I consider it a warning to sisters about whom they choose to marry. A lot of sisters marry for the wrong reasons.
Just because a brother is a ms for example, doesn’t mean that he is a decent human being.
Sunday's Drama @ convention!!! OMG!!!
by itscrap&theyknowit! 40 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
WTWizard
This is what really sucks about the "no fornication" rule. They whine when people commit fornication, which is not even a sin against nature but one against Judeo-Christi-SCAM-ity and Islam. This forces people into marriages without the benefit of trying it out first. Strike one.
Once they are married, Jehovah drives a wedge between the couple. They start out fine. Then, they are pressured to pious-sneer, wasting time together. You cannot become intimate while out in field circus, with the public watching you. Then they create money problems, generally by forcing the couple to give up opportunities to gain decent employment and by forcing them to waste resources in field circus and Worldwide Pedophile Defense Fund donations. Anything that could ignite the passion between the couple is banned. And time together is continually disrupted with field circus and boasting sessions. Strike two.
After a while of this, they grow apart. As they are stuck with each other, they each seek a way out. Little knowing that, even if they remarried, Jehovah would fxxx up that marriage, too. Arguments start, and become severe. Usually, one of the parties will dig in and refuse to commit adultery, forcing the other to do adultery instead (and then refuse to divorce). This is done, not out of faith to Jehovah, but spite for the other party. Physical and emotional abuse usually starts as well. Now, Jehovah insists that they stay in the marriage until one of them commits adultery. Without the benefit of a trial run, and with Jehovah continually interfering with development of the bond, he still insists on keeping the ruined marriage together. Of course, there is even more meddling, field circus and boasting sessions continually barging in. And, the demands of becoming "exemplary", meaning congregation matters are going to intrude even more.
The best advice is to get out--of the religion. True, the marriage itself may be past salvation--if so, it's better to kill it and start with another (and not letting that Almighty Lowlife Scumbag, his filthy angels, or any Jewish, Christian, or Muslim religion tamper with this one). If the marriage can reasonably be saved, asking whether it's worth the opportunity cost or not should be first. If so, it needs to be repaired outside any Jehovah, Jesus, or Allah constraints and either without god or in Satanic principles (which, contrary to Jehovah, are in line with nature).
-
Chemical Emotions
Seen it. Their "teen girl" stereotypes made me sick.
-
jamiebowers
The sister tells her they have grown apart and the arguments are daily and becoming violent and she just NEEDS out.
Did they actually mention violence?
-
TD
Did they actually mention violence?
No.
That would completely misrepresent the nature of the fictional marital troubles between, "Zack" and "Megan."
"Megan's" complaint was that "Zack" never spent any time with her:
"He's only interested in his business and sports. I never know when or even if he's going to be home for dinner."
"He never takes me anywhere anymore."
"If I could just count on him being home one night a week, I'd be satisfied."
"Zack's" complaint was that "Megan" was nasty and unpleasant to be with:
"She's got an 'acid tongue' just like her mother."
"I can take only so much of her cutting remarks and ugly moods."
-
lost1
Usually, one of the parties will dig in and refuse to commit adultery, forcing the other to do adultery instead (and then refuse to divorce
The "bf" got married young, practically arranged marriage, then went pioneering abroad, took job as window washer then she allegedly had an affair but he forgave her, or in his words not forgiven but had to keep up appearances. Says they hardly speak now and live totally separate lives, even houses but have to go to kh together and dc's to avoid anyone making comments (to protect her!). This all found out recently (some believe, rest I reckon is totally load of bs) and makes me feel even more of an idiot to believe what he said! All sounds very steriotypical looking back and reading comment above from wt wizard.
-
Quarterback
Marriages in the faith is having a bad survival rate.
The older marriages survive, because they started out in the 50's that held the view that the man brings in the bacon, and the wife stays in the kitchen and cooks, and shuts up. The man rules, but he can send his wife a flower to make up for his imperfections.
Newer marriages don't follow that 50's rule..Both are working, both cook and work in the kitchen. Both are pressured to have a regular share in FS.
Get 1o hrs a month average in FS time, and presto...your husband is an Elder, or MS. It doesn't matter if you have no experience in life, or can't counsel...it's the perception that counts.
The older marriages should have terminated, but it wasn't viewed as positive, as it is today.
The drama is the society's attempt to fix this problem. Funny thing, the families that broke down in my congregation had nothing to do with unbaptised, and baptised individuals. Many pioneered, many served as Elders, many had positions. Some had higher learning, some had low education.
I don't think that it's about the sex. It's about the working on it principle. It takes two to make it work.
-
Cacky
My non-jdub cousin was complaining to her non-jdub mom about her husband, saying he's always hunting or at the farm and never spends time with here.
My non-jdub (but strict Catholic) aunt said, "Eva, he's a man. He's going to be selfish."
