Passion and... er... well...

Preface: No, I'm not dead and I'm not scared about posting either. I'm just really, really busy. I'm working on a novel so that's where most of my writing time goes. But I feel guilty that I haven't been posting so I'm going to try harder. :) Hopefully, I'll have more book reviews up soon.

As some of you know, I’ve discussed Elizabeth Elliot’s Passion and Purity before in many posts, somewhat in depth in these: here and here I've been thinking about it again over the past few months and I realized that it’s honestly not a great example of purity. The story of Jim and Elizabeth’s romance is a decent love story (aside from Jim’s cold feet and stringing Elizabeth along for six years :-/) and I appreciate Elizabeth’s frank discussion of their temptations and her openness with the struggles of waiting. However, in Passion and Purity, Elizabeth and Jim are constantly focusing on the physical aspects of their relationship (or future relationship). Well, actually, it’s mostly Jim. One only has to turn a few pages to find excerpts from letters to where Jim declares that he has a “wetted appetite for her body.”¹ Now I have mixed feelings here… on one hand, it is a love letter but on another, Jim just sounds like a perverted creep. And then again, this is hardly something I would include in a discussion of purity! If you’re trying to be pure, you don’t talk about such things! Why? Because focusing on it isn’t going to help at all. Jim and Elizabeth weren’t messing around but they were talking about physical stuff and discussing it and thinking about it so much that they ended up focusing more and more upon physical intimacy. For the reader, this is terribly awkward, not to mention confusing.

In a similar fashion, I Kissed Dating Goodbye and even worse, Boy Meets Girl contain rather detailed descriptions of intimate encounters. I don’t really feel like quoting them, because I don’t want to re-read them! Seriously Josh Harris, did you have to use such descriptive language? I remember trying to read And the Bride Wore White as a teenager and I couldn’t even finish it because the book was so graphic. Did I really need to know that Dannah Gresh? All of these authors included things that can only be labeled as “TMI” and now that I’m an adult, I’m confused as to why they thought this was a good idea. Just what purpose do these discussions serve? If you’re trying to preach purity, why do you need to be so graphic? Why focus so much on the one thing you’re trying to ignore? It’s like that scene in Inception where Arthur says to Saito: “Okay, this is me, planting an idea in your mind. I say: don't think about elephants. What are you thinking about?” And the response is, “Elephants.”2 In fact, none of these authors have a good grasp of psychology because Ironic Process Theory states that the more you try to suppress a thought, the more it will surface in your mind. The more these authors talk about “forbidden subjects” the more the reader will think about forbidden subjects. Oh, and let me get one thing straight here, I have no problem with healthy, helpful discussions or advice for intimate relationships. Some people need that and I don’t think we should avoid the subject. However, I do have a problem with books that are supposed to promote purity dropping graphic descriptions into your mind with no warning. And if you are 12-18, it is doubly jarring and opens up a whole new discussion. My mom let me read Passion and Purity when I was 14, and I don't fault her at all, because she trusted Elizabeth Elliot. I don't think Elliot was worthy of that trust. Many parents are encouraged to trust these authors but knowing the facts, what parent would want to give their 12-18 year old these books?     

In all honesty, I think all of these books fall into the trap of puritanism and a lot of Christians fall into it as well. “…Puritanism is the most leering and prurient of world views. Far from wanting to keep sex in the private sphere, the puritans can't wait to drag it out in public. Puritans are the least buttoned-up people in the world. They can't wait to pin a scarlet A for adultery on someone's clothing, or hold a public humiliation ritual.”³ Yes, exactly. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Ingrid

1. Elizabeth Elliot, Passion and Purity, 1984.

2. Christopher Nolan, Inception, 2010.

3: BBC News Magazine. “A Point of View: Sex and the French.” 17 January 2014. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25756961

10 Reasons to Read Betsy-Tacy

The Betsy-Tacy books were written by Maud Hart Lovelace and were based upon her childhood and young adulthood in the early 20th century. There are four books about covering her years from 5 to 12 and these are suitable for all ages. The next six books cover her high school years, travel, and marriage and are suitable for 14+. (The reason? Well, Betsy can be a little silly about boys…but really, you’ll just appreciate them more if you’re in high school yourself or have been in it.) There are also 3 Deep Valley books about other people that Betsy knows. They are delightful books and worth reading again and again…and here are 10 reasons why.

