Male Celebrity Says He’s Happy Being Childless – I’m Awaiting the Attacks by the Tucker Carlsons, Abby Johnsons, and Matt Walshes Shaming This Man For Being Fine With Not Having Kids

Male Celebrity Says He’s Happy Being Childless – I’m Awaiting the Attacks by the Usual: The Tucker Carlsons, Abby Johnsons, and Matt Walshes, Shaming This Man For Being Fine With Not Having Kids

Will movie actor Seth Rogen get backlash from hyper-pro-parenthood conservatives for publicly admitting that he’s fine with being childless, as did comic Chelsea Handler?

If you’re new to my blog: I’m a conservative who is not anti-family, anti-parenthood, or anti-marriage, but can see how many other conservatives have wrongly placed undue emphasis upon marriage, parenthood, and The Nuclear Family. (I am not a woke, abortion-supporting feminist progressive, in other words.)

I’ve so far seen a very small number of people on Twitter saying, “Ha ha, I’m glad Rogen isn’t reproducing” and a few that are critical of him being childfree, but there’s hardly been any resistance or criticism over his childfree choice by everyday people on that platform.

Will Tucker Carlson tell Rogen that by putting career over family, he’s ultimately choosing misery?

(On his nightly Fox news program, Carlson often likes to mock working women who are childless, he likes to argue that they are trading in motherhood – which he equates with guaranteed happiness for all women – for devoting their lives to a corporation.

I’ve never heard Carlson say to single, childless men: “You’re trading in happiness over having kids for a career, you sucker.”
This rhetoric is only directed at women. It’s a double standard.

Also, if a single, childless woman doesn’t earn a pay check, if she doesn’t hold down a job somewhere, is Tucker Carlson going to pay her rent for her, while she’s out dating, to try and find a “Mr. Right” to marry and pro-create with? My guess is no.)

Will sexist Matt Walsh (who’s correct about the transgender debate but little else) mock Rogen for “pushing 50 and being childless,” and suggest he will die alone in a room full of cats, as he did with comic Chelsea Handler? -Probably not.

Even should the usual culprits, who constantly try to shame, criticize, and fear monger women into getting pregnant and having children, should actually criticize Rogen over passing up Fatherhood, it will be a very, very rare exception that does not counter the repeated bashing of childless women that these extreme “pro family” conservatives have been aiming at women for decades.

And, I would guess that on the chance they would confront a man on his being childless, they would do so without using the same level of gross sexism and ageism at a man for passing up parenthood that they commonly direct at women, such as the phrases and jokes about “hitting the wall,” tweeting  photos of empty egg cartons, and making “crazy cat lady” jokes.

I do not think that men or women should be shamed, guilt tripped, or scared into getting married or having children, but I’ve noticed for many years that most of the criticism for being single or childless is more often than not directed at women.

(Link): Seth Rogen Says He and His Wife Are ‘Happy’ They Didn’t Have Kids

(Link): Seth Rogen: Not having kids ‘has helped me succeed’ 

Seth Rogen says he and his wife are “happy” with their “choice to not have kids” — and he believes it’s only boosted his career.

(Link): Seth Rogen claims he’s more successful because he did not have kids: ‘Honestly, thank God’

Seth Rogen and wife Lauren Miller ‘get to do whatever we want’ because they do not have kids, actor says

March 11, 2023
By Stephanie Giang-Paunon | Fox News

Seth Rogen is crediting his success to not having children.

The “Knocked Up” star candidly opened up about his personal life and the reason behind why he and his wife Lauren Miller decided not to start a family of their own.

“I do not [have kids]. That has helped me succeed as well, definitely” Rogen laughed during an interview on The Diary of a CEO podcast.

“There’s a whole huge thing I’m not doing, which is raising children.”

The 40-year-old actor continued to say he doesn’t believe having kids would make him happy.

“I’ve been around obviously a lot of children, I’m not ignorant to what it’s like…everyone I know has kids…some of my friends have had kids for decades,” he quipped.

“Some people want kids, some people don’t want kids. Honestly, you just are told, ‘You go through life, you get married, you have kids.’ That’s what happens…me and my wife, neither of us were like that.”

39-Year-Old Woman Goes Viral For Honest Videos On What Her Childfree Life Looks Like

39-Year-Old Woman Goes Viral For Honest Videos On What Her Childfree Life Looks Like

(Link): This Woman Went Viral For Sharing That She Ultimately Had To End A Relationship Because Her Partner Wanted Kids And She Didn’t, And It’s Something That Should Be Talked About More

“People need to stop asking women when they will have kids. Women need to be encouraged to do whatever the hell they want with their lives. Like any stigma, the more we normalize it, the better it will get.”

