Page 27 of 27 [ 421 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,541
Location: Hell

07 Mar 2025, 3:27 pm

Adult content.






I recently found out that JW married couples are no longer forbidden from having oral and anal sex. Apparently, it was a disfellowshipping offense until January. For some reason, I thought that stopped being a thing quite some time ago. The following is the last article they had about it until this year. The first paragraph covers the situation when a JW is married to a nonbeliever. What it’s implying here is utterly grotesque.

What, though, if one mate wants or even demands to share with his or her partner in what is clearly a perverted sex practice? The above-presented facts show that porneia involves unlawful sexual conduct outside the marital arrangement. Thus, a mate’s enforcing perverted acts, such as oral or anal sex, within the marriage would not constitute a Scriptural basis for a divorce that would free either for remarriage. Even though a believing mate is distressed by the situation, yet that one’s endeavor to hold to Scriptural principles will result in a blessing from Jehovah. In such cases it may be helpful for the couple to discuss the problem frankly, bearing in mind especially that sexual relations should be honorable, wholesome, an expression of tender love. This certainly should exclude anything that might distress or harm one’s mate.​—Ephesians 5:28-30; 1 Peter 3:1, 7.
1 Peter 3:1, which is a scripture they LOVE and cite often, says: “Wives, in the same way, be subject to your husbands, so that, even if some of them do not obey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives’ conduct,” so the implication here is that JW women should engage in sex acts they don’t want if their nonbelieving spouse wants it. Verse 7 is advice for JW husbands of nonbelieving wives: “Husbands, in the same way, show consideration for your wives in your life together, paying honor to the woman—though the weaker vessel, they are joint heirs of the gracious gift of life—so that nothing may hinder your prayers.”

The next paragraph in the Watchtower concerns JW couples:
Quote:
As already stated, it is not for elders to “police” the private marital matters of couples in the congregation. However, if it becomes known that a member of the congregation is practicing or openly advocating perverted sex relations within the marriage bond, that one certainly would not be irreprehensible, and so would not be acceptable for special privileges, such as serving as an elder, a ministerial servant or a pioneer. Such practice and advocacy could even lead to expulsion from the congregation.
Apparently, husband and wives in the past felt guilty for engaging in the behavior which led to confessions and, sometimes, disfellowshipping/shunning.

In articles on this topic, they often took what Paul says at Romans 1:26-27 out of context and argued that only PIV sex is acceptable to God.
Quote:
For this reason God gave them over to dishonorable passions. Their females exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the males, giving up natural intercourse with females, were consumed with their passionate desires for one another. Males committed shameless acts with males and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.
JWs reading the article would’ve likely had these verses in mind because they were so commonly used in their publications and at church and still are when they are trying to uphold/legitimize their homophobia.

At any rate, here’s what they’re saying now:
The Bible does not provide details as to what sexual practices between a husband and a wife should be considered clean or unclean. A Christian couple must make decisions that reflect their resolve to honor Jehovah, to please each other, and to maintain a clean conscience. Generally speaking, a couple would not discuss with others this intimate aspect of their marriage.
Now it’s a “conscience matter” which means that a lot still won’t do it for fear of displeasing Jehover, but those who do won’t be disciplined for it. It’s all so silly.

Speaking of silly, here’s what the January 2025 Watchtower has to say about domestic violence:
Quote:
A husband who physically or verbally abuses his wife needs to take additional steps to repair his relationship with Jehovah and with his wife. What are these steps? First, he recognizes that he has a serious problem. Nothing is hidden from Jehovah’s sight. (Ps. 44:21; Eccl. 12:14; Heb. 4:13) Second, he stops abusing his wife and changes his behavior. (Prov. 28:13) Third, he apologizes to his wife and to Jehovah and seeks their forgiveness. (Acts 3:19) He should also beg Jehovah for both the desire to change and the help to control his thoughts, speech, and actions. (Ps. 51:10-12; 2 Cor. 10:5; Phil. 2:13) Fourth, he acts in harmony with his prayers by learning to hate all forms of violence and abusive speech. (Ps. 97:10) Fifth, he seeks immediate help from loving shepherds in the congregation [i.e. elders]. (Jas. 5:14-16) Sixth, he develops a plan that will help him to avoid all such behavior in the future. A husband who views pornography should follow these same steps. Jehovah will bless his efforts to change his behavior. (Ps. 37:5) But it is not enough for a husband to reject dishonorable conduct. He also needs to learn to show honor to his wife.
Yet again, domestic violence is treated as a sin and not a dangerous crime. Their advice would likely only serve to keep a spouse in a dangerous situation while he or she hopes that the childlike advice will change their partner’s behavior.

