#I know i'm rambling i just

[hobbitsetal]

I read an article* recently that examined Voddie Baucham’s theology of and general attitude toward parenting--the catchy “viper in a diaper” philosophy. It made me acutely aware that the longer we parent gently and the further we get from Reformed theology, the more grateful I am for my relationships with my son and my God, and the more strongly convicted I feel about never spanking.

I have concerns about parenting in general, certainly. Arthur is two, and is overall a sweet and amenable child. Overall, he listens pretty well: stops on walks when we call to him to wait, usually comes when we call his name, has learned to say “thank you” freely and is learning “please” and “help” as prompted. He’s empathetic, running to try to comfort any crying child he sees. We have only to express frustration to see him get upset in turn.

But will Cassian respond the same way? Probably not. While he kicks almost as much as his brother in the womb, and while he apparently has my knees and elbows, we know Cas is his own little person and will react differently to stimuli and challenges. And we, two and a half years into this adventure of parenting, have become different people and will meet certain of his behaviors differently than we met Arthur’s.

And, of course, we have the questions that only time can answer, of what will our boys be like as they grow older? How will they respond to our guidance when they are ten, teens, young adults?

Those are questions that God knows and we will learn in due time.

In the meantime, my son is not a viper in a diaper. He is an image-bearer of God, a tiny joy who loves snuggles and telling apples “bye-bye” as he throws them on the ground and who displays boundless and exhausting energy.

The doctrine of total depravity undermines, to me, our status as image-bearers of God. That image may be marred by sin, but it is not gone. Baucham and those who subscribe to similar theology treat children and the idea of original sin as if children are utter fools bent solely on their own sins, uninterested in doing the right thing unless their parents compel them to. And they discipline in accordance with that belief: they spank for nearly every infraction, they view children’s attitudes and responses as acts of wilful rebellion, they offer no quarter for the simple weaknesses of humanity.

They offer no grace. Ironic, for those who claim to hold to the tenets of grace.

I do not say this from an outside perspective. I was Reformed for a decade, and read theology extensively from within that worldview. As we continue evolving our beliefs, Alex and I have been rereading many books we once regarded highly, reading them now with a more critical eye and finding the flaws within them.

At the core, our entire worldview has shifted irreconcilably from the Reformed doctrines and the many foundational theologies assumed within it. We don’t hold to penal substitutionary atonement theory. We don’t hold a punitive view of justice. I’m not even sure we fully believe in original sin (a doctrine traceable to St. Augustine).

We believe more strongly in unconditional love. My behavior and my reactions shouldn’t be governed by my child’s behavior. When Arthur throws a tantrum because we told him no, when he melts down because he’s hangry or tired, my calling as his mother is to respond with the same patient love and care I give to him when he’s running to me to bestow hugs or kisses.

I believe that God displays unconditional love. No human is perfect. No human can ever hold perfect theology. So if I’m wrong in some of my beliefs, I believe ultimately it doesn’t matter. God sees my earnest desire to love well, to show love to others, my desire to hold to what is true and lovely and worthwhile. If I err in my behaviors and actions, God forgives and embraces, as I forgive and embrace my son.

I believe that God is love. The thread seen through the Bible is that He loves His people.

And if all of humanity is created in the image of God, are we not all His people?

That’s the point Jesus made with the parable of the Samaritan. That’s the point the apostle John makes in 1st John. And that is the point I hold before me in my dealings with my children.

As Christians, we are called to love, gentleness, kindness, compassion. We are told that love does not insist on its own way. How is hitting my child to enforce compliance in line with those teachings?

We are our children’s guides, shepherds, stewards. Shepherds don’t beat their sheep. And we do not beat our sons.

We seek to understand them. We know Arthur pretty well, and we can usually identify when his moods go south because he’s tired and needs to rest, or he needs food, or even when he’s being wild because he has no good outlet for his energy and needs to be allowed outside.

The parenting I grew up with, and was taught to parent with, would have me respond by teaching him that his needs are no excuse for poor behavior. I find that insensitive to a two year old’s situation. He’s still learning how to ask for help when he’s frustrated. How can I expect him to convey properly that he has ants in his little pants and desperately needs stimuli to entertain him? And why would I punish him for conveying, in his limited way, what he does want and need? He’s getting better at asking to go for walks. He will, with time, get better at regulating his emotions and not crying when he’s frustrated.

And he will get better as he sees us model these behaviors.

He learned “thank you” because we his parents say that frequently to each other. He’s learned to kiss and give hugs because we’re freely affectionate with him and each other. He’s learned empathy and compassion for others’ pain because we respond immediately to his crying.

Much of the parenting philosophy I grew up with decries “child-centered parenting,” from arranging social schedules around children’s nap times to adjusting our behaviors for their moods. But as I center my parenting around my son’s needs, I question that mindset deeply.

