I’ve never been part of the Quiverful movement, but my background is very similar on a lot of points.
One person called dancing “the vertical expression of a horizontal desire.”
In other words, traditional ballroom dancing is inherently sexual.
Some of this has been covered upthread, but I don’t mind repeating.
Wives and daughters were encouraged to be thrifty - goodwill, relatives’ castoffs, day-old-bread stores, overstock places, soup kitchens, charity pantries, dumpster diving, etc. Making rather than buying was strongly encouraged, as was gardening and canning and hunting. I never saw anyone looking hungry or unkempt, but I don’t know that I would have noticed wives passing actual money back and forth to help each other out.
Most of the men worked regular jobs - the core families all had a family business they worked in that provided something (bulletins?) for local churches, one guy was a car salesman. Probably lots of nepotism, and lots of under-the-table jobs off the books, but our group seemed pretty financially stable. I’m sure the preference would be to work for a godly company, but our group wasn’t that strict.
We had a TV, and I watched movies with my dad. I’m pretty sure it was frowned on, but I was smart enough to keep my trap shut, and again, it wasn’t like there were surprise house visits to check on us. I’m sure there were a lot of things I couldn’t watch, but I never knew they existed, so I never missed them. I don’t recall going to movies at the theatre, so that was probably too obvious to get away with. My aunt did take me to seee Fantasia, and apparently I went beserk during the last vignette with the demon mountain and had to be carried out.
Books were supposed to be christian fiction or vetted nonfiction, but I read fast, and my mom gave up. The books in the house were all approved, and if I spent a lot of time in the library, I was just being picky. 
I didn’t, no. I posted earlier that with the strong conservative politics and the ‘a man of god provides for his family’ of Patriarchy, and the ‘prosperity gospel’ of naming and claiming, it would be perhaps embarrassing for a man to have his family taking welfare. I could be totally wrong, but I never saw any signs of it being anything but a humiliation.
It varies among fundamentalist groups. Receiving welfare is considered highly shameful among Amish people, for example. They are patriarchal, but not typically “prosperity gospel”.
If your mom hadn’t been kicked out by the group, do you think you’d still be a member now?
That’s a tough one to think about.
I was content, even happy, as a child, but I was starting to feel the restrictions as I got into pre-teen and teen years, but I don’t think enough to rebel against the church. If my dad hadn’t passed, I probably wouldn’t be phobic of illness and hospitals, and therefore not as against the idea of pregnancy/childbirth, so that wouldn’t be an issue. If we hadn’t been unfairly accused and kicked out, I wouldn’t have the impetus to question my beliefs.
I have to say that if my husband was kind, I can see a version of myself being happy as a homeschooling mom or teacher in a small christian school.
That’s a very profoundly unsettling thought.
I believe it.
Many thanks again, Lasciel, for this thread and for your very interesting replies.
We have a group in MN that’s affiliated with Above Rubies. I know that group is active in Australia and New Zealand as well. There’s a few moms I know, but not sure if we’re in a pocket of activity, or if it’s more widespread. http://above. rubies.org/
Decent people, try hard.
They tried to recruit me (I have five kids, so must have hit their radar. I’m Catholic, but they didn’t seem to care overmuch. I’m also a big pain in the ass, and not very easily domesticated, so there was never any extensive pressure.)
Many of the things they practice apply in general to large families, religious or not. Garage sales, gardening, rural, strong community ties.
As far as homeschooling, I’ve seen a wide spectrum. Religious fanatics, ultra liberals, parents who wanted to spend more time with their kids, parents that want to travel the world with kids, high achieving kids that weren’t well served by the public school, really good athletes, kids that need a lot of extra help, and socially struggling kids. One of the kids I know who was homeschooled until high school was because of severe allergies. She also graduated valedictorian from a pretty tough college prep high school
I would never homeschool myself, but it has definitely become more mainstream and not half as weird as it used to be. There are a lot of resources now.