The paragraph only talks about physical and verbal abuse. A short paragraph on “sexually demeaning behavior” was included earlier in the article, but the Watchtower seems to view it as a much smaller issue because the higher ups, including those in the writing department and governing body, are f*****g morons.
Quote:
Being sexually demeaning. Some husbands pressure their wife to engage in sexual acts that are demeaning and that make her feel unclean or unloved. Jehovah hates such cold and thoughtless behavior. He expects a husband to love and cherish his wife and to respect her feelings. (Eph. 5:28, 29)


_________________
“Les grandes personnes ne comprennent jamais rien toutes seules, et c'est fatigant, pour les enfants, de toujours et toujours leur donner des explications.”
— Saint-Exupéry, Le Petit Prince


TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,541
Location: Hell

09 Mar 2025, 7:58 pm

What Jesus says in the following verses freaked me out when I was a kid.

“Truly I tell you, people will be forgiven for their sins and whatever blasphemies they utter, 29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness but is guilty of an eternal sin”
I started having doubts and was critical of God from the time I was 5 or 6, so I often wondered if I committed the unforgivable sin as I was growing up. My church connected this passage with their notion of apostasy, so I am apparently irredeemable. :lol:

Out of all the horrible things people can do, it’s a strange thing for Jesus or whomever was responsible for this passage to be so concerned about. The most heinous crimes are forgivable but blaspheming against the Holy Spirit is just going too far.


_________________
“Les grandes personnes ne comprennent jamais rien toutes seules, et c'est fatigant, pour les enfants, de toujours et toujours leur donner des explications.”
— Saint-Exupéry, Le Petit Prince


ToughDiamond
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Age: 72
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,405

12 Mar 2025, 12:04 pm

Yes it does look rather a bizarre thing to put on the top of the tree. Looking around, though, it seems he aimed it at the rabbis who had just said his miracles were satanically-powered rather than HS-powered. Doesn't seem to me that they were exactly blowing raspberries at the HS. They were just attributing his miracles to something else. So is the "beware false prophets" thing also unforgivable blasphemy? The ancients really get up my nose sometimes with their muddled thinking.



TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,541
Location: Hell

12 Mar 2025, 12:28 pm

It sort of seems like Jesus was trying to shut down scrutiny and debate here and to put himself/the Holy Spirit above criticism, not that Jesus likely ever said anything remotely close to that since Mark was apparently written around 70 AD. I think the writer may have had a broader, propagandistic motivation in mind as far as this passage goes or maybe not. I’m not sure.


_________________
“Les grandes personnes ne comprennent jamais rien toutes seules, et c'est fatigant, pour les enfants, de toujours et toujours leur donner des explications.”
— Saint-Exupéry, Le Petit Prince


TwilightPrincess
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Sep 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 30,541
Location: Hell

13 Mar 2025, 12:22 pm

Content Warning: Child Physical Abuse






20 Where is the wise person? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has God not made foolish the wisdom of the world? 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than mankind
To those not guided by the wisdom of God, the wisdom of the world seems impressive. There are lofty-sounding worldly philosophies that captivate the mind. Thousands of institutions of higher learning impart information from what many consider the greatest minds of mankind. Extensive libraries are replete with the accumulated knowledge of centuries of human experience. Despite this, however, the new world order that worldly rulers propose could only be a rule by imperfect, sin-stained, dying men. Hence, that order would be imperfect, repeating many past blunders and never satisfying all of mankind’s needs.​—Romans 3:10-12; 5:12.