(Link): 39-Year-Old Woman Goes Viral For Honest Videos On What Her Childfree Life Looks Like

Excerpts:

In recent years, there has been a growing number of women who have been vocal about remaining child-free. The reasons behind their choice vary, but common ones are concerns about financial stability, the desire to focus on personal interests and careers, and broader things like overpopulation.

39-year-old Vancouver-based photographer and artist Jackie Dives is one of these advocates. In addition to her creative work, Jackie uses social media to break the ice and invites the public to talk about (not) having children.

Photographer Jackie Dives has made a conscious decision not to have kids

To normalize the discussion about this choice, she runs a TikTok vlog series

“I was surprised by how many people have commented that they experienced the same thing,” Jackie explained to BuzzFeed. “I think the root cause of this is that everyone tells women they will change their mind. You might have a strong conviction that you don’t want kids, but if everyone in your life is telling you that you will change your mind or that you will regret not having them, it can be very difficult to walk away from someone you love to stay true to your convictions.”

“People need to stop asking women when they will have kids,” Jackie said. “Women need to be encouraged to do whatever the hell they want with their lives. Like any stigma, the more we normalize it, the better it will get. People need to stop gaslighting women about what they want from their own lives.”

The Chelsea Handler Childless Woman Upset: Other Conservatives Wrongly Conflating Married Motherhood with Womanhood or Happiness, Meaning, Purpose

The Chelsea Handler Childless Woman Upset: Other Conservatives Wrongly Conflating Married Motherhood with Womanhood or with Happiness, Meaning, or Purpose

After entertainer Chelsea Handler uploaded (Link): a Tweet with a video of herself listing the numerous ways she enjoys life due to being childless – I didn’t see anything in the video mentioning abortion – a lot of other conservatives jumped to shame and scold Handler for being happy about being childless and publicly expressing that happiness.

Others have said that Handler had two or three abortions in the past. The fact that Handler previously had abortions does not change the substance of my problems with conservative reaction to Handler’s video.

I am pro-life, not pro-choice, so I don’t agree with Handler’s actions to terminate her pregnancies.

However, again, I don’t recall Handler’s “happy to be childless” video advocating abortion or mentioning anything about abortion.

I don’t think her video criticized or shamed women for being mothers or for wanting to be mothers.

The only possible, even remotely “anti motherhood” take away one can get from her video is that mothers – assuming they are good, non-abusive mothers – invest a lot of time in child-rearing, but Handler doesn’t frame it in an anti-motherhood way.

It’s Okay For Women to Be Childless at Any Age and to be Happy About Being Childless, Just Like It’s Okay For Mothers to Be Happy About Being Mothers

Handler was just showing ways she has more free time because she doesn’t have to participate in childcare – which is not the same thing as being “anti-motherhood,” or telling other women they are wrong to be mothers.

It’s perfectly fine for a woman to be single and childless and to be happy about it.

Women can and should find meaning and purpose apart from marriage and motherhood. It’s unhealthy for any person to wrap up all their happiness, meaning, or purpose into one identity, station of life, or role.

If you are a married mother, your children will grow up, move out, and seldom visit you once they’re gone. Your husband may develop dementia, abuse you, or cheat on you, so that you will be without emotional support or you will have to divorce him.
In all these situations, you will be left with yourself, by yourself, and god help you if you never forged purpose, identity, happiness, or meaning apart from a spouse and children.

There’s no reason to criticize or shame an adult, man or woman, for being single and childless and for being happy about it and posting about it.

My fellow conservatives often push motherhood (via podcasts, tweets, magazine articles, church sermons, blog posts, etc) to a loopy, creepy, fevered pitch, about how super awesome, fulfilling, and wonderful motherhood supposedly is – but goodness forbid a childless woman lists or publicizes the ways she’s happy with being childless – and do so without criticizing motherhood or mothers. That’s a huge double standard.

I also didn’t agree with Handler’s mockery of single women who choose to remain virgins until marriage or to remain chaste (I blogged about that (Link): here a few years ago).

Unfortunately, in the midst of criticizing Handler, a lot of conservatives today were conflating “womanhood” to married motherhood. 

However, a woman remains a woman regardless if she has a child or is infertile, childless, or childfree, or whether she wants to have children or not.

