating, because children who do not experience unhappiness or disappointment do not develop resilience. The Iliad tells us that the gods pour out both joy and sorrow, and pretending that nothing is unpleasant is an excellent way to set your child up for depression, failure, and anxiety. My mother couldn’t bear to tell 16-year-old me that my beloved cat had died; I looked for her for two weeks, posited that she might be gone, and was only then informed by my friend that her dad had found my cat and buried it. (My friend did not know of my ignorance of my cat’s fate.) This was unspeakably cruel, although my mother meant well.

This little anecdote brings me to my final point on respecting children, and that is on telling them the truth. I am not saying that allowing them to believe in Santa Claus is evil, but we should answer their questions honestly. Not necessarily fully–I do not recommend showing porn to a 4-year-old who asks where babies come from–but honestly. And above all, when we make promises to children, we should keep them. I have been promising my son that we’d play chess when this blog post is done, and so I must wrap it up and keep my promise to him. For as I behave toward him, so he will behave toward others–with, I hope, love and honesty and respect.

 

 

*Note that our kids sit through our church service from a young age–our two-year-old is consistently joining our family for the whole service, which is generally between 100 minutes and 2 hours, plus Sunday School. However, are kids are allowed to read, draw, play with quiet toys, and fidget, and our congregation tolerates low-level kid noise–“the sounds of the covenant.” Of course we take them out if they’re becoming disruptive, but that happens less than you might imagine.