Man’s proposed new world order is subject not only to human frailty but also to the influence of wicked spirit creatures​—yes, Satan the Devil and his demons.

[…]

The Bible makes it clear that “the fear of Jehovah is the start of wisdom.” (Proverbs 9:10; Psalm 111:10) Yet, the world has not even learned this basic requirement of wisdom.


The Use of Corporal Punishment on Children According to the Bible and the Watchtower

Corporal punishment - often with belts and sometimes with hands, wooden spoons (one or two of which were broken on me), paddles, etc. - is something I frequently experienced and observed as a kid. (Of course, some Christian fundamentalists use rods to discipline abuse their children due to the scriptures quoted below.) It never sat well with me and felt wrong. Anyway, I wanted to explore the Bible and my former religion’s views on this topic. It’s a huge topic, so I’m only scratching the surface as far as the Watchtower is concerned. Not only are there many more articles addressing this form of discipline, but I grew up hearing corporal punishment being advocated for in sermons. As a child, they were always difficult to sit through. First, here are some scriptures that support the use of physical punishment. (Others that could be thought to support the practice will be cited as I proceed through the discussion of the Watchtower. Several that demand or demonstrate violent capital punishment on children are quoted at the bottom of this post):

Those who spare the rod hate their children,
but those who love them are diligent to discipline them.
The rod and reproof give wisdom,
but a mother is disgraced by a neglected child.
Folly is bound up in the heart of a child,
but the rod of discipline drives it far away.
Do not withhold discipline from your children;
if you beat them with a rod, they will not die.
14 If you beat them with the rod,
you will save their lives from Sheol.
Interestingly, the same Hebrew word for “rod” (shebet) is used at Exodus 21:20-21:
Quote:
When a slaveowner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment, for the slave is the owner’s property.
By mere words slaves are not disciplined,
for though they understand, they will not give heed.
None of the scriptures in the Bible set limits on the severity or give a minimum or maximum age. Members of my former religion most often utilized corporal punishment from early toddlerhood until puberty although there were exceptions either way. My last experience with it was when I was 12 or 13. My mom slapped me in the face for saying a swear word. Since I had braces at the time, it made my mouth bleed. To be perfectly fair, my mom felt bad about it to the point that I needed to comfort and reassure her. In her mind, that episode, unlike other instances of harsh physical punishments she and my dad doled out, crossed the line. She never hit me again.

In the following quotes from the Watchtower, I’ll link scriptures unless they are quoted above. First, here’s what the JW reference book Insight on the Scriptures, published in 1988, has to say about using the rod:
Quote:
Parental authority. “Rod” is used also to symbolize the authority of parents over their children. The book of Proverbs makes many references to this authority, the term symbolizing all forms of discipline used, including the literal rod used for chastisement. The parent is actually responsible before God to exercise this rod, controlling the child. If the parent fails in this, he will bring ruination and death to his child and disgrace and God’s disapproval to himself also. (Pr 10:1; 15:20; 17:25; 19:13) “Foolishness is tied up with the heart of a boy; the rod of discipline is what will remove it far from him.” “Do not hold back discipline from the mere boy. In case you beat him with the rod, he will not die. With the rod you yourself should beat him, that you may deliver his very soul from Sheol itself.” (Pr 22:15; 23:13, 14) In fact, “the one holding back his rod is hating his son, but the one loving him is he that does look for him with discipline.”​—Pr 13:24; 19:18; 29:15; 1Sa 2:27-36.
Worldly authorities on rearing children frequently say: ‘No, the child should never be spanked. Avoid frustrating the child by using such strong measures to change his natural inclinations.’ A New York Times editorial, April 5, 1972, said: “‘Spare the rod and spoil the child’ is a wrong-headed adage that continues to get approving nods from self-appointed upholders of ‘the old virtues.’ It is difficult to fathom why the administration of premeditated, painful punishment by a bigger and stronger person could instill anything other than the belief that force triumphs.” But is this view correct? Is it a mistake to use physical punishment for the purpose of correcting a child’s wrong course of conduct?