Dear Abby: “My Kids Never Call or Visit Me” – Your Adult Children Do Not Owe You Friendship and Won’t Visit You When You Are Elderly: Readjust Your Expectations, Parents

Dear Abby: “My Kids Never Call or Visit Me” – Your Adult Children Do Not Owe You Friendship and Won’t Visit You When You Are Elderly: Readjust Your Expectations, Parents

If you’re a childfree person, you know you’ve heard pro-parenthood people, usually parents themselves, ask a million times, “But who is going to take care of you when you get older?”

From what I’ve heard of people who work in nursing homes, the adult children of elderly people in nursing homes seldom to never go to visit them.

When I used to periodically visit my grandmother in a nursing home, as myself and other family would be sitting in the lobby waiting for a nurse to wheel my grandmother out to visit, other seniors would wheel up to myself or one of my aunts and start to cry.

These seniors would cry (I mean literally cry, with tears running down their faces), and they’d say, “I don’t like it here, I want to go home.”

The vibe is that these elderly people hated being in the nursing home (which is understandable; I felt so bad for these people), but they were apparently not getting many visits (if any at all) from their family members.

When one of my Aunts got into her 80s (by that time, her spouse had been dead for around ten or more years), she was living alone, her memory was going – she eventually had to move in with one of her adult sons.

But prior to that, for years and years, that Aunt was on her own. She’d phone my Dad (her brother in law) any time she needed help.

My Dad ended up doing things like driving that particular Aunt of mine to the hospital at 2:00 in the morning when she fell and broke a rib. She called him and asked him for help with that.

My Dad went to her home on another occasion to fix a leaking toilet. My Dad also mowed her lawn for her a few times.

My Aunt’s own own adult son, who lived much closer to her than my father did, was not stepping up to the plate. He only came into the picture when there was no other choice.

His Mom (my Aunt) eventually got fairly bad dementia, or whatever problem (her recall became terrible) – she also became more and more physically frail, and it became glaringly obvious she could no longer live alone.

Only then did the adult son step up and let her live in his house, something he should’ve done years prior.

Before that, my Dad, who was up there in age himself, was driving to her house, which was like a 40 minute commute each way, to run errands for her, drive her to doctor’s appointments, etc, whenever she’d phone for help.

In reading up on books and web pages on abuse and codependency, I kept seeing one boundary violation by parents who have this bogus expectation that their adult children owe them friendship – to keep them occupied when they’re lonely.

This is doubly true if the parent in question is widowed (the other spouse died), or if they’re in a lonely, loveless marriage.

These types of parents (usually the mother) actually expects that their adult children (usually a daughter) to wait on them hand and foot, eat lunch with them daily, to phone them daily to chit chat – to be their buddy, their confidant and their pal to keep loneliness at bay.

And that is not a fair or reasonable expectation for a parent to have. Psychologists write about this in their books, it’s not merely me informing you of this.

I also read an entire book about emotional incest by a psychologist, and, according to this book, a lot of parents actually begin looking to a young child of theirs to meet their emotional needs and their need for companionship and/or identity or purpose when their kid is a baby, toddler, pre-teen, or teen!

This sort of thing does not always start in the kid’s adulthood, in other words. For some kids, it begins when they’re a baby or small child.

If the parent leans on the child in that manner, according to the psychologist who treats the now-adult patients who were leaned on by a parent when they were a kid, it will create all sorts of problems for the child when he or she grows up.

If you’re a parent, you need to realize that it’s not your child’s responsibility or duty to provide you with companionship, regardless of your child’s age.

If you are lonely or bored, you need to get out of the house and make friends with people YOUR OWN AGE.

You should never, ever rely on a child of yours (whatever their age) to meet your need for friendship, nor should you share personal details with them, like divorce stress, or whatever.

Your child is not your mini-therapist at any age. Talk to an adult friend about your adult problems. Making friends as an adult is not easy, but you will be messing up your kid if you start sharing “adult” details and problems with them, especially if they are young.

Anyway, having children is NOT a guarantee that the children will regularly stay in touch with you as you age.

(Link): Dear Abby: My Kids Never Call or Visit Me

by Dear Abby
January 29, 2023

DEAR ABBY:
I am an active widower with five grown children. Although three of them live in the same city and two live in a city nearby, I haven’t heard from or seen them as often over the past few years as I would like.

I realized recently that I miss their company and I’d like them to call or see me more often.

Woman Continues To Enjoy Her Ice Cream In Peace As Entitled Mother Yells Profanities At Her For Not Sharing The Treat With Crying Toddler

Woman Continues To Enjoy Her Ice Cream In Peace As Entitled Mother Yells Profanities At Her For Not Sharing The Treat With Crying Toddler

This mother is incredibly entitled. It is NOT the responsibility of a stranger to hand your kid her ice cream she just bought.