1. The characters are hopelessly flawed but always learn from their mistakes and become better people. Which is so nice, yes? :-)

2. Betsy and Tib are a little boy-crazy but Tacy isn’t.

3. The characters have loving relationships with their families (and their fathers!) but it’s not sickly sweet or obsessive.

4. College and education are viewed as good and beneficial things. Most of the girls go to college and then get married.

5. Betsy learns to keep house after she’s married and makes it a priority. But, she doesn’t give up her writing to do so. They’re some of the few books I’ve read with a healthy balance between homemaking and having dreams and pursuits as a married woman.

6. Betsy’s life doesn’t end with her marriage: the wedding is in the beginning of the last book.

7. The books make a statement against sororities and fraternities which shows some greatness of mind on Mrs. Lovelace’s part, I think.

8. The characters eat so well! Warning: These books will make you hungry!

9. Betsy doesn’t like Elsie Dinsmore (and neither do I)!

10. They show that heartache (even over, (horrors!) boys) is normal and can be a beneficial thing to growing up and maturing.

And the 11th reason to read Betsy-Tacy is….

After a long sojourn in the world of “out of print”… the high school books are being re-released on September 29th! And Carney’s House Party and Emily of Deep Valley will be out next year!







So now instead of having to track them down on Abebooks and paying $25 for one paperback you can find them on BN.com for 11.99 (for 2 books actually). Dreeaming.... :-)

And if you want to know more about Betsy-Tacy follow these links:

http://www.maudhartlovelacesociety.com/

http://www.betsy-tacysociety.org/

Ingrid

Guys

Young men are widely misunderstood—especially by young women...and especially, in the courtship movement. Most of the time, girls are completely clueless about guys and their feelings and, really, mystifyingly so. Take several friends of mine, for example, they seem totally and completely clueless about young men…yet most of them have brothers and/or are close to their fathers. It is as if they cannot believe that other men do indeed have similar feelings to that of their associates. There's a lot of talk about treating young men as brothers in Christ…but I don't think very many young ladies even understand or think about how to do that. These same friends are crazy about Vision Forum and Courtship and everything that goes with it―they can recite all the steps in their courtship plans (though they deny having one…have you ever noticed how courtship people deny having a plan yet still have one??) but really cares nothing about understanding guys. It’s so unfair. I have a father, brothers, guy cousins, and a few close guy friends—I’ve talked to them and I’ve studied them… and have come to the conclusion that my friends and all the girls like them are very mistaken about guys. Below is a list of mistaken beliefs and behaviors that I noted that many of them hold on to and my comments (if I have them) on the items noted.

—Girls with a strong courtship mindset often:


1. Seem afraid of guys; as if they think every young man they meet is going to want to marry them or at least try to ask them out.

I’ve known a lot of guys…as friends. Some are nice and some are kind of Charlie Sloanish (read the Anne of Green Gables books to see what I’m referring to) but not one of them has ever done anything that was truly startling. :-) It might have been annoying or even aggravating but nothing to be scared of or worried about. I just keep other people around when I’m talking to a guy...it’s not a big deal at all.

2. Don’t give guys a chance or the benefit of the doubt.

3. Have over-blown expectations about guys between the ages of 14-18 especially.

Do you really think he’s going to brave all and hasten to your rescue when he’s 16? Is he really going to be perfectly polished or romantic? This is your chance to be encouraging towards guys; they need your support. Just don’t expect perfection from them. You wouldn’t want them expecting you to be perfect all the time, would you?

At a homeschool convention that happened recently, there were a lot of young men who were trying to be “cool.” You know the type, acting like surfer dudes on the wrong beach. Maybe the reason they were acting like that, trying to be tough, was because they are terribly insecure. Adolescence is a tough enough time for young men even without heaping expectations upon them that they cannot measure up to. There is no way a normal guy can be everything Vision Forum wants them to be…I know there are guys who appear to be everything and more. But inside, they must feel hollow.

I've also noticed that at many conventions there are far more young women than young men attending and as I pondered this, I wondered....

Could all this “vision casting” be having a negative effect upon young men?

That’s a whole other post and I’m not sure that I have enough information to write it.

4. Don’t understand real love; it’s either sappy romance or having to make a formal decision...both things can be part of love but neither is all of it.

