Would it be wrong to be around them?

[christulsa]

I was attempting to help you understand—AS YOU REQUESTED A COUPLE POSTS AGO—why your repeated words to Awkwardcustomer are objectively insulting and mean, by using example, which btw are just as subjective in everyday experience as they are objective. Not trying to win an argument   You ASKED.  Remember?  Were you sincerely asking for help to better understand your behavior or not?   

[christulsa]

Afterwards you've continued several long posts defending your parenting style, including several such posts before I even posted in this thread.  Why so defensive? 

This is just the sort of question you would not need to ask if you had children. You would have personal experience that would allow you to already understand.

Well, I wouldn't be so defensive about my future parenting style to the extent of cluttering/distracting a long thread talking about myself with several long diatribes about one particular parenting choice I make in a family situation, because one person makes one singular post critiquing the way that situation is handled as described when asked their opinion.  I would never online say "I could care less if my mother goes to hell if that's her choice," criticize my father as "milquetoast," or praise my wife "going off on my mother" as "awesome," all as part of my argument that my children shouldn't spend time alone with an anti-Catholic grandparent (which I agreed with btw).   How one can find this defensible from a Catholic viewpoint is beyond me.

[Jayne]

Well, I wouldn't be so defensive about my future parenting style to the extent of cluttering/distracting a long thread talking about myself with several long diatribes about one particular parenting choice I make in a family situation, because one person makes one singular post critiquing the way that situation is handled as described when asked their opinion.

You don't know what you would do if you were a parent.  You can't imagine it.  It is completely outside your experience, no matter how many kinds of interactions you have had with children.

You do not understand how raw it makes your emotions or anything else about how it feels.  The more you say, the more you prove that there is a huge gap between those with the experience and those without.

I have found Gardener's posts in this thread interesting and thought-provoking.  As I recall, I thanked a few of them.  As a parent, I could relate to what he was talking about. Your posts criticizing him are the ones that seem strange.

[John Lamb]

Afterwards you've continued several long posts defending your parenting style, including several such posts before I even posted in this thread.  Why so defensive? 

This is just the sort of question you would not need to ask if you had children. You would have personal experience that would allow you to already understand.

While there are all sorts of principles and abstract ideas that anyone can talk about, some things are only understood through experience.  Single people don't know what being married feels like. Childless people don't know what being a parent feels like.  Lay people don't know what being a priest feels like. Etc.

The crushing responsibility of being a parent is only understood by those who have experienced it.

Being a parent doesn't make you morally superior. The whole "you don't know what it's like being x, because you're not x, so shut up about x" shtick sounds like a whiny victim mentality: it's not fair to criticise me because you haven't walked in my shoes. That's emotional defensiveness and refusal to justify one's actions, lashing out angrily at the other person for making you reflect on yourself and scrutinise your decisions. If it wasn't "you don't know what it's like to have children so shut up," it would probably be another layer of defensiveness, "you don't know what it's like to have my children so shut up." Such defensiveness reveals that one is inwardly conflicted about one's actions, and also a refusal to reexamine them because it might reveal that one is wrong, mistaken, or even guilty to some extent.

If you're truly taking your parental responsibility seriously then surely you'd be willing to hear some criticism or opposing views and examine them to see if it might help you be a better parent. But in fact nearly every parent does fail their children to some extent; and the great tragedy is not so much the failure itself, but the parent's refusal to acknowledge it because of the guilt they wish to hide from. That's why parents can often act high and mighty and morally superior when children are brought up: they're hiding from their guilt.

Yeah being a parent is an enormous responsibility. That's why it's so important to be humble and not be too hard on yourself. A lukewarm priest who throws up layers of anger and emotion at the least suggestion he's failing in his pastoral duties, "you don't know what it's like to be in charge of people's salvation", is in a way taking himself far too seriously and exaggerating the burden of his responsibility way out of proportion as an excuse not to tackle the real and manageable burden that God has actually given him. Yes saving souls is an enormous responsibility, that's why God gave it to Christ and why you're only Christ's steward, so be humble, accept your imperfections, and do better. The same goes for parents. Yeah your responsibility is great; but you're only stewards of God the Father, so don't crush yourself with pressure and use that as a way to avoid seeing your actual shortcomings. God is forgiving, and nobody can be a good parent without His help. That's why there's no need to be angry or defensive; we're all bound to fail until God rescues us.