Arthur cannot help getting tired and hangry unless we help him manage his bodily needs. He cannot express to me, or even properly identify, when he becomes overwhelmed by big crowds and too much excitement. He just grows wild or starts freaking out over little things. It is our responsibility as his parents to recognize his weaknesses and his needs and to meet them.

It is our responsibility to consider his needs more important than our own. To love him as we love our own bodies. To do for him, the least of us, as we would care for God Himself. As Mary cared for God Himself.

As he grows older, his needs will shift and how we meet them will shift. As he develops, he’ll learn better to control his own responses, and we will begin to hold him responsible for his reactions to stimuli and how well he communicates to us and others what he needs. This is part of preparing him for life.

My mother told me, when I was a teenager, that hormonal shifts over the course of a month would affect my mood. I found that very helpful in checking my own reactions. Did I have a reason to be annoyed or was I PMSing? Should I be irritable or did I need rest? Checking my emotions and responses is a learned skill.

I cannot hold my son to standards I myself don’t adhere to. I’m not always cheerful or reasonable. Sometimes I respond to him in anger. Therefore, it is more incumbent on me to respond to my son’s anger with grace, and to teach him how to restore relationships in the aftermath of a relational injury.

We all must live with our humanity. And we must teach the littlest humans how to live with themselves and others with grace and love. If we respond to their needs by hitting them for expressing emotions or desires, what do we teach them but that they are inconvenient and should not express themselves?

And what do we teach them of the image of God, and of the God in Whose image we are made?

*tw for discussions of child abuse. The article itself is very good: https://www.csbvbristol.org.uk/2020/06/01/the-child-as-viper/

[lazylittledragon]

can't believe we're all adults being forced into the club penguin level of censorship in 2024

[frownyalfred]

thinking about a Damian who was raised his entire life hearing how much he looks like his Father, how he's the blood son, how he's better than any other child Bruce Wayne has taken in, starting to buy into it like a kid does, only to hit puberty and turn out looking like 80% Talia.

[artist-rat]

some epilogue vibes (an excuse to draw some hugs. and my durge so many times)

[sev-ille]

I may be pointing out something completely obvious, but Round 7 takes place immediately after Round 6?

Like immediately after.

Hyuna is still there, bleeding. Like it's so unlikely that Mizi and Hyuna have just been roaming for days. Like after round 6, it's been maybe a few hours at most?

My thoughts are a mess rn but damn that sucks for Till if that's true (not that it doesn't suck if it's not).

Ivan dies in front of him, then he has a change of outfit and immediately has to move onto the next Round. No wonder he looks so fatigued, like he's about to pass out at any moment.

Did he even get to eat or drink anything? I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't, but still.

[misteria247]

I'm realizing that Stan is actually incredibly smart. Like in a Ford kind of way to some extent.

Like yes Stan's street smart and life smart but he's also got the smarts that Ford's praised for. Because he had rebuilt the portal and figured out his brother's notes and equations.

Like do you know how hard math is on Ford and Fiddleford's level of expertise??? How complicated and delicate it is????? Especially the kind that brings portals to life???? And Stan figured it out. Had taught himself to read and comprehend these difficult things. Difficult things that requires college degrees in science and mathematics.

And Stan did this on an incomplete high school grade level of academics.

That's fucking nuts. Sure it took 30 years but he learned it. By himself, can you imagine how frustrated he got, teaching himself Ford's educational level??? Using his mechanical skills of fixing his car to be up to par to Fiddleford's impressive craftsmanship????

And I can just see how Ford and Fiddleford react post apocalypse. Ford doing equations and science stuff and talking while Fiddleford listens and gives his input when Stan pipes up unintentionally and puts his hat into the ring. And it's mathematically sound?? And these two men are just blown away cuz what the actual hell?? Ford's immediately questioning Stan, wanting to hear his thoughts while Fiddleford watches impressed and Stan's mortified and a bit overwhelmed. Or Fiddleford working on something and Ford's watching him when Stan points out a better way to make a part work and Fidds is like omg thank you Stanley??? And Ford's looking at his little brother dumbfounded and itching to bomb him with questions and whatnot.

Stan never knows peace afterwards.

[teaboot]

Sometimes at work it's not my place to tell people the things I want to say, and I find I often go home at the end of the rougher days to stand blankly in my shower and tell myself over and over what I wish I could pass on.

This accomplishes very little, and mostly just gives me a tension headache, but through it all I think I've narrowed myself down to a few solid things I'd like to tell people the most.

You can't change people. Not permanently, not for anythig. You can support them, encourage them, love them, give them tools and opportunities and resources, but you can't make them change. They can change themselves if they want to, but they have to want to, and they have to want it for themselves, because they're the only one that's certain to be with them forever.

For better or worse, you make your own choices, and blaming bad choices on others doesn't only work to absolve you of responsibility- it also robs you of control. Because if you say you only did something because I did something, then you arent only shifting blame- you're admitting that you cannot control yourself, that you cannot truly make choices for yourself, that other people can control you- and as long as you truly beleive that, you'll keep facing the same problems over and over. You'll keep letting others dictate your choices, because you'll beleive that they can, and you'll never be free.