Parenthood does NOT make people more godly, loving, ethical, nor does parenthood make culture “better,” as so many hyper-Nuclear Family conservatives continue to argue. (I am a conservative as well, but I recognize the obnoxiousness and wrongness of so many “pro parenthood” type comments I see from “hyper pro Nuclear Family” conservatives).

The mother in this example sounds like a pathological narcissist. If someone has a terrible personality style while single and childless, they will continue to have a terrible personality after they marry and become a parent.

(Link): Woman Continues To Enjoy Her Ice Cream In Peace As Entitled Mother Yells Profanities At Her For Not Sharing The Treat With Crying Toddler

Excerpts:

AITA for relishing my ice-cream in front of a crying toddler?

I (25F) had to travel to a city 6 hours away for college related work. The trip was pretty tight. I had to leave on Thursday night by train and reached the city on Friday early morning, was engaged in work till the evening and then take a train to get back home on friday night itself.

When I got into the train at about 10 PM, I still hadn’t had dinner.

I was exhausted. I happened to share my cabin in the train with a middle aged woman and her toddler.

There was around 30 mins left for the train to start so I went out of the train, quickly got some snacks and ice-cream and got back to the cabin. I decided to have the ice-cream first because I didn’t want it to melt. The toddler saw it and starting asking for it.

I just looked at the mom and she goes “give it to my son and buy yourself a new one”.

I was taken aback because she wasn’t even requesting, she was demanding.

I’m Child-Free by Choice So No, I Don’t Want to Look After Your Kids by Jana Hocking

I’m Child-Free by Choice So No, I Don’t Want to Look After Your Kids by Jana Hocking

This is interesting… it’s (the essay below, via New York Post) presented from a secular vantage, so I’m not sure what the religious beliefs are here, or if everyone discussed is an atheist or what, but I can tell you as a former Southern Baptist, former evangelical Christian, that most Christians exploit single, childless adults and assume that all single, childless adults ADORE children, are only good for free babysitting services. And that is all false.

While I am pro-life on abortion (I don’t support abortion), I do NOT enjoy being around babies, toddlers, and little kids and have no interest in babysitting them.

The false, condescending idea that all single, childless adults should babysit the children of married couples for free at any and all times and LOVE doing it!!, is very, very common among Baptist and Protestant Christians (I’ve never been Roman Catholic, so I cannot speak to that).

But often in their sermons, podcasts, books, or literature about singleness (if and when the Christian idiots bother to address adult singleness at all, because they usually ignore the topic),
they always advise single adults (especially women) that they should help their “married with children” couples in their lives (especially in their churches) by babysitting their children for free. How obnoxious.

But it’s a very common theme that turns up in Christian thinking.

Years ago, I did a blog post here about a totally obnoxious, hideous post published in “Christianity Today” magazine by a married-with-kids woman who started the editorial out nicely enough, when she talked about how churches treat single, childless adults like trash (yes, they do), but then that wonderful opening transitioned into a vomitous, disgusting explanation at how churches should value single, childless adults for all the free babysitting they can provide nuclear families.

Seriously.

Just when I thought I had found a wonderful essay uplifting and affirming single, childless adults, and acknowledging how horribly Christian culture mistreats single, childless adults, married bitch has to go and ruin the essay by making it into another gross, “single adults are only good and useful for the services they can provide to married parents, like babysit my kids for free, since I’m a mother to toddlers, I have no immediate family near me, and the parenting leaves me exhausted all day!” spiel.

This below sounds like the secular version of that.

And it’s so wrong. Damn it all, am I ever sick and tired of married- with- kids couples acting as though their single, childless friends have life so much easier then they do and that these single adult friends “owe” babysitting services to them. It pisses me off to no end. And I’m also effing sick of Christian culture for upholding this same singles-exploiting crap in their books, tweets, You Tube videos, sermons, etc.

(Link): I’m child-free by choice so no, I don’t want to look after your kids by Jana Hocking

By Jana Hocking, News.com.au (in New York Post)
Oct 13, 2022

Look, there’s no polite way to put this: Dear people with kids, look after your own damn children!

There, I said it.

This fury has been quietly raging in me for a couple of years now. It started when a few of my girlfriends started coupling off.

Sure, I’ve managed to come to peace with the fact that once my friends find their special person, I’m probably not going to see them for a couple of months. At least until they’ve come out of that honeymoon period.

I’ve never complained, because I’ve secretly hoped they would understand when I too, went through that phase. It’s exciting, and lusty and totally worth dumping your friends for a few months of lovey dovey ridiculousness.

