Oh, for heaven’s sake!

Doug Wilson’s daughters have joined in the fray, defending their father against the recent outcry of the blogosphere (see my last post for more on that). I just read their defenses, and I just can’t even. I’m sitting here bone tired from a day of blogging and dissertation writing and baby watching, and there’s no way I want to write a whole post responding to their defenses. Fortunately, I don’t have to. Sierra has already replied to their posts, saying everything I would and more:

Doug Wilson’s Daughters Defend Him by Attacking Rachel Held Evans

Seriously, read the thing. It’s painful.

When Marriage Looks Like the Only Escape
What the Ruff, the Spotted Hyena, and the Cuttlefish Taught Me about Gender and Sexuality
The Cold, Unforgiving World of Geoffrey Botkin
What Courtship Was for Me
About Libby Anne

Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the Christian Right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the detrimental effects of the "purity culture," the contradictions of conservative politics, and the importance of feminism.

  • Steve

    Stockholm Syndrome

  • smrnda

    I responded on her post – I mean, here we have Wilson’s daughter who will do anything to demean Rachel without addressing a single point that Rachel made – it’s all about her ‘issues’ and she uses the most condescending language in trying to argue that Rachel just made some outburst of emotion where in fact, ti’s Wilson’s daughter who can’t write coherently or intelligently. Plus, the usual Christian platitude – anybody who says something that makes it seem like you’re local high priest isn’t right is just ‘not focusing on the real problem, their own sin.’ Great way to trivialize and brush over anyone saying anything you don’t like.

    I also don’t think she understands that once you connect the idea that male protection is something women get by submitting, you create this idea that the women who aren’t submitting to men don’t deserve protection. She can idealize ‘submission’ and ‘leadership’ but once you’ve put people on an unequal footing, the submitting party is taught to police their thoughts so as not to go against the local authority. You get people like this guy’s daughters who can’t even allow themselves to think for an instant that their dad might not be totally wise and all knowing.

  • http://wonderingwanderingthoughts.blogspot.com OneSmallStep

    In reading all the defenses of the original article, it’s like they abstractly understand that culture has an issue with the ideas they presented, and so they try and use words and phrases to say that they don’t actually follow horrific policies. Which is why one of Wood’s daughters can be so dismissive and condescending towards Rachel, and yet turn around and say that Rachel would negatively react to a man condescendingly pat her on the head and call Rachel sweetheart — she’s seen examples of culture saying such behavior is unacceptable, but she doesn’t really grasp what that behavior is or why — hence why she essentially is the man patting Rachel on the head and calling her a pretty sweetheart.

    There’s truly no grasp of the concepts. It’s like she was told that 2+2 = 4, but doesn’t really get what that means. She knows to repeat it, she knows that it’s the correct answer, but if she actually had two apples and added them to another two apples, she’d have no idea that she just did the equation.

    That, and I just wince when the daughters keep saying that if their father was truly oppressive, they’d be the first to know. That’s … not how it actually plays out. Millions of women fought against the right for women to vote, or work outside the home. Women can practice female genital mutilation on their own daughters. Women are perfectly capable of absorbing their own oppression and convincing themselves that the oppression is good for them, or they’re not actually oppressed.

  • AnotherOne

    Doug Wilson is an abominable human being:


    Summary: anyone–especially any woman–who disagrees with what he wrote is a “feminist bedwetter,” some random bishop (I have no idea who he’s talking about) is a “lesbian dyke,” and Rachel Held Evans is none other than a Samson-seducing Delilah. And he, the Bible-honoring, ever perfect Doug Wilson, the best thing since sliced bread, has nothing but open derision for all the hellbound people who take issue with his rape culture patriarchy.

    Christ on a cracker.

  • Jennifer

    Whoa whoa, he called someone a lesbian dyke??? And here I used to think Mark Driscoll had a potty mouth. I’m just praying Jon Piper and other comps sometimes connected with him don’t think this way.

    The daughter’s almost amusing; I may message her elsewhere.

  • Jennifer

    LOL Smrnda, you know them to a tee.

    “That, and I just wince when the daughters keep saying that if their father was truly oppressive, they’d be the first to know. That’s … not how it actually plays out.”

    Funny and true, thank you.