White knights on horseback are from fairytales. Nobody can help you if ou're not willing to help yourself. To try, to put the dirty work in, to belive you're worth that effort- Act as though nobody is coming to save you. From a struggle, from pain, from bad relationships, from yourself. And when you do save yourself, because you will, because failure here isn't an option if you want to survive, you'll never find another dragon that can keep you prisoner.

Don't say anything to anyone that you wouldn't want them remembering forever.

Doing the right thing in bad circumstances is hard. It's the hardest thing. But if you make the choice to do that hard thing anyways, despite your fear, you'll go on the rest of your like knowing that you're the sort of person who did something.

The present only seems the hardest because the past I over and the future hasn't happened.

There's so much joy ahead of you, the kind you can't possibly understand until you see it yourself.

The responsibility of consequences is often disguised as the power of permission. "I won't do this if you help me", "I'll work on my anger if you do this for me", "I promised you I'd quit, but can I have just one?". The unspoken question is, "Can it be your fault if this goes badly?"

You cant make someone love you the way you need to be loved. Someone can love you very much and still be bad for you, even if you love them very much in return. Two people can love each other very, very much, and try their very best, and still be wrong for each other.

Sometimes being near to someone changes you, even in good ways, and the people you become don't fit together as well as the people you were.

Caring takes work. Even if it's real. Especially if it's real. And the most important gestures aren't the grand, poetic, songs-and-flowers-and-tears moments; they're getting out of bed even though you don't want to. Paying attention to things you don't enjoy. Scrubbing pans, or opening a window, saying "thank-you", or helping carry groceries into the house. The small things fill the big things- without the small, boring, mediocre things, big things feel hollow.

Thrre is honour and dignity in humble work.

If you are a cruel and spiteful person, then you will find every place you visit to be full of the same cruel, spiteful people. This is not because the world is as cruel as you, but because everywhere you are, you will be disliked. This is the curse that comes with being persistently cruel and spiteful.

If you are a kind and ppsitive person, you will repeatedly encounter kind and positive people, because as they grow familiar with you, they will be happier to have you near. This is the reward of being a kind and positive person.

When splitting paths with loved ones, briefly or forever, aim for your last words to always be "I love you".

[technically-human]

Hey, don't cry. Ghost yuri, okay?

(Now that you know the girls, they need to meet the boys!)

[somnimagus]

My page for @sheikahzine; about Impaz's duty to her village, empty of people and full of memories.

[id in alt text]

[herewithinthevoid]

[cangrellesteponme]

wife

[lazylittledragon]

i'm in one of those phases where i really wish i believed in manifesting and spellcasting and things like that bc you know when you want something so bad you're literally praying for the universe to let it happen

[sainz100]

2024 Brazilian GP | x

[simplenefelibata]

as much as i love sam knowing about destiel before dean does, there's something about "i mean yeah my brother and his angel best friend are really weird about each other, live together, co-parent a kid, nearly kill themselves every time the other is gone, stand too close and stare at the other's mouth while they talk, but i mean to each their own i guess??" that's so special to me

[misteria247]

We always talk about how Stan looks at Dipper and sees Ford but like what about Ford looking at Dipper and he sees Stan??

Like at first Ford notices how Mabel is a lot like his twin. She's fierce and laid back and tends to just sail through life with an optimistic point of view. She's outgoing and her with Waddles makes Ford see Stanley in her quite a bit. However it takes longer for Ford to see his twin in his grand nephew. It's something small. Ford notices how Dipper seems to keep an eye on Mabel, always ready to stand up for her should the need arise. And the more Ford sees the miniscule details, the more he sees Stanley in the boy. From his sarcastic remarks to his suspiciousness towards others who come off too fake, to his loyalty to his sister. It becomes achingly obvious that Dipper is like Stan in so many ways. And it makes Ford ache something fierce seeing this boy who reminds him of his little brother before life had come along and tore him down.

And one day while he, Stan, Dipper and Mabel are out doing a field search and Stanley and Mabel are further up ahead chatting and joking around. Ford finds himself looking at Dipper and catches his beaming smile and excited form and Ford has to fight the wave of deja vu because he looks so much like Stanley in that moment of peace. So much so that it makes his throat all tight and he finds himself willing to do anything to keep that smile on his grand nephew's face. That smile that's so much like his twin's it's almost painful because of how innocent it is. And as Ford looks up at his twin and grand niece he mentally swears that he'll do whatever it takes to keep these three smiling and happy for as long as he's able. Because he loves them to bits and pieces.

[technically-human]

Can you draw something with Doom Patrol!Edwin and Netflix!Edwin?

Maybe something about Dp!Edwin talking about his feelings for Charles with N!Edwin?

It's just something I've been thinking of, make it a little angsty?<3

Glad you asked

ko-fi