God is man’s Creator. There is no higher authority. His Word is very clear on the matter. It says: “Do not hold back discipline from the mere boy. In case you beat him with the rod, he will not die. With the rod you yourself should beat him, that you may deliver his very soul from Sheol [the grave] itself.” (Prov. 23:13, 14) The life of the child is at stake. If he is allowed to pursue a wrong course, it will lead to his own unhappiness and eventual death outside God’s favor. Thus the Bible says: “The one holding back his rod is hating his son, but the one loving him is he that does look for him with discipline.” (Prov. 13:24) It shows real love on the part of a parent to do whatever he can to correct his child, including spanking him. This is God’s way. “For whom Jehovah loves,” the scripture says, “he disciplines; in fact, he scourges [whips or lashes] every one whom he receives as a son.”​—Heb. 12:5, 6.

[…]

The rejection by the world of such disciplinary training is largely responsible for the tremendous increase of juvenile delinquency and the resulting trouble and shame it has brought to parents.​—Prov. 29:15.
The quoted scripture in Hebrews reminds me of a previous post in this thread concerning a passage in the book of Deuteronomy that promotes punishing adults by flogging.

They seem to be trying to get parents to act against their own loving inclination here:
Strange as it may at first seem, children themselves can also be guilty of misusing power. How so? Children can cause their parents to act against their own better judgment because of the affection their parents have for them. A child, knowing that he deserves to be spanked, may cry so pitifully that his mother just cannot bring herself to administer the deserved spanking.
Off-topic, toxic BS about marriage from the same Watchtower:

Quote:
It has been observed that the mate who loves more deeply is at the mercy of the one who loves less. There seems to be a measure of truth in that. Wives, in general, love more deeply than their husbands do​—love is more important to them—​and many husbands take selfish advantage of that. On the other hand, wives have been known to show reluctance to pay the marriage due [i.e. have sex] when their wishes are crossed. In fact, some wives have even refused the marriage due altogether. Sad to say, at times this has contributed to a husband’s committing adultery. All such failure to heed Paul’s counsel at 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 is likewise a selfish misuse of power.

Imperfect people need discipline. They need it from childhood onward. God’s Word says: “The one holding back his rod is hating his son, but the one loving him is he that does look for him with discipline.” (Proverbs 13:24) Many child psychologists dispute this divine wisdom. Years ago one asked: “Do you mothers realize that every time you spank your child you show that you are hating your child?” Yet their permissiveness produced such a deluge of juvenile delinquents that a Brooklyn court judge made this caustic comment: “I think we need the woodshed for some young folks. But that is not considered fashionable now. Now we are told you must not strike a child; you may be stunting a genius.” But their permissiveness produced no crop of geniuses​—only a lawless wave of teenage criminals.
The following article cites the child psychologist Dr. Spock. When I was growing up, they often maligned him in their publications and sermons when the topic of corporal punishment came up.
Quote:
Dr. Benjamin Spock, author of Baby and Child Care, took part of the blame for the lack of parental firmness and the resulting delinquency. He said blame rested on the experts, “the child psychiatrists, psychologists, teachers, social workers and pediatricians like myself.”
Who will guide us through these difficult times? Well, there is no lack of advice from psychologists, educators, and others, but much of it is contradictory. For a whole generation in the West, Dr. Benjamin Spock was the foremost adviser in the matter of educating children. Then he admitted that his advice had been mistaken!

How much wiser to have God as our “dwelling place”! In these turbulent times, he is a rock of stability, existing “from everlasting to everlasting.” He said of himself through the prophet Malachi: “I am Jehovah; I have not changed.” (Malachi 3:6) God’s standards, as recorded in the Bible, are completely reliable.
Their claims about Dr. Spock are unfounded and based on misquotes. Here’s some things he actually said:
Dr. Spock said that Dr. Peale, Mr. Agnew and other critics had distorted what he had written. ''I didn't want to encourage permissiveness, but rather to relax rigidity,'' he once observed. ''Every once in a while, somebody would say to me, 'There's a perfectly horrible child down the block whose mother tells everybody that he's being brought up entirely by your book.' But my own children were raised strictly, to be polite and considerate. I guess people read into the book what they wanted to.''