But then something happens once they start having kids.

We singletons become less friends, and more servants to you and your children. Think I’m being extreme? I’m really not!

Church-Sponsored LGBTQ Pride Event Promotes ‘Kid’s Activities,’ ‘Drag Shows’

Church-Sponsored LGBTQ Pride Event Promotes ‘Kid’s Activities,’ ‘Drag Shows’

I don’t have an issue with churches (or whatever group) making homosexual people feel welcome, that’s all find and dandy, but there’s a line there between welcoming someone, and celebrating, endorsing, or affirming everything they say, think, or do, and also involving children in whatever that is.

(Link): Church-Sponsored LGBTQ Pride Event Promotes ‘Kid’s Activities,’ ‘Drag Shows’

Church sponsoring LGBTQ pride event says, ‘We mean it about inclusivity’

By Jessica Chasmar | Fox News

A church-sponsored LGBTQ pride event in Kentucky is advertising “kid’s activities” and “drag shows” in the state’s capital this weekend.

Capital Pride Kentucky is hosting a festival on Saturday at the Old Capitol Lawn in Frankfort, where children can partake in activities like jewelry making and a scavenger hunt.

Banners advertising the event posted on the LGBTQ group’s Facebook page list a number of activities for attendees, including “drag shows,” “vendor fair,” “kid’s activities,” “entertainment,” “food & beer,” and “fun for everyone.”

Women Threaten to Go On Sex Strike In Protest Over SCOTUS Overturning Roe V Wade

Women Threaten to Go On Sex Strike In Protest Over SCOTUS Overturning Roe V Wade

So, it takes the overturn of Roe Vs Wade to get secular feminists (and probably some progressive religious ones) to think seriously about celibacy now? Are they for real?

I’m in my 50s, still haven’t had sex because I was waiting until marriage to have sex, never got married, so I’m still a virgin. I have a normal libido. There is no such thing as a “gifting of celibacy,” as so many Christians assume; God, if he exists, did not remove my libido.

I discussed in a previous post a couple years ago why I made the choice I did to sexually abstain, but I will repeat one reason of several from that post: I did not want to get pregnant out of wedlock.

Birth control is not totally effective, it costs to maintain, I didn’t want to see a doctor periodically to get check ups to get birth control, etc.

I realized years ago – even as far back as my teen years – that a possible outcome of consensual sex was pregnancy which I didn’t want to happen. I didn’t want to use abortion as birth control (I don’t believe in abortion).

I managed to live my life practicing sexual self control, and I expect others to be capable of the same.

Any time you have sex with another person, that is a choice you’re making. As I’ve said before, sex with another person is a luxury not a necessity.

Having sex is not a biological necessity for you to stay alive – you will continue to live even if you’re abstaining. You can enjoy life without sex with another person.

If you are a woman thinking you can get or keep a boyfriend by giving him sex, think again. That won’t work, and you’ll only attract manipulative, selfish men who don’t make for good boyfriends anyway.

I just find it ludicrous that now that Roe V Wade was overturned, that all these women (many of whom are probably self-identifying feminists who spent years promoting “sex positivity”) are willing to practice celibacy, probably for the first time.

I’ve been celibate my whole life. I never bought into the hedonistic sex messaging of feminists, not even when I was a teen in the 1980s or a college student in the 1990s.

A lot of the “sex positive” feminists always came across to me as though they are really infuriated that men get to have (in some regards) consequence- free sex but not women; some of these feminists assume that all women want to be just as gross and promiscuous as most men are.

Why on earth would it take limitations on abortion to get a woman to think twice about when to have sex, with whom, and so forth?

Abortion will not be out-lawed in all fifty states going forward. Currently, some states still permit abortion, while others still allow it but with more stipulations.

Things should never have gotten to this point in the first place.
Pro Choice feminists reassured all of us pro-lifers back years ago that abortions would be “safe but rare” if it were legalized, but now I see all these air-headed Gen Z or younger Millennial women screaming and yelling on social media about how “proud” they are that they had an abortion.

Some of them are acting like abortion getting limitations strips them of all birth control – were these sexually active young women not already on the pill, or making their boyfriends use condoms? Abortion should never be used as a form of birth control.

Maybe the best things is to abstain and not have ANY sex with another person, unless and until you marry.

I’ve seen a lot of women in the past 30 years write in to advice columnists broken hearted because they wanted a meaningful, lasting, committed relationship but although they were having sex with men, they weren’t getting the marriage proposals they expected to get, as liberal feminists assured them that having free sex anywhere, at any time, with anyone was “empowering.”