5. Don’t apply their knowledge gained from father/brothers/cousins to guys they are not related to.

6. Seem shy, cold, or rude towards young men in their effort to keep their distance.

7. Obsess over marriage but don’t understand what marriage is.

A lot of girls are in love with love or they want to have children. They don’t truly want to get married. I know they say they do…but they really don’t. My friends say (quite often) that they want to marry young and have lots of kids…but what they really talk about are the kids. The guy rarely comes into the discussion―they say nothing him and what they hope he’ll be like. When I think of marriage, words like; “being able to read his mind”, companionship, humor, and love come to mind—thoughts of children follow afterwards. I really like children but they’re not my motivation for wanting to get married.

If all you think about in marriage is children or mushy romance...then you’re not ready to marry.

Marriage is, to alter a Jack Sparrow quote, “It's not just a man and a woman and a house and some kids, that's what a marriage needs but what a marriage is... what a good marriage really is... is a miracle.”

8. Think that love can be turned off and on like a light switch.

Well-meaning family and friends have sadly been guilty of telling me that I should just pray “that God will take your feelings for so and so away .” And my response is, “What if He doesn’t want to take them away?” That always floors them :-)

9. Treat God like a vending machine… saying things like, “Well God gave me a desire for marriage so I’m sure I’ll get married really soon.”

Honey, you’ve got a lot to learn. God gives you desires and dreams to test you and is watching to see how you handle them. They are wonderful things but have to be handled properly to be of any use. Saying things like, “But what if God doesn’t want you to marry soon?” is always amusing. Especially, because the young lady normally cannot think of any reply to this but repeating the avowal in #9.

It’s also like saying, “God has given me the desire to have a handsome guy for my husband...so I’m sure my guy will be gorgeous!” Sheesh. And I always wonder, “What about the homely man with a beautiful heart?” (Elizabeth Elliot relates a conversation similar to this in Passion and Purity...I think.)

10. Are unwilling to even think about having to be bold with a guy at any time.

There are times when you’re going to need to make a move and go after your guy…they’re rare but they exist. Think Ruth. :-)

11. Think that there are very few nice guys out there.

The world is full of nice guys…stop being so pessimistic!

12. Thinks that guys are “heart-stealers”.

I've heard a speaker about courtship say, (I'll paraphrase) "If a young man comes to you after he's already stolen your daughter's heart then he can't court her." Many people seem to agree with this but my mind always yells: "STOLEN!!! What the heck?? The poor guy!! Who would want to marry your daughter… you, you reprobate!!" Ahem, anyway.... :-D

First off, there's that word. Steal. That means to take something without the owner's permission. God should be the owner of a person's heart and when a Christian young lady gives her heart to someone, it should be because it's God's will. There's no stealing involved. No one can force you to love someone anymore than anyone can force you to stop loving someone.

"It is mine to give to whom I choose…like my heart," – Arwen Evenstar, in the movie of The Fellowship of the Ring.

Understand this: your heart is a gift and you give it to whoever you choose. It cannot be stolen without your permission. So stop acting as if the exchanging of hearts is a robbery!

Then, there’s the obvious question: Do you honestly think that a normal young man actually tries to steal a girl's heart?

Do you think that a guy wakes up in the morning and thinks “I’ll make so and so fall in love with me today!”

Get real!

13. Think that all guys are Casanova heartbreakers that lead girls on.

A girl I knew once told me, "Any guy who leads a girl on and can't make a commitment is a jerk." I didn't agree with her then and I still don't now.

Because, I mean really, does a guy actually, purposely lead a girl on?

Think about it…if he knew what he was doing…would he actually do it?

I doubt it. In reality, I think most nice young men…the kind that are worth noticing…are just as nervous about girls as we are about guys. Maybe even more so…because after all, the guy is the one who has to lay his whole heart out on the line. Whenever he asks a girl out or talks to her Dad or asks her to marry him…he's giving her the chance to completely and totally wound him.

14. Use the excuse “he led me on!”

You can’t be lead anywhere unless you move your feet. Basically, unless he's asking you out, NEVER assume he likes you!


—And girls of any mindset seem to think:

15. That guys have no emotions.

I don’t know what idiot started that idea but womankind has been believing that’s it’s true for generations. For one thing, I can tell you that guys are sensitive and emotionally vulnerable―but they don’t talk about it all the time…if ever. Guys feel...deeply. I know they do. Have you ever seen a teenage boy after his team lost a ballgame and he thought it was his fault? Or when they’ve gotten really injured (but are trying to pretend they’re not really injured)? It’s worse for them...because they tend to stuff it and therefore, can suffer much more and for a longer time than girls. Stop seeing young men as shyster Casanova heart-stealers who are out to get you and start seeing them as human beings. They’re people too after all and have the same essential needs that girls have. Moreover, you may want to marry one someday and likely will end up being a mother... I think making an effort to understand guys is worth your time. So, give the guys a chance...before it's too late.