On another occasion, striking a different note, he said: ''Maybe my book helped a generation not to be intimidated by adulthood. When I was young, I was always made to assume that I was wrong. Now young people think they might be right and stand up to authority.''
Legacy wrote:
Dr. Spock countered this with a defense of his methodology – there was, he said, no instant gratification advocated in his books. He had called for parents to express their love for their children while providing “clear, firm discipline,” not instead of providing it. And he suspected that he was being punished for his liberal politics more than his childrearing philosophy.
At any rate, generations of JWs have been trained to be wary of professionals, like child psychologists. If experts in any field say something that conflicts with their understanding of the Bible, they are trained to reject it. I’m not saying experts will always be right, but basing one’s views about rightness on the Bible itself, rather than on valid research, is the height of absurdity.

Moving on from the topic of child psychologists, here’s a disturbing passage from the June 1, 1980 Watchtower:

Image

My family used to laugh over a similar story involving me being carried to the back in church for a spanking because I wasn’t being still and quiet during an exceedingly boring sermon. I was preschool-aged at the time. Anyway, as I was being dragged back, I screamed: “Don’t beat me! Don’t beat me!” My family claimed I was exaggerating and that a hard spanking wasn’t that bad. They also claimed to be against spanking in anger or to the point where it left a mark, but they often did both. Sometimes I’d have welts after being beaten with a belt. Anyway, over the years, I eventually got pissed off enough from repeatedly hearing my family relay this charming story at family get togethers that, on one occasion, I cut through their merriment with a deadpan delivery of the question: “Why is that funny?” They no longer bring it up when I’m around, not that I’m around most of them anymore. as*holes.

From the 1978 book Making Your Family Life Happy:
Quote:
“A rebuke works deeper in one having understanding than striking a stupid one a hundred times.” (Proverbs 17:10) Different children may need to be disciplined differently. The temperament and disposition of the individual child must be considered. One child may be very sensitive, and physical punishment, such as spanking, may not always be necessary. With another, spanking may be ineffective. Or a child may be like the servant described at Proverbs 29:19, one who “will not let himself be corrected by mere words, for he understands but he is paying no heed.” In such a case the child would need corporal punishment.
In practice, most parents were quick to use corporal punishment because it takes less effort and is supported by scripture. Most JW parents were not (and still aren’t) well-educated since education was (and still is) discouraged, so it wasn’t at all uncommon for parents to expect behavior that was beyond a kid’s developmental level - expecting toddlers and preschoolers to sit still in church was a big one.

To be fair, the organization has lightened up on the use of corporal punishment in recent decades, likely due to legal concerns and repercussions which were present when I was a kid. People would often complain, even from the platform at church, about fears related to CPS. This stuff led to a culture of silence from kids who were worried they’d be “taken away.” At any rate, even though the Bible is clearly talking about a literal rod, the JW leadership are now pushing the idea that God was speaking figuratively. If he was speaking figuratively, he was apparently too stupid to realize that such scriptures would lead to hurt and traumatized children.

The Watchtower isn’t forbidding corporal punishment, admitting they were wrong in the past, or removing harmful articles from their website, but they are lightening the message in more recent articles/publications. Still, the damage has been done. Physical abuse is still being promoted in individual congregations by elders who’ve been in the organization for decades. It’s generational, religious physical abuse.
Use of the rod, representing authority, may involve a spanking, but many times it does not. Different children, different misbehaviors, call for different disciplining. A rebuke kindly given may suffice; stubbornness may require stronger medicine: “A rebuke works deeper in one having understanding than striking a stupid one a hundred times.” (Proverbs 17:10) Also applicable: “A servant [or, a child] will not let himself be corrected by mere words, for he understands but he is paying no heed.”​—Proverbs 29:19.
But parental authority—“the rod of discipline”—should never be abusive.(Proverbs 22:15; 29:15) The Bible cautions parents: “Don’t over-correct your children, or you will take all the heart out of them.” (Colossians 3:21, Phillips) [Phillips is a not-very-accurate paraphrase of the Bible. “Provoke” is a better rendering than “over-correct.” A manipulative tactic the Watchtower often uses is choosing translations that say what they want it to when their own, which is already quite biased, isn’t cutting it.] It also acknowledges that physical punishment is usually not the most effective teaching method. Proverbs 17:10 says: “A rebuke works deeper in one having understanding than striking a stupid one a hundred times.” Besides, the Bible recommends preventive discipline. At Deuteronomy 11:19 parents are urged to take advantage of casual moments to instill moral values in their children.—See also Deuteronomy 6:6, 7.
A rod is a symbol of authority. At Proverbs 13:24, it refers to parental authority. In this context, employing the rod of discipline does not necessarily mean spanking a child. Rather, it represents the means of correction, whatever form it may take. In one case, a rebuke kindly given to a child may be sufficient to correct improper behavior. Another child may require a stronger reproof. “A rebuke works deeper in one having understanding than striking a stupid one a hundred times,” says Proverbs 17:10.
The ultimate Source of advice on raising children is Jehovah God, the Originator of the family. (Ephesians 3:15) He is the only real expert. In his Word, the Bible, he provides reliable, practical instruction that really works. (Psalm 32:8; Isaiah 48:17, 18) It is up to us, though, to apply it.