[christulsa]

Well, I wouldn't be so defensive about my future parenting style to the extent of cluttering/distracting a long thread talking about myself with several long diatribes about one particular parenting choice I make in a family situation, because one person makes one singular post critiquing the way that situation is handled as described when asked their opinion.

You don't know what you would do if you were a parent.  You can't imagine it.  It is completely outside your experience, no matter how many kinds of interactions you have had with children.

You do not understand how raw it makes your emotions or anything else about how it feels.  The more you say, the more you prove that there is a huge gap between those with the experience and those without.

I have found Gardener's posts in this thread interesting and thought-provoking.  As I recall, I thanked a few of them.  As a parent, I could relate to what he was talking about. Your posts criticizing him are the ones that seem strange.

1. You might want to get your facts straight.  H asked my opinion before I ever posted in this thread. I gave it in ONE post pages back in the thread.  G later thought I was calling him a bunker trad, I clarified that I wasn't.

2. Don't you find it strange that a traditional Catholic as yourself would take issue with me criticizing what is obviously disrespect towards one's parents?   What you're being is territorial about what you perceive to be the forum consensus, as if what I said is in opposition to trads posting here in general.  I guarantee you'd correcting me if I spoke that way about my parents here.

Which is why I'm taking a break from the forum, after this thread.   The little cliques using snark and insult to win daily arguments, thread after thread, is as unedifying as it is a ridiculous waste of time.

[Jayne]

Being a parent doesn't make you morally superior.

I am reasonably sure that nobody claimed that it did, (I know that I didn't) so I do not see why you are posting this. 

A thread like this, where it pretty much turns into people taking sides based on whether or not they have children, is, in itself, evidence that the experience of parenthood makes a difference.  The parents here understand what the other parents are talking about.  The non-parents do not.

I'm sure that nobody is trying to be hurtful or insulting, but parents are not likely to value the opinions of non-parents on this subject.  Don't take it personally.

[John Lamb]

You do not understand how raw it makes your emotions or anything else about how it feels.  The more you say, the more you prove that there is a huge gap between those with the experience and those without.

Angry victim mentality.

To see how this is the case, imagine asking a bishop why clerical sex abuse is being covered up, reminding him of his pastoral duties before Christ, and being told, "you don't know what it's like to be a bishop or priest. The more you say, the more you prove there's a huge gap between the experience of a cleric and a layman."

"I've suffered through seminary and the priesthood in order to become a bishop, so why should I have to answer the questions of a mere layman?"

"I've suffered through giving birth and raising a child, so why should I have to answer to someone who doesn't even have children?"

My own mother has this mentality. I can't mention to her any way that she might have failed or neglected me because her immediate response is to turn herself into the victim by saying, "oh, so I'm the worst mother in the world." But of course I do not believe and could not suggest any such thing, and she makes out as though I'm accusing her and being unfair to her, in order to avoid looking at herself. This is the way mothers hide from their guilt.

I have a lot of sympathy because I know mothers do put a lot of pressure on themselves and their failings as parents are a consequence of their own flawed upbringing, but it's this fierce defensiveness and victim mentality that mothers develop which very often prevents them from coming to terms with themselves, reconciling with their children, and providing them with what they hadn't provided before. A very visible example would be a single mother who keeps on getting in bad relationships, because if she got in a good one it would bring up all the guilt and shame she feels for not providing her children with a real father figure in the first place. She'd rather keep the family in a dysfunctional state than go through the pain of facing her guilt. And no wonder, it would make many mothers suicidal. But we have God to forgive us for our faults so we should not hide from them.

[John Lamb]

I'm sure that nobody is trying to be hurtful or insulting, but parents are not likely to value the opinions of non-parents on this subject.

Parents who are ridden with guilt and have developed a victim mentality to hide themselves from it. People who are not emotionally hung up about something just weigh the advice or argument on its own merits; they don't attack the messenger.