Ingrid


P.S. I don’t recommend books very often but if you need help understanding guys...this is a fairly good (clean) book: http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-About-Guys-Shouldnt-Secret/dp/0784715440/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196786739&sr=8-1

There are a few things I've discovered to be untrue or exaggerated in it but it's a good book to get you started being more empathetic towards young men. As with any self-help book though, it’s best to read it once and then refrain from referring to it unless you really need to. :-)

Of Daughters of Destiny and Watered Down History

I was eleven or twelve when I first read several stories in Daughters of Destiny, written by Noelle Wheeler Goforth. Her father, Little Bear Wheeler, had been in our area at a home school convention and we purchased the book from him. Now, I like Little Bear; he’s a very entertaining storyteller and a neat guy. But, of course, Daughters of Destiny was also sold by Vision Forum, which is enough “to give sober men pause.” (Actually, I believe DOD is out of print now, as I cannot locate it on the Vision Forum or Mantle Ministries websites.) I liked Daughters of Destiny when I was younger...but there was always something missing. Now, I know what it is.... I do a lot of histrical research and some of my pet projects/interests have been Queens of England; such as Elizabeth I and Victoria. In Daughters of Destiny, there is a story about Victoria in the “Daughters of Royalty” section and it is full of conflicts with the actual historical record. While DOD paints Victoria’s Mother, the Duchess of Kent, as a kind, intelligent woman who wished to shield her daughter from the court—she was in actuality, quite a silly, unkind woman; being manipulative and domineering towards her only daughter. Daughters of Destiny avows that the reason that the Duchess of Kent kept Victoria near her at all times, even having Victoria sleep in her room up until the girl became Queen, was that "she believed that no nurse or governess, however skilled she might be, could take the place of a Mother."1 The truth is that Victoria did have a governess named Louise Lehzen who was far closer to her than the Duchess of Kent. And the real reason the Duchess was so involved in Victoria's life was because she was a control freak and was also hoping to become regent. Of course, Victoria turned eighteen before becoming Queen and one of the first things she did was ask that her bed be moved from her Mother's room. Unfortunately, Daughters of Destiny bypasses such conflicts entirely. Many other stories in Daughters of Destiny suffer from this saccharine portrayal and end up making the “heroines” look quite wimpy—when in fact, most of them were strong, courageous women. They are “wimpy” because they actually have nothing to triumph over—even if problems are mentioned there is no real conflict, only melodrama. As in the Queen Victoria story, their future is obviously happy from the first sentence. By smoothing out their stories and eliminating the villains and bumps in their roads, the historical women are reduced to being merely docile, boring creatures who just expect everything to have a happy ending. As James Loewen says of textbooks, “The stories that history textbooks tell are predictable; every problem has already been solved or is about to be solved. Textbooks exclude conflict or real suspense. They leave out anything which might reflect badly upon our national character. When they try for drama, they achieve only melodrama, because readers know that everything will turn out fine in the end.” 2 “The optimistic approach prevents any understanding of failure other than blaming the victim.... After a thousand pages, bland optimism gets pretty offending for everyone.” 3 These excerpts weirdly fit for a book written by a homeschooler for homeschoolers and that's rather discouraging. I thought we homeschooled people were supposed to pursue the truth not regurgitate the same old legends.

