TTUAC: Police State

Last updated on: February 16, 2014 at 11:47 pm by Libby Anne

TTUAC: Police State 2014-02-16T23:47:54-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

To Train Up A Child, chapter 9, part 2

We are still in the chapter titled “Training Examples.” As I promised last week, I want to try to bring a specific theme out in each post as I cover this section. This week’s theme is creating a police state in your own home.

THE LITTLE FOXES SPOIL THE VINES

We just returned from having supper with some good neighbors. They are a fine young couple who are just beginning their family. They are kind parents, concerned to rear their children properly. They would never be guilty of abuse or neglect. Their children are their priority. But, as we sat talking, I was once again reminded that it is the little “insignificant” things that determine a child’s character.

The little three-year-old boy was between us playing with a little rubber bathtub type animal. He apparently discovered there was still some water in it, so he held the rubber goat over the table and began to squeeze. To the delight of everyone, and especially the boy, the goat began to relieve itself on the coffee table. After a good laugh, the mother went to the kitchen for a towel.

When she attempted to wipe it up, the little fellow said, “No,” and tried to prevent her from removing his water puddle. She easily brushed him aside and wiped the puddle away. He gasped an angry and frustrated protest, threw himself on the couch and cried. The cry was not loud and did not last five seconds before he jerked around with protruded lip to see what other entertainment was available. It was all over in ten seconds.

The conversation resumed as he performed the first of a series of deliberate transgressions. He climbed onto the coffee table—which is always off limits—and then sought out other expressions of defiance. After about the fifth command, he would cease and go to the next transgression. The conversation continued with only an occasional lapse while he was being rebuked. This is exactly the kind of issue that demands concentrated training and discipline. To ignore it, as they did, is to waste your child.

What did the child learn? He learned that his mother is bigger than he and can force her will upon him. This will result in his enforcing his will upon his younger brother. He learned that he does not have to exercise self-control. Anything that he is big enough to accomplish is fair game. The anger that was allowed to seethe in his heart led to rebellion. Though the parents were unaware of it, his subsequent actions were the product of his defiled heart.

I’m continually surprised when Michael chides parents for sending their children the message that whoever is biggest can force their will on those who are smaller. I’m surprised because that is what is heart and center of Michael’s own methods. Michael, if you will remember, earlier wrote “If you have to sit on him to spank him then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher, more patiently enduring and are unmoved by his wailing. Defeat him totally.” Just last week Michael wrote of his wife trading blows with a toddler and said affirmingly that “Most little bullies are cured by meeting a bigger bully.” So what even is this?

I thought I’d take a moment, now, to explain how I would have handled this situation. The three-year-old boy was upset when his mother cleaned up his water puddle, presumably because he wanted to play in it. Playing with water is fun! It’s one of my own small children’s favorite activities. But the boy’s mother cleaned the water up anyway, without listening to or (it sounds like) communicating with her son. Her son then began to act out, trying to get her attention and trying to assert some form of control over the situation—a situation in which he was in fact helpless. His mother should have heard what he was communicating—that he had wanted to play in the puddle, and that he was upset that she didn’t take his desires into account. If I were in that situation, I would have communicated with the child and found a solution amenable to us both. That doesn’t necessarily mean not cleaning up the puddle—it might have been on a nice table, or in a walkway, after all. It might simply mean pulling a chair up to a sink and running some water, providing the child with measuring cups, bowls, and mixing spoons. This sort of solution communicates that everyone’s needs are important, and it helps teach communication and compromise.

So, what does Michael think this young mother should have done?

THE PROPER RESPONSE

The proper response would have gone something like this: “Johnny, here is a rag, clean up your mess.” “No, I don’t ‘wanna’.” And he continues to dabble in the water, sort of rocking back and forth with one shoulder and the chin down, not too earnestly involved in the water, yet waiting to see if the mother is going to let him be. Rebellion is in his heart; but he faces a superior power, so he hesitates. She again says, “Johnny, clean the water up now.” (With my children, one command is all they would get.) If he again hesitates, she goes for her switch. If he hurriedly attempts to avert a switching by cleaning the water, it will make no difference. She returns with the switch, and sitting in front of him, says, “Johnny, I told you to wipe up the water, and you hesitated, therefore I am going to have to spank you so you will not hesitate the next time Mama wants her boy to grow up to be wise like Daddy, so I am going to help you to remember to obey. Lean over the couch. Put you hands down. Now, don’t move or I will have to give you more licks.”

