Category: womenssuffrage

Posted on in americanpolitics, beautystandards, beliefs, Bible, biblicalworldview, bodyimage, capitalism, challenges, childcare, children'srights, christianfaith, christianpatriarchy, churchharm, civilrights, coercivecontrol, deconstruction, exchristian, faith, freedom, friendship, genderideology, historicalfigures, history, medicalconsequences, mental health, misinformation, nuance, podcast, politics, progressiveleft, progressives, radicalfeminism, religion, sexindustry, sexwork, socialjustice, theology, trump, womenssuffrage, worldview

The Real Handmaid’s Tale Isn’t in America

Between Liberation and Collapse: Why We Need to Talk About the Middle Path

Welcome back to Taste Test Thursdays, where we explore health, culture, belief, and everything in between. I’m your host, Megan Leigh and today, we’re asking a question that’s bound to make someone uncomfortable:

What if the very institutions we tore down as oppressive… were also protecting us?

We live in a time of extremes. On one side, you’ve got Quiverfull-style fundamentalists preaching hyper-fertility and wifely submission like it’s the only antidote to modern decay. On the other, we’ve got a postmodern buffet of “do what you want, gender is a vibe, all structures are violence.”

And if you’re like me—having navigated the high-control religion pipeline but also come out the other side—you might be wondering…

“Wait… does anyone believe in guardrails anymore?”

Because spoiler: freedom without form becomes chaos. And chaos isn’t empowering. It’s destabilizing.

I truly believe that structure and boundaries can actually serve a purpose—especially when it comes to sex, gender, and human flourishing.

This isn’t a call to go backward. It’s a call to pause, zoom out, and ask: what’s been lost in our so-called progress? Let’s dig in.

The Panic Playbook

This past summer, the media went full apocalyptic. You couldn’t scroll, stream, or tune in without hearing it: Christian nationalism is taking over. Project 2025 is a fascist manifesto. Trump is a theocratic threat to democracy itself. The narrative was everywhere—breathless Substacks, viral TikToks, and cable news countdowns to Gilead.

But while progressives were busy hallucinating handmaids and framing every Republican vote as the end of America, they were also helping cover up the biggest political scandal since Watergate: Biden’s cognitive decline.

This blog isn’t a right-wing defense or a leftist takedown. It’s a wake-up call. Because authoritarian creep doesn’t wear just one team’s jersey. If we’re serious about resisting tyranny, we need to stop fearmongering about theocracy and start interrogating the power grabs happening under our own banners—especially the ones cloaked in compassion, inclusion, and “equity.”

Not All “Christian Nationalism” Is the Same—Let’s Break It Down

The term “nationalism” gets thrown around a lot, but it actually has different meanings:

🔸 1. The Theocratic Extreme
This is the version everyone fears—and with good reason.

  • Belief: Government should follow biblical law.
  • Goal: A Christian theocracy where dissent is treated as rebellion.
  • Associated with: Christian Reconstructionism, Dominionism, and groups hostile to pluralism.
    📍 Reality: This is fringe. Most evangelicals don’t support this, but it’s the go-to boogeyman in media and deconstruction circles.

🔸 2. Civic or Cultural Nationalism
More common, less scary.

  • Belief: Shared culture—language, customs, even religion—can create unity.
  • Goal: Strong national identity and cohesion, not exclusion.
  • Seen in: France’s secularism, Japan’s cultural pride, and even Fourth of July BBQs.
    📍 Reality: This is where most “Christian nationalists” actually land. They believe in the U.S.’s Christian roots and want to preserve those values—not enforce a theocracy.

🔸 3. Patriotism (Often Mislabeled as Nationalism)
Here’s where it gets absurd.

  • Belief: Loving your country and its traditions.
  • Goal: A moral, thriving republic.
    📍 Reality: Critics lump this in with extremism to discredit conservatives, centrists, or people of faith.

Why It Matters

Lumping everyone—from flag-waving moderates to dominionist hardliners—into one “Christian nationalist” category fuels moral panic. It shuts down real dialogue and replaces nuance with hysteria.

You can:

✅ Love your country
✅ Value strong families
✅ Want morality in public life

…without wanting a theocracy.