Now, this may not be all Noelle Goforth’s fault. I remember Little Bear saying something like, “I encouraged Noelle to use all of the girl books in our library to compile a book to encourage young ladies.” She must have used their personal library because in the bibliography, there are 16 sources listed (with only titles and dates—no author or publisher names, unfortunately, which would make tracking them easier), and of those sources I could only locate 4-5 in my tri-county library system. Why? Well, they were all written before 1935; nine were written before 1900, three between 1900-1910, one between 1910-1920, and three between 1930-1940. Fitting in with this, I also recall Little Bear recommending the buying of old books, written in the 1800's especially, because "they will have a biblical worldview." Now, there's nothing wrong with old books but you have to be careful with their take on history and life in general. Why? Because they moralize everything. As with Victoria's mother being held in honour, even though the historical record shows that she was far from saintly, the history books (especially the ones for children) tend to twist away from facts in an effort to moralize or make them melodramatic or just stick to legends that have been proven false. I don't know why they did that back then but I can tell you that books written after 1930-40ish have a greater chance of being accurate. The reason for this, I think, is that the authors decided to go back to the historical record of first-hand accounts, letters, and diaries while researching them. When I'm researching something, if I can't find copies of original documents and such, I always pick out books written sometime after 1930 to the present and I check their bibliographies for strong sources. For a good example of what you can find in older books, I have a book from 1922, about Queen Elizabeth I. In this volume, it asserts the Victorian idea that "women do not experience the slightest desire before marriage."4 That idea is laughable at best, infuriating at worst—all of such research has been proven wrong and was an entirely male assumption anyway. (Don't get me started on what I call, "The Victorian Repression Doctrine: tell women nothing about anything and leave them in ignorance and fear for the greater part of their lives. You know, they might think about things and that would just be wrong." No wonder women were so afraid of childbirth if no one told them what to expect! *rolling eyes*)

Older books are also terribly racist—not just to African Americans in regards to slavery but also to American Indians. In Daughters of Destiny, Pocahontas and Sacagawea are portrayed as good, which they were; but in other parts of the book, words such as "savages" and "red men" are also used in reference to Indians. I'm a European American but I don't like the white supremacist or Eurocentric viewpoints one bit—in anything—and especially not in "Christian" publications.

Martha Finley is given a glowing story in Daughters of Destiny and it is even said, "Because of the strong Christian content that surfaces throughout Elsie's life, Miss Finley was blackballed. She was ignored by contemporary critics and by such popular children's magazines of her day as St. Nicholas and Youths Companion." 5 First off, I doubt that she was blackballed because of the Christian content of the novels—as I've already said; almost all books for children in the ninetieth century were written with extremely moralistic views. So, I don't know why she was blackballed or if she even was…I can hope it had to do with the melodrama or racism in the Elsie books. Yes, there's racism in the Elsie Dinsmore series…does that really surprise you? Here’s an Elsie review if you're not familiar with these books or if you are and you don't believe me about the racism. http://www.keepersofthefaith.com/category/ElsieDinsmoreAnEnigma (I don't know anything about this site but I thought the review is quite interesting.)

Older books may be written from a biblical worldview but how can that help anything if they are incorrect in their facts or racist. Use them at your own risk and be very careful with any historical books recommended by Vision Forum. The Henty series, Beautiful Girlhood series, and many other old or historically-inspired books sold by Vision Forum have incorrect historical material and white supremacist overtones. They are also inclined towards "heroification" of historical figures. As a matter of fact, most of Vision Forum's and even Mantle Ministries' "historical" teachings are full of errors, legends, and Eurocentric assumptions. (Even though we're Americans most of us are technically European Americans and therefore, can still be Eurocentric.) Remember, a book (or even a lecture) can only be as good as its sources and Daughters of Destiny has very poor ones. The only reason I still have it is because I like some of the poetry selections—at least they can be taken at face value.

Definitions -

White supremacy: racial view; the view that white people are supposedly genetically and culturally superior to all other people or races and should therefore rule over them.

Eurocentric: Focusing on Europe; focusing on Europe or its people, institutions, and cultures, often in a way that is arrogantly dismissive of others.

1: Daughters of Destiny, Noelle Wheeler Goforth, page 130.
2: Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything your American History Textbook Got Wrong, James
W. Loewen, Introduction, Page 5.
3: Ibid; Introduction, Page 6.
4. The Private Character of Queen Elizabeth, Chamberlin, Frederick.
5 Daughters of Destiny, Noelle Wheeler Goforth, page 208.
“That's the sort of thought that gives sober men pause” – Linus Van Pelt

Two books I recommend:

- Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen. I absolutely loved this book and it was a very fast read. Do keep in mind though, that you may not agree with everything Mr. Loewen says, mostly in the last few chapters. The sections on Columbus, Vietnam, the Reconstruction, and American Indians were very informative and intriguing.

- The Good Old Days: They were Terrible! by Otto Bettmann. If you're as tired of I am of people talking about "the good old days" especially homeschooled girls (mostly sighing about the clothes people used to wear) and patriarchy type people, then you'll love this book. Once you read it, you'll know what Solomon meant when he said, "Do not say, "Why were the old days better than these?" For it is not wise to ask such questions." Ecclesiastes 7:10.