[…]

Dr. James Dobson wrote in The Strong-Willed Child (1978): “Corporal punishment in the hands of a loving parent is a teaching tool by which harmful behavior is inhibited.” On the other hand, in an article adapted from the seventh edition of the popular book Baby and Child Care (1998), Dr. Benjamin Spock said: “Spanking teaches children that the larger, stronger person has the power to get his way, whether or not he is in the right.”

With regard to discipline, the Bible states: “The rod and reproof are what give wisdom.” (Proverbs 29:15) However, not all children need physical punishment.
No wonder, then, that Proverbs 13:24 says: “The one holding back his rod is hating his son, but the one loving him is he that does look for him with discipline.” In this context, the rod of discipline represents a means of correction, whatever form it may take.
^ That sounds ominous.

The following scriptures advocate executing disobedient children:
If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the gate of that place. 20 They shall say to the elders of his town, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel will hear and be afraid.
15 Whoever strikes father or mother shall be put to death. 17 Whoever curses father or mother shall be put to death.
Here’s what the publication Insight on the Scriptures says about these passages:
Quote:
If an occasion arose where a son became absolutely rebellious and incorrigible after repeated warnings and the necessary discipline, a still sterner measure was taken. The son was brought before the older men of the city, and after testimony from the parents that he was an irreformable offender, the delinquent suffered capital punishment by stoning. Such arrangement evidently had reference to a son beyond the age of what is usually considered a young child, for this one the Scriptures describe as “a glutton and a drunkard.” (De 21:18-21) One striking his father or mother, or calling down evil upon his parents, was put to death. The reason for such strong measures was that the nation might clear away what was bad from their midst and so that “all Israel [would] hear and indeed become afraid.” Therefore, any tendency in the nation toward juvenile delinquency or disrespect of parental authority would be greatly retar ded by the punishment inflicted upon such offenders.​—Ex 21:15, 17; Mt 15:4; Mr 7:10.
The episode of Elisha and the she-bears is an example of God using capital punishment on naughty children:
[Elisha] went up from there to Bethel, and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, “Go away, baldhead! Go away, baldhead!” 24 When he turned around and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.
Clearly, there are quite a few scriptures that support physical punishment in the Bible, so it’s not surprising that physical abuse is a widespread problem in many fundamentalist communities. I cited the Watchtower because that’s the organization I’m the most familiar with and was the most affected by, but there are communities that are much worse.

The following video is about Debi and Michael Pearl who are Christian fundamentalists (independent Baptists) best known for the book To Train Up a Child which is a notorious manual promoting child physical abuse. The book is still available for purchase on Amazon. Anyway, the part about children starts at 27 minutes in although the first half pertaining to gender roles is also quite interesting and grotesque:



Short, disturbing video featuring the Pearls:


_________________
“Les grandes personnes ne comprennent jamais rien toutes seules, et c'est fatigant, pour les enfants, de toujours et toujours leur donner des explications.”
— Saint-Exupéry, Le Petit Prince