Let’s Define the Terms Critics Confuse:

  • Dominionism: A fringe movement pushing for Christian control of civic life. Exists, but not mainstream.
  • Quiverfull: Ultra-niche belief in having as many kids as possible for religious reasons. Rare and extreme.
  • Christian Nationalism: Belief that the U.S. has a Christian identity that should shape culture and law. Vague, often misapplied.

And What It Isn’t:

  • Pro-natalism: A global concern over falling birth rates—not just a religious thing.
  • Conservative Feminism: Belief in empowerment through family and tradition. Dismissing it as brainwashing is anti-feminist.
  • Family Values: Often demonized, but for many, it just means prioritizing marriage, kids, and legacy.

Not all traditionalism is fascism.
Not all progressivism is liberation.
Let’s keep the conversation honest.

Hillary’s “Handmaid” Moment

Hilary Clinton🎧 “Well, first of all, don’t be a handmaiden to the patriarchy. Which kind of eliminates every woman on the other side of the aisle, except for very few. First, we have to get there, and it is obviously so much harder than it should be. So, if a woman runs who I think would be a good president, as I thought Kamala Harris would be, and as I knew I would be, I will support that woman.”

This quote from Hillary Clinton caused predictable outrage—but what’s more disturbing than the clip is the sentiment behind it.

In one breath, she managed to dismiss millions of women—mothers, caretakers, homemakers, conservative politicians, religious traditionalists—as unwitting slaves to male domination. Clinton doesn’t leave room for the idea that a woman might freely choose to prioritize home, faith, or family—not because she’s brainwashed, but because she’s pragmatic, thoughtful, and in tune with her own values.

To Clinton, there’s one legitimate type of woman in politics: the woman who governs like Hillary Clinton.

This framework—that conservative, traditional, or religious women are “handmaidens”—isn’t new. It’s a familiar talking point in progressive circles. And lately, it’s been weaponized even more boldly, as Clinton revealed in another recent statement:

“…blatant effort to basically send a message, most exemplified by Vance and Musk and others, that, you know, what we really need from you women are more children. And what that really means is you should go back to doing what you were born to do, which is to produce more children. So this is another performance about concerns they allegedly have for family life. Return to the family, the nuclear family. Return to being a Christian nation. Return to, you know, producing a lot of children, which is sort of odd because the people who produce the most children in our country are immigrants and they want to deport them, so none of this adds up.”

This is where modern feminism loses its plot. If liberation only counts when women make certain kinds of choices, it’s not about freedom then.

The Pro-Natalism Panic—and the Projection Problem

🎧 “Although the Quiverfull formal life isn’t necessarily being preached, many of the underlying theological and practical assumptions are elevated… and now, you know, they’re in the White House.”
– Emily Hunter McGowin, guest on In the Church Library podcast with Kelsey Kramer McGinnis and Marissa Franks Burt

There’s a subtle but dangerous trend happening in the deconstruction space: lumping all traditional Christian views of family into the Quiverfull/Dominionist bucket.

In a recent episode of In the Church Library, the hosts and guest reflected on the rise of pro-natalist ideas and Christian influence in politics. Marissa asks whether the ideology behind the Quiverfull movement might be getting a new rebrand—and Emily responds with what sounds like a chilling observation: echoes of that movement are now in the White House.

But let’s pause.

❗ The Quiverfull movement is real—but it’s fringe. It’s not representative of all evangelicals, conservatives, or even Christian pro-family thinking.

Yet increasingly, any policy or belief that values marriage, child-rearing, or generational stability gets painted with that same extremist brush. This is where projection replaces analysis.

Take J.D. Vance, often scapegoated in these conversations. He’s frequently accused of trying to turn America into Gilead—even though he has three children, supports working-class families, and hasn’t once called for a theocracy. His concern? America’s birthrate is in freefall.

That’s not theocracy. That’s math.

Pro-natalism isn’t about forcing women to give birth. It’s about grappling with a demographic time bomb. Countries like South Korea, Hungary, and Italy are facing societal collapse because too few people are having children. This isn’t moral panic—it’s math.

Even secular thinkers are sounding the alarm:

Lyman Stone, an economist and demographer, emphasizes: “Lower fertility rates are harbingers of lower economic growth, less innovation, less entrepreneurship, a weakened global position, any number of factors… But for me, the thing I worry about most is just disappointment. That is a society where most people grow old alone with little family around them, even though they wanted a family.”