Ingrid

The Way of a Man with a Maid

I've been reading this online book, by Robin Phillips.

The Way of a Man with a Maid ~ A Response to the Courtship & Betrothal Movements

http://www.users.waitrose.com/~robinphillips/Way%20of%20a%20Man%20with%20a%20Maid.htm

It's very interesting because I can see parallels in Gothard's teaching with all the Vision Forum stuff and Lindvall's teaching is very similar to that of the Botkin's and also Emotional Purity. Hmmm... I guess this junk has been around for longer than I thought! Maybe Heather Paulson got her ideas and material from several of the authors mentioned in this book? It bears some consideration.

What do you think?

Ingrid

Better Ways to Spend the Summer

If you read any of the "self-help" books, then you begin to analyze everything and end up thinking more and more about yourself and your problem(s) and not about God and other people. Whereas if you would just keep busy with helping others and reading other books (i.e. about real things and classic fiction) then you wouldn't have time to need the "self-help" books because you are too busy to think about yourself. Believe me, it works.

Recommended Summer...

Reading:

Fiction:
Great Expectations by Charles Dickens.
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen.
Little Women by Louisa May Alcott.
The Sarah's Journey series by Wanda Luttrell.
Emma by Jane Austen.
Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens.
The Betsy-Tacy series by Maud Hart Lovelace. (Including Carney's House Party.)
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court by Mark Twain.
The Hobbit by J.R.R Tolkien
The Lord of the Rings series by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Shakespeare's Plays and Poems.
The Anne of Green Gables series by L.M. Montgomery.
Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie.
The Witch of Blackbird Pond by Elizabeth George Speare.
Johnny Tremain by Esther Forbes.
The Liza, Bill, and Jed series by Peggy Parish.

Non-Fiction:
My Story by Ingrid Bergman and Robert Burgress.
Catherine the Queen by Mary M. Luke.
A Crown for Elizabeth by Mary M. Luke.
Gloriana: The years of Elizabeth I by Mary M. Luke.
Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson by Peter Kurth
All the Presidents Men by Bob Woodward and Carl Burnstein. Also the sequel, "The Final Days.". (There is some language in these but oh well.)
Paul Revere and the World He Lived In by Esther Forbes.
The Bible.
Various Autobiographies of Interesting People.

DVD Airings:
Casablanca
Chariots of Fire
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Little Women (1994)
The Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew TV series from the 1970's.
Anastasia (starring Ingrid Bergman)
Ever After (great score (music) as well)
What a Girl Wants
Hairspray (2007)
Emma (with Gwyneth Paltrow)
The Original Star Wars Trilogy
Gone with the Wind
Enchanted
Follow Me Boys
Gummi Bears series
Summer Magic
Elizabethtown

And when you're done with all that...go hiking or something. :-D

I think that this is how people lived in the past...they kept very busy and didn't have time to analyze things. We could all learn a thing or two from them. :-)

Random Thoughts

I’ve finished my school for the day and am going to post some random thoughts that have been rattling around in my brain for several days.

Wow! I made it onto Josh Harris’ blog! http://www.joshharris.com/

“Stomach-Churning Tales and First Kisses "Joshua Harris' next book, Boy Meets Girl , was a good read and again, he presents his ideas in suggestion form. I enjoyed his and Shannon's story but some of the others made my stomach churn." (Read the full post here.)”

It’s not the most flattering way to mention my essay but hey, it’s still interesting.

I’ve gotten notice from YLCF http://www.ylcf.org/ on my “Seeking Perfection” essay and waaayy more hits due to that. I had no idea YLCF had such a following! :-)

Why did they use a picture of Felicity and Arthur? Hahahae. (That’s a Latin expression of amusement.) Funny, I’m not sure if I even thought about my blog being controversial. Okay, okay, “Life in Perfect” made some people mad but they could use a bit of lightening up. It was a good joke that I thought up while doing laundry, that’s all. Let it Be = Love3 (that means love3 as in math, you know like x3 because it’s Love, Love, Love.) is the focus of my blog.