But for a lot of women, all that casual sex, or whatever type of sex prior to marriage (outside of a loving, committed relationship), wasn’t fulfilling or empowering.

I just find it so hypocritical that after years and years of seeing so many people, whether secular feminists, or progressive Christians, mock the concept of sexual abstinence and celibacy (or staying a virgin until marriage)
– and yes, I’ve even seen conservative Baptist and evangelical Christians give up on defending purity until marriage –
to suddenly see all these women advocate for celibacy!

Where were all these bitches for the years I’ve been on this blog advocating for celibacy or virginity-until-marriage to at least be respected as a viable life choice for women (and men) instead of something to mock and ridicule?

A lot of you women out there now having conniption fits and screaming about having a Sex Strike should have given sexual abstinence an honest consideration YEARS AGO, prior to the overturn of Roe V Wade.

By the way, I am specifically talking about consensual sex.
Too many feminists have the dishonest tendency to conflate the topics of consensual sex with rape and then condemn any and all discussion of female (or male) sexual restraint as being cruel or victim-blaming.

Links About Pro Choice Women Going on Sex Strikes

(Link): Sex Strike! Abstinence trends on Twitter in wake of Roe v. Wade ruling

June 25, 2022
By Emily Crane and  Irie Sentner

Big Apple abortion protesters were in support of a sex strike Saturday — as “abstinence” started trending on Twitter in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

“If you’re a man who won’t get a vasectomy, even though it’s reversible, and you’re not out in the streets fighting for my rights, you do not deserve to have sex with me,” Brianna Campbell, a 24-year-old EMT, told The Post.

Caroline Healey, a 22-year-old event coordinator, also questioned why sex was more important than women’s rights.

“I think it’s absolutely valid for us to be withholding the Holy Grail that men seem to think is important,” she told The Post at an abortion protest in Manhattan’s Union Square.

…“If this world thinks that they can oppress women forever, then we close our legs.”

Evangelical Adoptions: Churches Are AWOL in Helping Parents of Special Needs Kids by Julia Duin – Churches Are Useless (and Not Just Re: Adoptive Families)

Evangelical Adoptions: Churches Are AWOL in Helping Parents of Special Needs Kids by Julia Duin – Churches Are Useless (and Not Just Re: Adoptive Families)

By Julia Duin, who has also written and has been interviewed about how churches have let down single adults over the age of 30, and who wrote a wonderful book called “Quitting Church.”

This article discusses how so many evangelical churches encouraged Christian couples to adopt babies (usually from foreign nations), but once those adopted babies grew up to have all sort of developmental or personality disorders, churches would not help these parents.

This is like so much of American, evangelical, Baptist and Protestant Christianity:
Sell a certain deed, or a type of life style (or whatever it may be – let’s call it “X,” whether it’s adopting a baby, or whatever it is) as being so “godly” and “pure,” but once you live X out, and X either does not work out, or it creates a whole new batch of problems, those same Christians, or ones like them who promote X, refuse to help you.

I went through something similar in regards to adult singlehood. I wrote about that (Link): here.

I followed all the Christian dating advice I was taught as a teen and 20- something, Christian advice that taught me if I wanted to get married I would, if I just followed “biblical” wisdom, and the Christian persons, books, and magazine articles spelled it out for me.

However, when I remained single into my mid-30s, in spite of having followed the Christian teaching I had been given by other Christians when younger, and when I began asking Christians online (on various blogs and discussion forums) who dish out this swill to singles, why I didn’t have the husband I had been promised according to their teaching, interpretations, and worldview, I was yelled at, judged, and criticized by these Christians.

I was told God didn’t owe me anything, etc, and how dare I expect God to “reward” me with a spouse just because I did Z, Q, and R (i.e., just because I had followed Christian teaching and advice on the topic).

Christians will do this to you – they will sell you and market you on doing X, and so you carry out X, but five, ten years later, X did not work out and maybe even left you with a set of problems you need help with, the same Christians that sold you X in the first place are now not willing to help you, and may even insult you when you go to them telling them that X did not work, and you could use their help.

You end up getting punished for taking the very life-style advice, for buying the marketing, these Christians sold you, guilt tripped you, or conned you into taking in the first place. 😤🤬😡😣😫

It’s demonic and perverse, I swear.

It is crazy-making and despicable how Christians set people up in these no-win or stressful or miserable situations, then fault those people when they try the Christian advice, and admit to defeat, stress, and they ask for help.

Christians set people up for failure with their stupid advice, then have the audacity to victim-blame those people (who earnestly took and followed the advice) for failing. 😡😤🤬

After having read through the testimonies of the parents on this page (see below, link with excerpts), it sounds like exhausting, hellish work to raise these adoptive children who turn out to have medical and behavioral problems.