Paul Morland, a British demographer, warns: “We’ve never seen anything like this kind of population decline before. The Black Death wiped out perhaps a third of Europe, but we’ve never seen an inverted population pyramid like the one we have today. I can’t see a way out of this beyond the supposedly crazy notion that people should try to have more kids.”

We have to be able to separate structure from subjugation. There’s a world of difference between saying “families matter” and forcing women into barefoot-and-pregnant obedience.

When we flatten every traditional idea into a fundamentalist threat, we not only lose clarity—we alienate people who are genuinely seeking meaning, stability, and community in a fragmented culture.

If we want to be intellectually honest, we must distinguish:

  • Extremism vs. Order
  • Oppression vs. Structure
  • Religious Tyranny vs. Social Cohesion

And we should probably stop pretending that every road leads to the Handmaid’s Tale.

Protective Powers: What Louise Perry and Joan Brumberg Reveal About Institutions

Let’s talk about The Case Against the Sexual Revolution by Louise Perry. Perry is a secular feminist. She’s not nostalgic for 1950s housewife culture—but she is asking: what did we actually get from the sexual revolution?

Here’s her mic-drop:

“The new sexual culture didn’t liberate women. It just asked them to participate in their own objectification with a smile.”

We built an entire culture around the idea that as long as it’s consensual, it’s empowering. But Perry argues that consent—without wisdom, without boundaries, without institutional protection—leaves women wide open to harm.

She points to:

  • Porn culture
  • Casual hookups
  • The normalization of sexual aggression and coercion in dating

These aren’t signs of liberation—they’re signs of a society that privatized female suffering and told us to smile through it.

Perry doesn’t say “go full tradwife.” But she does say maybe marriage, sexual restraint, and even modesty functioned as protective constraints—not just patriarchal tools of oppression.

We traded one form of pressure (be pure, stay home) for another (be hot, work hard, never need a man). Neither version asked what women actually want.

Now flip over to The Body Project by Joan Jacobs Brumberg. This one blew my mind.

She traces how, a century ago, girls were taught to cultivate inner character: honesty, kindness, self-control.

By the late 20th century? That inner moral development had been replaced by bodily self-surveillance: thigh gaps, clear skin, flat stomachs. Girls now focus on looking good, not being good.

She writes:

“The body has become the primary expression of self for teenage girls.”

Think about that. We went from teaching virtue to teaching girls how to market themselves. We told them they were free—and then handed them Instagram and said, “Good luck.”

So again, maybe some of those “oppressive” structures were also serving as cultural scaffolding. Not perfect. Not painless. But they gave young people—especially girls—a script that wasn’t just: “Be hot, be available, and don’t catch feelings.”

Brumberg isn’t saying go back to corsets and courtship. But she is saying we’ve lost our moral imagination. We gave up teaching self-restraint and purpose and replaced it with branding. With body projects. And now we wonder why depression and anxiety are through the roof??

We dive deeper into these subjects in these two podcasts:

From Diary Entries to Digital Screens: How Beauty Ideals and Sexualization Have Transformed Over Time
Consent Isn’t Enough: The Harsh Truth About “Sex Work”

Why the Fear Feels Real—And Why It’s Still Misguided

Look, I get it.

If you’ve escaped religious trauma, purity culture, or spiritual abuse, the sight of a political figure talking about motherhood as a virtue can feel like a threat. Your nervous system registers it as a return to oppression. The media confirms your panic. And suddenly, a call for demographic survival starts sounding like a demand for forced birth.

But your trauma doesn’t make every policy that triggers you authoritarian. It just means you need to slow down and check the data.

Because ironically, the real threats to bodily autonomy and family structure? They might not be coming from traditionalists at all.

🏛 The Progressive Power Grab You’re Not Supposed to Question

Another frustrating comment made by Kelsey Kramer McGinnis in a recent podcast was the need to “decenter nuclear families” and the dismissal of concerns about an “attack on nuclear families” as mere panic. But here’s the thing—this fear isn’t fabricated. It’s not fringe. It’s rooted in observable cultural trends and policy shifts. You can’t just wave it away with smug academic detachment.