I actually clicked around at YLCF for the first time and found some interesting stuff. Why did someone comment that I don’t recommend any books, just criticize them? It looks to me like the same person wrote almost all of their book reviews. (Note: Under Maud Hart Lovelace, they forgot to mention the other 6 Betsy books. There are 4 High School and 1 traveling and 1 when she gets married. There. I recommended some books! :-D) And why would anyone care if my essay mentions courtship a bunch? YLCF has tons of courtship stories and then a whole “romance lover’s nook”. http://www.ylcf.org/romance/ Ick. Yuck. Eww. "Bad site! Mess you up!" :-D (The romance stuff not the rest of it.) Sometimes I think we focus on mushy stuff too much...waayy too much. I actually can’t say whether I like YLCF or not; it’s not really my thing but I don’t mind if it is someone else’s thing. :-) So I suppose I feel like Rick in the scene below.

Ugarte: You are a very cynical person, Rick, if you forgive me for saying so. Rick: I forgive you. Ugarte: You despise me, don't you? Rick: Well, if I gave you any thought, I probably would. ~ Rick (Humphrey Bogart) and Ugarte (Peter Lorre) in Casablanca, 1942.

That probably is the best description of my feelings about most everything—save for a good cause. Which, as we see later in Casablanca, Rick loves a good cause too. (If you've never seen Casablanca go watch it right now! :-)

Why do women write so many of the self-help books? With the exception of Joshua Harris, where are the men? I like Josh Harris books because they are very rational and down to earth. Women have too much of a tendency to be irrational—I know, because I am one. This looks like a good book and it’s written by a man, Doing Things Right in Matters of the Heart.

Why does this blog, http://readevenmore.blogspot.com/ say this: “Let it be = Love3...one woman's thoughts on emotional purity--contains some good thoughts but also some unnecessary inflammatory remarks.” Ouch! Why is my site the only one picked on?! As if some of these other ones didn’t have “unnecessary inflammatory remarks.” Good grief. And the site even says, “This is a Conversation, not an inquisition or trial. There will be nothing inflammatory, accusatory, immature, or personally insulting to any author tolerated.” I find the extra commentary on my blog “personally insulting.” “I know when I‘ve been insulted! I know when I’ve been insulted!” :-D

Why do people make an idol of chocolate? You know, how girls (err…people) say, “We’ll have chocolate oooooo!!!” Eww is more like it. I mean I like chocolate but too much of it gives me a headache. So it tastes good but so do lots of things. Talking about chocolate or having a web page on it is dumb. It’s like saying: I really like asparagus so I think I should start a whole webpage on asparagus for all the asparagus lovers out there. :-D Hahahae. Actually, asparagus might need the support since it's not very well liked but chocolate does not--almost everyone likes it.

Why are so there many comments by women on blogs written by men? For instance, on a random post on James McDonald’s blog, four of the comments are from women and one is from a man. (I just said “random post” because I’m not picking a certain one. I’m not saying the content was random. :-)) Of course it’s not Mr. McDonald’s fault at all but doesn’t that seem a little weird? Where are the women’s husbands? Isn’t patriarchy about the father shaping his families vision? (I just chose Mr. McDonald blog at random...I’m not picking on it at all. :-))

Oh, here’s another book I like, Secrets About Guys: (That Shouldn't Be Secret). Because it’s informative without being over the top and very delicate—unlike the majority of books on the shelves these days. I’m still wondering why boys don’t get a book about us, if we get one on them. :-)

Read the books, memorize them, and then work out your own philosophy. It’s a lot like making up a recipe; a hint of this idea, a pinch of that one, and there you go...your very own lifestyle. :-D
Oh, I recommended more books!

Why did patriarchy catch on at all? It’s based on the Old Testament patriarchs’ right? Most of them were quite messed up. Abraham lied, Isaac chose a deceiving wife, Jacob stole, Jacob’s kids threw their brother in a well and then sold him as a slave—”the patriarchs” are more a lesson in what NOT to do. I don’t know much about this issue and I haven’t researched it at all but sometimes things just don’t make any sense to begin with. Jesus didn’t tell us to go and be like Abraham did he? Did he tell us to read Deuteronomy and follow those rules? I don’t think so. Maybe the patriarch people need to study the gospels more and really think about what Jesus said.

Okay, so what if you don’t like some of my comments, pick what you like and ignore the rest, come on. Let it Be. It’s only my opinion and my friends and family know that I can be a bit too blunt sometimes. But, sometimes you have to say what you think; even if others don’t agree with you.

Ingrid

“I have no regrets. I wouldn't have lived my life the way I did if I was going to worry about what people were going to say.” ~ Ingrid Bergman.