She then administers about ten slow, patient licks on his bare legs. He cries in pain. If he continues to show defiance by jerking around and defending himself, or by expressing anger, then she will wait a moment and again lecture him and again spank him. When it is obvious he is totally broken, she will hand him the rag and very calmly say, “Johnny, clean up your mess.” He should very contritely wipe up the water. To test and reinforce this moment of surrender, give him another command. “Johnny, go over and put your toys all back in the box.” Or, “Johnny, pick up all the dirty clothes and put them in the basket.” After three or four faithfully performed acts of obedience, brag on how “smart” a helper he is. For the rest of the day, he will be happy and compliant. The transformation is unbelievable.

You have just witnessed the potential making of a peaceful home and of an emotionally stable and obedient child. If you are faithful to guard against and reward every infraction, whether in attitude or action, in just a few days you will have a perfectly obedient and cheerful child.

Oh, that’s right. Michael’s solution is to turn the home into a brutal dictatorship ruled by the sting of rod—one where children’s feelings are irrelevant and the goal is to leave children “totally broken.” Remind me, how is the child not learning that “his mother is bigger than he and can force her will upon him”? Because as I read it, that is exactly what he learns.

Honestly? These bits are the hardest part of the book to get through, for me. “Now, don’t move or I will give you more licks.” “If he continues to show defiance by jerking around and defending himself, or by expressing anger, then she will wait a moment and again lecture him and again spank him.” I remember this. I remember this only too well. I was raised by parents who followed the Pearls and the methods laid out in this book. Trying to get away, trying to avoid the pain, being angry, being anything but broken—those things meant more pain, more humiliation. The goal was to deaden your emotions and put on a mask so as to get out of the situation as quickly and with as few licks as possible.

I get a cold ball of fear in the pit of my stomach when I think about it.

I DON’T HAVE THE TIME

Now, I know exactly what some of you are thinking. “But, I am pushed to the limit now. I don’t have the time to watch and guard against every transgression.”

See, this isn’t actually what I was thinking. What I was thinking involves language I don’t think I can put in print here.

If you have duties outside the home that prevent you from properly rearing your children, give them back to the Devil. I mean that, even if they are church activities. If you have children your first calling is that of a parent. If, on the other hand, you are over-extended because of a chaotic household, then you cannot afford to do other than be faithful in discipline, for you need the rest it will bring.

Look, I agree that you shouldn’t make the decision to have children unless you are willing to put a huge priority on raising them. There will be many times you as a parent have to put your own desires aside to tend to your children’s needs. (2 a.m. feeding anyone?) But I worry that Michael’s emphasis on the duty of parenting over parental need for self-care creates a dangerous imbalance. Parents need to have their own interests, their own time, their own space apart from their children, just for their own emotional health and mental wellbeing. This isn’t entirely selfish either—more stable adults make better parents.

And of course, I’m also extremely concerned that for Michael, proper parenting means enforcing a police state in your own home. And note the threat—if you don’t enforce a police state you are handing your children to the Devil.

Just yesterday, a young mother of small children came to the house and told my wife this story:

“This morning, as I was sitting at the sewing machine, my son [four years old] came to me and said, ‘Mother, I love you so much.’ I stopped sewing, looked at the earnest expression on his face, and said, ‘I’m glad you love me, for I love you too. You are such a fine boy.’ As I attempted to turn back to the sewing, he said, ‘Do you know why I love you so much?’ ‘No, why do you love me so?’ ‘Because, you make me bring in firewood and do what you say.”

This mother always looks fresh and rested. I know this sounds pretentious, but it is the absolute truth. Even a four-year-old can compare himself with other children and appreciate his parents’ guidance.

I’m really not sure whether to take these stories seriously, because this is at least the third time Michael has told one like this. In fact, earlier Michael wrote of overhearing a “rebellious teenager” saying “If they only loved me enough to whip me.” I totally buy that some children are so neglected and starved for love that they may crave any attention at all, even abusive attention. I also get that children need at least a base level of structure and stability. I get it. But this idea that holding children down and whipping them, defeating them totally, and creating a permanent police state results in genuine love between child and parent? Not, you know, kindness, respect, acceptance, or communication? Really? This is just bizarre.

I’m also feeling increasingly uncomfortable with the level of detail Michael goes into in the examples he provides. It feels completely unnecessary, and it’s starting to feel like Michael is deriving pleasure from describing children’s pain.

Uncategorized

To Train Up a Child

Previous Post

February 16, 2014

CTNAHM: What Command Wives Want

Next Post

February 17, 2014 They called it "adultery" and made her confess

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

According to 1 Peter, believers are to abstain from what, which wages war against the soul?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Gentiles Sinful desires Evil The world