Whether you support the traditional family structure or not, the erosion of it has real consequences—especially for children, social stability, and intergenerational resilience. Calling that out isn’t fearmongering. It’s an invitation to discuss the stakes honestly.

Let’s set the record straight: The desire to shape culture, laws, and education systems is not the sole domain of religious conservatives. Dominionist Christians aren’t the only ones with blueprints for a theocratic society. Progressive activists also seek to remake the world in their image—one institution at a time.

This isn’t a right-wing “whataboutism.” It’s an honest observation about how ideological movements—regardless of political lean—operate when they gain influence.

Let’s take a look at what this looks like on both ends of the spectrum:

🏛 Dominionism (Far-Right Christian Nationalism)

Core Belief: Christians are mandated by God to bring every area of life—government, education, business—under biblical authority.

Tactics:

  • Homeschool curricula promoting biblical literalism and creationism.
  • Campaigns for Christian prayer in public schools or Ten Commandments monuments in courthouses.
  • Promoting the idea that America was founded as a Christian nation and must return to those roots.
  • Electing openly Christian lawmakers with the explicit goal of reshaping law and public policy to reflect “biblical values.”
  • Supporting the Quiverfull movement, which encourages large families to “outbreed the left” and raise up “arrows for God’s army.”

📘 Progressive Institutional Capture (Far-Left Activism)

Core Belief: Society must be dismantled and rebuilt to eliminate systemic oppression, centering race, gender, and identity as primary moral lenses.

Tactics:

  • Embedding DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) frameworks into public schools, universities, and corporate policy.
  • Redefining gender and sex in school curricula while often sidelining parental input or community values.
  • Elevating “lived experience” over objective standards in hiring, curriculum design, and academic research.
  • Weaponizing social media and institutional policies to punish dissenting views (labeling them as “harmful,” “unsafe,” or “hateful”).
  • Using activist lingo to obscure government overreach (“gender-affirming care” vs. irreversible medical intervention for minors).

🔄 Shared Behaviors: The Race to Capture Institutions

Despite their stark differences in values, both dominionists and far-left activists behave in eerily similar ways:

  • They seek cultural dominance through schools, law, media, and public policy.
  • They view their moral framework as not just legitimate but necessary for a just society.
  • They suppress dissent by pathologizing disagreement—branding critics as “anti-Christian,” “bigoted,” “transphobic,” “groomers,” or “domestic extremists.”

The battleground is no longer just the ballot box. It’s the school board meeting. The state legislature. The HR department. The university curriculum. The TikTok algorithm.

Colorado’s HB25-1312 — The “Kelly Loving Act”

Signed in May 2025, this law expands protections for transgender individuals. Fine on the surface. But here’s the fine print:

  • It redefines coercive control to include misgendering and deadnaming.
  • In custody cases, a parent who refuses to affirm a child’s gender identity could now be framed as abusive—even if that child is a minor in the midst of rapid-onset gender dysphoria.

Is it protecting kids? Or is it using identity to override parental rights?

Washington State’s HB 1296

This bill guts the Parents’ Bill of Rights (which was approved by voters via Initiative 2081). It:

  • Eliminates mandatory parental access to children’s health records (including mental health).
  • Enshrines gender identity and sexual orientation in a new “Student Bill of Rights.”
  • Allows state-level monitoring of school boards that don’t comply.

And the cherry on top? It was passed with an emergency clause so it would take effect immediately, bypassing normal legislative scrutiny.

This isn’t some abstract culture war. These are real laws, passed in real states, stripping real parents of their authority.

A Marxist Framework Masquerading as Compassion

Some of these changes echo critical theory more than constitutional liberty.

Historically, Marxist and Maoist ideologies viewed the family unit as an oppressive structure that needed dismantling. Parental authority was often seen as an extension of capitalist control. In its place? State-affirmed loyalty, reeducation, and ideological uniformity.

Now, it’s not happening with red stars and gulags—it’s happening through rainbow flags and DEI seminars. But the power dynamics are the same:

The family becomes secondary to the state.
Dissent becomes dangerous.
Disagreement becomes “violence.”

This is how authoritarianism creeps in—wrapped in the language of safety and inclusion.