I cannot, in good conscience, condemn any adult who realizes after so many months or years, they don’t have the mental or physical strength to keep parenting such children and so decide to return these children back to the adoption agency.

I appreciate the work Dee of Wartburg Watch has done against abuse, but I recall years ago, she ripped into famous Christian speaker Beth Moore, because Moore returned one of her adoptive children back to his mother.

I wrote about that situation (Link): here, towards the end of the post, under the sub-heading “Beth Moore / Judgementalism.” (You can scroll down that page to find the Beth Moore section, which is buried under a long discussion about YEC.)

It’s very easy to sit in judgment of someone else when or if your life is more or less going okay at the time and the person you’re criticizing has a life that is falling apart, or they’re in the middle of a calamity, or you may have a different temperament or inner strength the person you’re criticizing lacks.

I personally do not think I’d have the fortitude, endurance, or patience to put up with an adoptive kid who acts out constantly, even into their late teens. I’d want a break from that, too.

I have way, way more comments below this long excerpt, so please keep scrolling to read everything; thank you:

(Link): Evangelical adoptions: Churches are AWOL in helping parents of special needs kids

Excerpts:

by Julia Duin
June 2022

For years, evangelical Christians were enthusiastic supporters of adoption by sponsoring conferences, targeting adoption-friendly Sundays and staging adoption fairs in parish halls.

… Parents now say that the churches that encouraged them to adopt in the first place aren’t there for them now.

…Few statistics exist on the number of adoptions gone wrong, other than a 10-year-old study by the US Department of Health and Human Services reporting “adoption disruptions” ranging from 10-25 percent. This little-known statistic points to a meltdown in the industry and a sign that adoption and foster care have become a landmine for many families who believed God had called them to help these children.

No one told them there could be an aftermath. Here are some of their stories.

[I will not be pasting in ALL stories. These are just a few from the page]

Evangelicals adopted at a higher rate than others
“Joy” was a social worker in Tacoma, Washington, who adopted a 9-year-old boy in 2000, hoping for the best. She had 32 years of experience working for the state and a Christian agency where she’d helped more than 600 people adopt foster children.

The divorced mother of two was prepared for challenging behavior, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and developmental delays and PTSD from the child’s six years with mentally ill biological parents.
What stunned her was that by age 15, her son was a registered sex offender. Bad relationships, drug abuse and a child out of wedlock followed. Now 30, he cannot hold down a job.

Leftists Harassing, Shaming School Children in their Anti-Racism, CRT and Ethnic Studies Programs

Leftists Harassing, Shaming School Children in their Anti-Racism, CRT and Ethnic Studies Programs

Democrats, woke liberals, leftists and progressives are abusing children physically and psychologically to advance CRT, SEL, equity, and Communism – read examples below.

(Link):  ‘This Is A Cult’: How Wealthy Santa Barbara Foreshadowed The Fight Against Crackpot Curriculum

Excerpts:

By  Luke Rosiak
April 26, 2022

… Critical Race Theory (CRT), which holds that American institutions and culture are systemically racist and categorizes people as either victims or oppressors based on skin color, has generated a backlash in recent years from parents.

But a parents group called Fair Education Santa Barbara began fighting four years ago, filing what is believed to be the nation’s first lawsuit against CRT and related pedagogy, which critics say poison the minds of young children.

…The parents charged that the district required all students to take extreme “ethnic studies” courses as a condition of graduating, put a radical activist group in charge of other programming, and refused to allow parents to see the curriculum.

One specific claim asserted that the district segregated students for “training” sessions, telling white children that all whites are racist. One student allegedly contemplated suicide because he felt deep shame over not speaking Spanish.

Opponents say CRT is part of a larger, radical curriculum being imposed on public school children under a series of names that seem to change when opposition builds.

The Gross, Shaming Natalism Propaganda on Gab Platform by Its Rude Members, Including By Roman Catholics and Other Conservatives

The Gross, Shaming Natalism Propaganda on Gab Platform by Its Rude Members, Including By Roman Catholics and Other Conservatives

A few days ago, someone I follow on Gab – I was automatically signed up to follow that person when I joined the site, I did not choose to follow them on my own – (with Gab being a social media platform that is similar to Twitter) shared a meme by someone else called “Disco.”

You can view that meme (Link): here on Gab.

I will also provide a screen shot below.

By the way, I am not as familiar with Gab’s functions and commenting as I am with Twitter’s, so I am not quite sure how to reply to people on Gab or how to link to specific comments by myself or others.