In my experience, people/families were pretty normal. Extended breastfeeding and homeschooling were about the weirdest thing, and neither of those things are that odd. Never saw any abuse or anything beyond benign neglect. Some of the husbands weren’t earning more than probably $40,000 a year, so I am sure there was some help to raise 7+ kids, but as a community you all pull together anyways. Plenty of people dropped off outgrown clothes to us or extra tomatoes from the garden.
It’s not that bad of a life, but then again I wasn’t raised under it, and may not have seen some of the inherent issues with a strong patriarchy.
If you think I’m some subservient brainwashed breeder, you couldn’t be farther from the truth. I own and run a successful business in remodeling, a very male dominated industry. My husband mostly runs the kids and house, and works for me on occasion. It works for us.
Sure, no arguments here. If I have kids, I’m planning to homeschool, and I like the idea of gardening and homesteading (I have a black thumb, so it’s a pipe dream).
All I can say is that there’s a world of difference between choosing a lifestyle you enjoy and you can freely change or leave whenever you wish, and being part of a religious / social community that restricts your choices, restricts your awareness of choices, and restricts your ability to choose alternatives.
Additional thoughts.
I travel, a lot. Every time I’m in a big city, I think to myself “There is no fucking way I could’ve raised five kids in the city.” The logistics of clothing, feeding, and outfitting a family of seven would have been nigh impossible. Not to mention the outrageous expense.
If your background and experience is city, a large family in a rural environment can seem terrible, or stunted, or oppressive, but it doesn’t have to be.
It can be fun, and loving, and purposeful.
I was a stay at home mom for over a decade, and it’s one of the most valuable things I’ve done.
Just because you can’t imagine yourself living that life, doesn’t make it wrong.
But it’s really, really nice having choices.
I previewed, and we agree. I never saw anything terrible, but I was never sucked into it. The worst things I saw was women having kid after kid, when the pregnancies, births were horrible. But I saw non religious women do that, too.
I’ve seen a few episodes of the Duggar’s show, and one thing that appalled me was they had an 18 year old son who had already been “inducted” into the lifestyle with getting married as early as legally possible to a girl also from another QF family. He had a GED and was working as a car salesman, and already had one child and his wife was pregnant again already.
:eek:
I found this basically a form of child abuse, psychological child abuse. I feel there is a very good chance either the boy or girl will one day wake up screaming as they realize their entire life was stolen from them by parents who pressured them from childhood to get married as soon as the law allows and can only have sex without even using the pull out method slash conceive as many children as possible.
What happens to these marriages of second generation QF if someone cracks mentally and says I need to find myself and takes off or abandons their spouse and kids? I know everyone focuses on the girls of QF being raised to be used as breeding cows, but it has to be just as stressful and disgusting from the boy side as you are raised to know you have to get married as a teenager and father and support as many babies as possible.
That’s kind of what I feel. I know several Christian families with alot of kids and their is no hidden agenda. They just like kids. Of course you wouldnt know it from the MSM who think every Christian family are crazy fundies.
And you know what else? Those families are often the most popular in the neighborhood and are often the envy of the other kids because they have so many brothers and sisters to play with.
I mentioned something about Haredi Jews, and got a lifted eyebrow, so I was wondering what would happen in a few scenarios that actually happened to some Haredi families I know.
Would families in these situations be allowed to handle their problems the same way, would they be asked to leave the community, or what, do you think, would happen to them as quiverfullers?
-
In her third pregnancy, the wife of a rabbi developed gestational diabetes, and became very ill. The delivery was complicated, and while both the mother and baby survived, they recovery was long. At the suggestion of their non-Haredi OB, seconded by their Haredi GP, the mother had her tubes tied, because another pregnancy could be even worse.
-
A first-time mother had pretty serious PP depression. The couple began using birth control, and decided not to try for another baby (if they eventually ever did) until their daughter was in school (to take the pressure of looking after a very small child all day), and then do so under the supervision of a psychiatrist who was sympathetic to their religious situation. They had discussed this with their rabbi.