What Real Theocracy Looks Like

If you need a reality check, read Yasmine Mohammed’s Unveiled. Raised in a fundamentalist Muslim home, where women had no autonomy, no basic rights, and no freedom. She was forced into hijab at age 9, married off to an al-Qaeda operative, and beaten for asking questions. Women cannot see a doctor without a male guardian, they are forced to cover every inch of their bodies and are denied access to education and even the right to drive. That’s theocracy. That is TRUE oppression.

Now contrast that with the freedom that women enjoy in the West today. In modern America, women have more rights and freedoms than at any point in history. Women can run around naked at Pride parades, express their sexuality however they choose, and redefine what it means to be a woman altogether. The very idea of a “dystopia” here is laughable when we consider the actual freedom women in the West enjoy.

Yet, despite these freedoms, many liberal women still cry oppression. They whine about having to pay for their student loans, birth control or endure debates over abortion restrictions. This level of cognitive dissonance—claiming victimhood while living in unprecedented freedom—is a slap in the face to women who actually suffer under real patriarchal oppression.

What’s even more Orwellian is how the left, in its quest for inclusivity and justice, is actively stripping others of their freedoms. They preach about fighting for freedom of speech while canceling anyone who disagrees with them. They claim to be champions of equality while weaponizing institutions to enforce ideological conformity.

Bottom line: If you think Elon Musk tweeting about birth rates is the same as what Yasmine went through? You’ve lost perspective.

To revisit my conversation with Yasmine:

Women, Terror, and Freedom: How the West Enables Radical Ideologies

Fear Isn’t Feminism

If your feminism can’t handle dissent, it was never liberation—it was just a prettier cage.

We have to stop mistaking fear for wisdom. We have to stop confusing criticism with violence. And we absolutely must stop handing our power over to ideologies that infantilize us in the name of compassion.

Let’s be clear: Gilead isn’t coming. But if we’re not careful, something just as destructive might.

A world where parents are powerless.
Where biology is negotiable but ideology is law.
Where compliance is the only virtue, and questions are a crime.

The Courage to Be Honest

What I’m suggesting isn’t fashionable. It doesn’t fit neatly in a progressive or conservative box. But I’m tired of those boxes.

I’ve lived in Portland’s secular utopia and inside a high-control religious environment. I’ve seen how each side distorts truth in the name of “freedom” or “righteousness.”

But what if true liberation is found in the tension between the two?

The most revolutionary thing we can do today is refuse to become an extremist.

Not because we’re afraid.
Not because we’re fence-sitters.
But because we believe there’s a better way—one that honors the past without being imprisoned by it and faces the future with clear eyes and moral courage.

Maintain your curiosity, embrace skepticism, and keep tuning in. 🎙️🔒

— Megan Leigh

📚 Source List for Blog Post

1. Hillary Clinton Quotes

  • Quote 1 (on being a “handmaiden to the patriarchy”):
    [Reference: “Defending Democracy” podcast with historian Heather Cox Richardson, May 2024]
    No official transcript published — you’re using a direct audio clip for this one.
  • Quote 2 (on pro-natalism and immigration):
    [Source: Same podcast — “Defending Democracy” with Heather Cox Richardson, 2024]
    Partial reference via The Independent article

2. Louise Perry

3. Mary Harrington

4. Demographer Paul Morland

5. Lyman Stone

6. Dominionism & Quiverfull Movement

7. Recent Legislation Affecting Parental Rights

Posted on in americanpolitics, biblicalworldview, challenges, christianfaith, christianpatriarchy, coercivecontrol, cults, deconstruction, faith, freedom, influencers, manipulation, mental health, mentalhealth, mindset, misinformation, moms, podcast, politics, progressives, religion, resilence, self-help, selfcompassion, socialjustice, socialmedia, spiritualabuse, stress, stressresilence, testimonies, theology, trad wife, trump, wellness, womenssuffrage, worldview

1984 and The Handmaid’s Tale: Misplaced Parallels and Liberal Delusion

Breaking Free: A Conversation with Yasmine Mohammed on Radical Islam, Empowerment, and the West’s Blind Spots

After finishing George Orwell’s 1984, I noticed its resurgence in popularity, especially after Trump’s election. Ironically, it’s not the conservative right but the progressive left that increasingly mirrors Orwellian themes. Similarly, Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale has become a rallying cry for liberals who claim to be on the brink of a dystopian theocracy. Yet, as Yasmine Muhammad pointed out in this week’s episode, this comparison is not only absurd but deeply insulting to women who live under regimes where Atwood’s fiction is a grim reality.