[christulsa]

Being a parent doesn't make you morally superior.

I'm sure that nobody is trying to be hurtful or insulting, but parents are not likely to value the opinions of non-parents on this subject.  Don't take it personally.

Set aside intentions.  Was Gardener being insulting to his parents in this thread as I pointed out?  Yes or no.

How is JL "taking it personally"?   You're implying he's a non-parent.  Maybe he is, maybe he isn't.  Maybe you know him better than I do, or you are presuming who is or isn't a parent.

[awkwardcustomer]

Maybe you are right. Maybe I am super mean. Anyone else care to chime in on this? The only thing that is puzzling me is why you think what I have said is mean. I mean, the thing you seem to take the most offense to (routinely) is me pointing out that you have no children...? What gives? This is not an insult. Having no children does not make you less of a woman, it does not make you less of a trad, it does not make you less of a Catholic. Why are you treating it like an insult? If you said I was not a plumber and knew nothing about toilets so I should be quiet when the men are discussing copper vs PVC, I would respect that. I am not a plumber, it is a simple fact. I am not a great many things, that is the nature of life; one can only do so much. I do not consider being married and/or having children "the" mark of godly womanhood. when I point out that you are not married or have no children I am not saying that you are "lesser." I am simply observing morally neutral facts and stating them. This can hardly be called mean, nasty, or anything else.

Wow, I have to hand it to you for having the gall to attempt this. 

Trying to needle me with repeated references to my lack of family and then 'wondering' why I would be upset at you continually pointing this out when you're only 'stating facts.'

Unbelievable.

Here's what you said, &%(*&.

"You don't have a family and you hate the fact that the lifeblood of tradition is families, the future of tradition is families; not my problem."

"Giving your whole life to God and loving your children for His sake and according to His Will, is giving all your love to God. You have obviously created a cute little pedestal for yourself, but don't expect me to indulge your silly notions."

"You have proven over and over again how much you hate the fact that trad families are the reason we have priests, nuns, alter boys, etc."

"Most single people I know love big trad families, and many aspire to start their own. You are obviously not one of these people, but don't assume everyone takes such offense to basic facts as you do."

"you hate", "you hate", you say.

A fact, you say.

Go at get lost, *&^%$, and take your gaslightling dishonesty elsewhere.

[Jayne]

Which is why I'm taking a break from the forum, after this thread (this is my last post).  The little cliques using snark and insult to win daily arguments, thread after thread, is as unedifying as it is a ridiculous waste of time.

While I often find Gardener's posts articulate and insightful, it is absurd to claim that we form a clique.  Certain people here tend to agree with certain others depending on the subject.

I am likely to agree with awkwardcustomer on the subject of health and nutrition.  I am likely to agree with coffeeandcigarettes on the subject of historical costuming.  I am likely to agree with Xavier about the Rosary.  I think that everyone who has posted on this thread is someone whose posts I have thanked at some point. 

If I had to name a clique on this forum, until recently I would have said that it was you, Heinrich and Gardener, since you keep making references to how you have met in person.  And I suppose we could consider Greg and his brothers a clique, but I don't know if that is really fair to say about family.  But I don't think that there is really much clique dynamic on this forum at all.

[Jayne]

Set aside intentions.  Was Gardener being insulting to his parents in this thread as I pointed out?  Yes or no.

How is JL "taking it personally"?   You're implying he's a non-parent.  Maybe he is, maybe he isn't.  Maybe you know him better than I do, or you are presuming who is or isn't a parent.

There are guidelines about doing fraternal correction properly.  One of them is doing it in private. If I thought that Gardener had written something wrong and it was my place to correct him, I would send him a PM, not post about it.

JL has revealed in a post that he single and childless and I remembered that.

[christulsa]

Which is why I'm taking a break from the forum, after this thread (this is my last post).  The little cliques using snark and insult to win daily arguments, thread after thread, is as unedifying as it is a ridiculous waste of time.

While I often find Gardener's posts articulate and insightful, it is absurd to claim that we form a clique.  Certain people here tend to agree with certain others depending on the subject.