I am a pro-life conservative.

I am not opposed to equal rights for women, but I don’t identify as a feminist.

I don’t really fit in totally over on Gab, a platform which unfortunately attracts a lot of extreme right wing kooks (but some of the users seem okay),
but I don’t really fit in over on Twitter, either (where I was suspended for months previously before I got posting ability again),
because Twitter is over-run with far left “nut jobs,” most of whose views I normally do not agree with.

I have found that both conservatives and liberals / progressives are about equally annoying and wrong on the parenthood, marriage, or nuclear family topics.

Not all progressives or liberals are opposed to women having children; they just believe (and I agree with this concept, though I am a conservative) that women (and men) should be permitted to decide for themselves if they truly want to be a parent or not.

People should not be guilt tripped or pressured into having children.

There are some very fringe, far-out there leftists who are “anti nuclear family” and who are opposed to people having children, and they call themselves “anti natalists.”

I don’t agree with progressives who try to propagandize women (or men) from having children.

I don’t think it’s the progressives’ place to try to brainwash, scold, shame, or guilt trip people from having children.

But then I see the reverse dynamic from a lot of secular and Christian conservatives.

I see people who identify as conservative or Roman Catholic on sites such as GAB who keep pumping out these stupid, horrid, “Have ten kids by the time you’re 30” type memes or comments.

And these views are not even “biblical.”

“The Family Sex” Show – Nude Sex Show For Children (as Young as Five) at Theater

 “The Family Sex” Show – Nude Sex Show For Children (as Young as Five) at Theater

Post Updated Below

Okay, then, the left and the right clearly have vastly different understandings of “Family Values.”

The right can sometimes be hypocrites and not abide by the standards they have in place, but at least the right has some normal, healthy, baseline standards on some sexual subjects.
(Where conservatives lack: conservatives need to be teaching boys and men that they are not entitled to sex from girls and women, and they need to be taught more often about consent.)

The left, though, just wants to normalize pedophilia and all manner of perversion and immorality across the board.

Progressives  want everyone to consent to EVERYTHING and never, ever judge, not even humans engaging in sex acts on children, teens, or with animals. They want to legalize incest, too.

I’d say that conservatives, (those on the right side of the political spectrum), would say allowing children to attend a stage play with lots of adult nudity and overly frank talk of sex acts would be inappropriate. Highly inappropriate. And they’d be correct on that.

(Link):  UK Theatre Company Staging “Family Sex Show,” Invites Children As Young As 5

April 9, 2022

A theatre company in the United Kingdom is facing backlash after announcing it was staging a production aimed at children as young as 5 which would feature full-frontal nudity and offer an “alternative to porn.”

ThisEgg, a production company run by Josie Dale-Jones, is set to put on The Family Sex Show at the Royal Theatre in Bath, United Kingdom this coming May. The show is being run as part of the Theatre’s “incubator program,” a creative center within the facility intended to support projects aimed at young people.

…“I’m sorry but I am going to say it. This reeks of grooming. I’m horrified… 5 year olds… this can’t go ahead,” one Twitter user wrote in reply to a post putting the production on blast by journalist Sonia Poulton.

Another user tweeted, “Can I please vote for bringing back shame, thanks!” in response to The Family Sex Show’s claim that it sought to “imagine a future where there is no shame.”

Many mothers and women’s rights activists took particular issue with what they called a “safeguarding nightmare.”

One user looked into the show’s claim about its appropriateness for children aged as young as 5, writing that the guidelines the show was pulling were from the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) — a UK-based children’s charity.
— end excerpts —

(Link): When is sex not sex? When it’s agenda, by Corisande Pick

Excerpts:

… Parents thinking of taking their 5-year old to a show that explores “boundaries, pleasure, consent, queerness, sex…” and which ‘contains nakedness’, are invited to click through to see still photos of the performance.

Only there aren’t any. In their place, a message that they are not ready.

…By contrast, the Family Sex Show talks about “using pleasure to explore consent”.

If that means anything other than “try it and see if you like it” (a standard technique used to override a person’s boundaries), it means consent to the thing that might (or might not) “give pleasure” is already assumed. Because until the thing is actually occurring, the issue of pleasure (or its opposite) doesn’t arise.

It’s also a common trope, when sexual abuse is reported, to claim it wasn’t abuse if the victim enjoyed it (or appeared to, or if they were unable to indicate that they did not enjoy it). This puts the onus for stopping abuse on the victim.

… And now consider a family where abuse is already happening, or where a groomer is moving towards Child Sexual Abuse.