ServantofGod

I've been seeking ways that I can improve Mason's behavior because, as I've been saying since he was like 7 months old, he is hard! I read a lot on this forum and the GD forum. For whatever reason, as I surfed around one night a few days ago, I went to the Pearl's site. So I've been browsing the articles. I do find there are lots of things that I don't like and disagree with. But reading several of the articles also gives me a different picture of Michael Pearl than what I would get from just "hearing" about him. Personally, I think he's rough around the edges, like an old army general might be. But he believes in loving your children and having a great personal relationship with them. He believes the same things about families that I do. He's pro-natural living. He doesn't think children should be broken down. He even mentions several instances where you can't spank and he points out that training children is about consistency, not spanking. (That is what is taught here, except a lot of people here balk at the word training, but if you show them, for example that "help" is inevitable and your directions will be carried out, that is training! )

I would like to appologize for anytime in the past when I might have written posts that attributed characteristics to the Pearl's or the Ezzos that were based on my imagination going away with a few things I *have* read by them. I think there is a sticky caution to be gracious towards mothers coming here deprogramming from Ezzo or Pearl, but I don't feel that the same grace is extended to Pearl or Ezzo themselves. What is bothering me is that I think people who have "heard" about the Pearls will just assume other things about them and will post their assumptions here. And no one, naturally, reminds the poster to extend grace. No one refutes the statements.

One article in particular just really opened my eyes about my own childhood. As many of you know, my parents were Basic Youth Conflicts (Gothard) and Dobson fans. For this I have blamed a lot of my extensive childhood hurts and the almost non-existence family relationship I now have with my parents and siblings. But it really wasn't Gothard. (Although a lot of Gothard's teachings were carried out by my parents.) It wasn't Dobson. It was the missing relationship that harmed me so much. Ultimately, the relationship is the entire point! Why do we do GBD, anyway? Why nurse, why homeschool, why carry a baby around? We do it because we want the relationship to be strong. A strong relationship will not be demolished by a few punitive practices. It won't collapse the day we blow it and scream at our son, "Just straighten up, quit acting stupid and practice your piano!" :/ THAT is the reason why we all probably know a punitive family with wonderful kids, a punitive family with "broken" kids, a GBD family with wonderful kids and a GBD family with horrible kids. It's not so much about the way discipline is carried out (well, I mean within the bounds of a bell-curve norm) as it is what the relationship is. Of all people, Michael Pearl is the one who just let me realize that that is the whole of why my parents essentially failed. It could have failed just as badly if my folks had never dreamed of spanking.

I think I'm rambling a little bit here and my point is not as concise as it could be. I'm just thinking though we generally extend grace to mothers who are *leaving* Pearl, we are not gracious towards Pearl himself. I'm just saying Pearl is not Satan Incarnate, though I may disagree with many of his techniques, even strongly so.