I am likely to agree with awkwardcustomer on the subject of health and nutrition.  I am likely to agree with coffeeandcigarettes on the subject of historical costuming.  I am likely to agree with Xavier about the Rosary.  I think that everyone who has posted on this thread is someone whose posts I have thanked at some point. 

If I had to name a clique on this forum, until recently I would have said that it was you, Heinrich and Gardener, since you keep making references to how you have met in person.  And I suppose we could consider Greg and his brothers a clique, but I don't know if that is really fair to say about family.  But I don't think that there is really much clique dynamic on this forum at all.

You're being manipulative here as usual.  1. You dodged my questions because you know it's hypocritical of you to criticize me for criticizing another trad for bashing their parents online  2. You honed in on the word "clique" to distort my objections to the typical forum BS.

[Jayne]

Which is why I'm taking a break from the forum, after this thread (this is my last post).  The little cliques using snark and insult to win daily arguments, thread after thread, is as unedifying as it is a ridiculous waste of time.

While I often find Gardener's posts articulate and insightful, it is absurd to claim that we form a clique.  Certain people here tend to agree with certain others depending on the subject.

I am likely to agree with awkwardcustomer on the subject of health and nutrition.  I am likely to agree with coffeeandcigarettes on the subject of historical costuming.  I am likely to agree with Xavier about the Rosary.  I think that everyone who has posted on this thread is someone whose posts I have thanked at some point. 

If I had to name a clique on this forum, until recently I would have said that it was you, Heinrich and Gardener, since you keep making references to how you have met in person.  And I suppose we could consider Greg and his brothers a clique, but I don't know if that is really fair to say about family.  But I don't think that there is really much clique dynamic on this forum at all.

You're being manipulative here as usual.  1. You dodged my questions because you know it's hypocritical of you to criticize me for criticizing another trad for bashing their parents online  2. You honed in on the word "clique" to distort my objections to the typical forum BS, and 3. You inserted "(this is my last post") back into the quote.  I know this because I deleted it seconds after, and you've already made several other posts since I edited that out.  When a poster re-edits their post, you don't have the right to change it back for others to read.

I did not insert anything into your quote.  I started replying to your post before you edited it and posted it while unaware that you had done so. You are mistaken about the sequence of events.

[christulsa]

Which is why I'm taking a break from the forum, after this thread (this is my last post).  The little cliques using snark and insult to win daily arguments, thread after thread, is as unedifying as it is a ridiculous waste of time.

While I often find Gardener's posts articulate and insightful, it is absurd to claim that we form a clique.  Certain people here tend to agree with certain others depending on the subject.

I am likely to agree with awkwardcustomer on the subject of health and nutrition.  I am likely to agree with coffeeandcigarettes on the subject of historical costuming.  I am likely to agree with Xavier about the Rosary.  I think that everyone who has posted on this thread is someone whose posts I have thanked at some point. 

If I had to name a clique on this forum, until recently I would have said that it was you, Heinrich and Gardener, since you keep making references to how you have met in person.  And I suppose we could consider Greg and his brothers a clique, but I don't know if that is really fair to say about family.  But I don't think that there is really much clique dynamic on this forum at all.

You're being manipulative here as usual.  1. You dodged my questions because you know it's hypocritical of you to criticize me for criticizing another trad for bashing their parents online  2. You honed in on the word "clique" to distort my objections to the typical forum BS, and 3. You inserted "(this is my last post") back into the quote.  I know this because I deleted it seconds after, and you've already made several other posts since I edited that out.  When a poster re-edits their post, you don't have the right to change it back for others to read.

I did not insert anything into your quote.  I started replying to your post before you edited it and posted it while unaware that you had done so. You are mistaken about the sequence of events.

Ok, I went ahead and changed that since I edited the original later than I at first said, so I can't prove you re-inserted it, even though it would be typical of you to do that.  Still playing the part of forum Mother Hen, aren't we Jayne?  The reason John is calling you out on acting superior, is because that is how you act.   Not because you have any superior gifts of knowledge or logical argumentation or wisdom, but because you think having children makes you superior to trads who don't.  Most trad parents in my experience don't have this narcissistic sense of superiority to others, but your comments only prove that some in fact do.