LOL They should have just put that line in the drama.
-
undercover
This drama has several messages on various levels. I'd like to say that this is a masterful piece of propaganda, but it's so over the top, anyone outside the organization's influence immediately discounts it as ridiculous.
Itscrap's take on the message of 'staying in a misreable message' is there, as well as TD's take of, 'don't marry an unbeliever'.
Other underlying messages I noticed:
The happiest couple of the drama was the old couple who had spent their entire lives pioneering. Message: you are happiest by giving full time service to Jehovah the Organization. (which was one of the more ironic images of the whole thing. The old couple had spent their entire lives pioneering. Their health is failing. Yet the end hasn't come...and they're happy? I'm betting that they're secretly glad that Roberts upheld Obamacare, 'cause they're gonna need it. I thought that in the scene were the old pioneer sister was in her wheelchair waiting to be called into the doctor's office. How the hell are they paying for healthcare in old age, if they spent their entire live pioneering, living hand to mouth? anyway, I digress)
There was also the requisite message on how JWs should dress: Lizzie's (good little pioneer girl) parents were shown as neat and conservative in dress, even while relaxing at home. Megan's (immature, self-absorbed girl) parents, especially her mom (in housecoat and hair in rollers), were unkempt, slovenly (at least in WT definitions). Message: True Christians WT slaves can be identified by their dress and grooming. This message was also carried in our first meeting of Zack (unbaptized, immature, sport loving heart-throb) and John (geeky JW kid). Zack's ball cap was backwards, shirt tail hanging out (as was his dad's). John was stereotypical geek, yet was respected by any and all who had love for Jehovah the Organization, despite his inablitity to dress himself.
Another sly little message that I caught, was for JW fathers who have children who marry an unbeliever, or even an unbaptized publisher (like Zack). Megans' father, at one point, was fairly non-commital about the budding romance - until - he was reminded that Zack wasn't baptized. Then he expressed concern. Concern over the fact that his daughter might become unevenly yoked, you ask? Maybe, but the comment he made didn't reflect that. He said that if she were to marry Zack then he could lose his privileges ("what few I have" he said, which drew a chuckle from the crowd). The message: If you allow or condone your children to marry an unbeliever, we'll take it out on your ass. Later on in the drama, it was revealed that Megan's father, in fact, did not attend her wedding. Message: Jehovah the Organization comes first, family second.
Other tidbits:
Megan mentioned the 5 sisters to 1 brother ratio, to which Lizzie said, "where'd you hear that?" Megan waved off the question, but the ratio was never disproven. The point was more of, 'ratios don't matter. obedience does, no matter what'. And the old sister in the wheelchair was really off her rocker when she said to pray and Jehovah would provide a faithful servant as a suitable marriage material. All I could think was that if you're a woman in a pool of 5 women to 1 man and you're gonna wait on an invisible (and imaginary one at that) person to match make, you're in for a long, long wait.
I noticed that they kept saying, "to do thing's in Jehovah's way", or something similar. I also noticed that any reference to field service/pioneering/missionary work was always mentioned as, "telling people about Jehovah". "Jehovah" became a buzzword. Every reference to him/it/whatever was in reference into obeying and/or serving. It was conveyed that all was done in obeying/serving Jehovah but in reality anyone with an ounce of critical thinking skills knew that "Jehovah" was a substitute for "The Organization".
-
TD
Interesting observations, Sir82
Another subtlety about the drama that I would add is the emotional perspective that was presented.
Men and women have pretty much the same emotional needs, but as general demographic groups, they tend to weight those needs differently and assign them a different priority from most important to least important.
JW's are such a patriarchical, androcentirc social group that it is unusual to see any real attention given to the female emotional perspective and in this respect, the drama struck me as a departure from that pattern in some ways.
From the unnamed radio personality's assertion that women instinctively know what true love is because, "It's in our genes" to the blood stained rose of the elderly "Fields" couple, and the story of his convalescence, the romantic and maternal aspects of the marital relationship were emphasized as "True love."
On the flip-side of the coin the only reference at all to the physical aspects of the marital relationship was an indirect deprioritization/segregation via "Elizabeth's" comment to "Megan," "Do you want to wind up married to someone who is loves you as a person, or is only interested in your body."
Please don't misunderstand. I understand objectification theory very well and understand how harmful it is. The point is there really isn't a male counterpart to this viewpoint because men as a general group tend to assign a much higher emotional priority to the physical aspects of the relationship. Without it a man will not only feel unloved, he will eventually completely loose the feeling of being in love himself. And the lack of a physical connection will wreck a marriage just as surely as the lack of an emotional connection will.
None of this is a criticism. A gynocentric view of "True love" suggests that the drama was targeted at young women and I'm just surpised a pool of (ostenisbly) male writers were able to pull it off.