-
Parents with an adult daughter who had schizophrenia had trouble with her modesty when she wore dresses. I’m not sure exactly what it was exactly, and I didn’t pry, but she always wore slacks that had something about them that made them “women’s clothes.” The zipper would be on the front of the side, and they’d be some pastel color, often pink, and cut in the waist so that no one could possibly mistakes them for men’s clothes.*
Actually, in regard to 3, there is no actual prohibition against pants, just “men’s clothes,” and every Haredi woman I know has a pair of pink sweatpants, and all the older girls who go to the segregated school (bais Ya’akov) have pink gym shorts.
Also, just as a note, the Haredi I know don’t confuse autism with mental illness.
*FWIW, the daughter was very and well-behaved, and capable of holding short conversations when she was medicated, and her parents took to events and holiday services, and everyone was very nice to her.
It’s amazing how often the LORD’s teachings in such groups matches the tendency of middle aged men to want to have sex with as many young women as possible. Total coincidence, I’m sure.
It is, literally, the one thing that binds pretty much all religions.
Yeah, I know. I’m a devout, middle-aged Catholic, and I can’t tell you how many nubile young teenyboppers I’ve gotten to nail at Church.
I think this strongly depends on the strictness of the particular group. Birth control is just flat out BECAUSE it’s keeping the family from relying directly on God’s Manifest Will. So, there would likely be a lot of prayer, and the family would most likely continue to have unprotected sex without contraceptives, relying on God to either intervene and heal the mother/child, or to prevent conception to protect her health. The directive against contraceptives is justified through the ‘quiverfull’ arguments, but the actual practice reflects your willingness to trust God completely, rather than being ‘selfish’ and choosing to control your own destiny.
In our particular group, depression was seen as a spiritual attack, and medication for mental health was strongly discouraged. The mother would be pitied and the other mothers and young women would try their best to help her out, but any emotional imbalances, up to and including what I think now was a suicide attempt, were met with prayer and casting out of demons. Our group was very pentacostal, and I have no idea how prevalent that is in the larger quiverfull community.
This one isn’t a problem with who the clothes belong to. Lots of those denim jumpers you see used to be men’s pants that have been re-sewn into dresses. The problem here is with ‘feminine’ mannerisms and behavior, and part of ‘being’ feminine is wearing dresses. In gym, we wore knee-length culottes or divided skirts, while the boys wore long sweatpants. A simple fix that occurs to me would be to wear pyjama pants or sweats under a dress - lots of us girls did that in cold weather anyway so our legs would stay warm.
That is a very good question, and I wish I knew the answer. Sadly, the teachings of the group almost seem to realize that this might eventually be a concern, so there is a lot of ‘gaslighting’ of feelings and teachings of ‘it’s not so bad, you just don’t have the right perspective - you could be in a work camp in North Korea or (more likely now) being beheaded by ISIS.’ When the outside world is portrayed like a living horror movie, complaining that you are exhausted or emotionally drained by kids seems petty in comparison.
You do realize that’s not what she’s talking about, right? Having even half a dozen kids is not the same thing as encouraging every single member of your small congregation to have an army full of kids. If you’ve never seen the Duggars on TV (or their counterparts – I know there’s another show on, but not who is on it), they are more representative of what’s being discussed here. And I really don’t get the blow back on the OP. She’s been nothing but polite, thorough, thoughtful, respectful, explicit in explaining this is just her take on things and doesn’t know if it applies to a wider group, and even goes so far as repeatedly reminding everyone that, although with distance, education and time, she views things differently now, she had a happy childhood. She’s not talking about your (general speaking) life or extrapolating her experience on to anyone else. People are projecting a fringe element onto themselves and it’s bizarre. This isn’t about atheists in general dogging good Christians. This is about one woman’s life.
<3