1984: Rewriting Language and History

The Democratic Party’s obsession with redefining language is straight out of Orwell’s playbook. They tell us biology is bigotry and that there are infinite genders, forcing people to adopt nonsensical pronouns or risk social ostracism. This is not progress—it’s the weaponization of language to control thought, eerily similar to Orwell’s Newspeak.

But it doesn’t stop there. They actively rewrite history by renaming monuments, military bases, and even schools, erasing cultural markers in the name of ideological purity. This is doublespeak in action: the manipulation of truth for political orthodoxy. Orwell’s warning that “orthodoxy is unconsciousness” feels disturbingly apt when observing the modern left.

The Handmaid’s Tale: An Insult to Women Who Actually Suffer

In our conversation, Yasmine highlighted the absurdity of liberal claims that America is The Handmaid’s Tale come to life. Yasmine, who grew up under Islamic theocracy, knows firsthand what it’s like to live in a world where women have no autonomy. These women cannot see a doctor without a male guardian, are forced to cover every inch of their bodies, and are denied basic freedoms like education or the right to drive.

Contrast this with the West, where women have more freedom than any other point in history. Liberal women can run around naked at Pride parades, freely express their sexuality, and redefine what it means to be a woman altogether. And yet, they cry oppression because they are expected to pay for their own birth control or endure debates over abortion limits. This level of cognitive dissonance—claiming victimhood while living in unprecedented freedom—is a slap in the face to women who actually suffer under real patriarchal oppression.

Liberal Orthodoxy: Lost in the Sauce

What’s truly Orwellian is how the left uses its freedom to strip others of theirs. They shout about inclusivity but cancel anyone who disagrees. They claim to fight for justice while weaponizing institutions to enforce ideological conformity. Meanwhile, they are so consumed with their own victim complex that they fail to see how absurd their comparisons to dystopian fiction really are.

Orwell and Atwood warned against unchecked power and ideological extremism. If liberals actually read these books instead of using them as aesthetic props, they might realize they’re mirroring the very authoritarianism they claim to oppose. Instead, they’re lost in the sauce, preaching oppression in a society where they have more freedom than they can handle.

As Yasmine said, “You want to see The Handmaid’s Tale? Try being a woman in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Afghanistan.” The left would do well to remember that before playing the victim in their cosplay dystopia.

Posted on in americanpolitics, challenges, coercivecontrol, cults, deconstruction, freedom, manipulation, mental health, mentalhealth, mindset, misinformation, neuroplasticity, nuance, physiology, podcast, politics, progressives, self-help, selfcompassion, socialjustice, socialmedia, stressresilence, trump, womenssuffrage, worldview

Understanding Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS)

Forget your zombie apocalypse fantasies — the real outbreak is Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS), where rational thinking flies out the window the moment “Orange Man” is mentioned. TDS has become a modern-day fever that sends reasonable minds into a frenzy. If you’ve seen this around you, you’re not alone. But let me just say, I get it! I used to be there. When Trump won in 2016, I cried. I felt the devastation, the outrage, the “what’s happening to our country?!” moment that so many others experienced. I believed the media narratives without question and wore that emotional turmoil like a badge. But then, something clicked. I started researching more carefully, looking into primary sources, seeking out independent media, and asking myself what I was really feeling about the issues rather than just repeating the party line. Over time, I saw the layers of complexity, nuance, and even hypocrisy that I’d never realized before.

Now, let’s take a deeper look at each of the TDS symptoms:

Symptoms of TDS: Diagnosing the Outrage

1. “Fascist! Racist! Sexist!”

If you so much as mention Trump in a positive light, brace yourself for the onslaught: you’re suddenly a fascist, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, bigoted conspiracy theorist out to destroy democracy. The irony? This mob is so quick to throw every name in the book that the words have lost all meaning. Their logic: if you disagree, you’re evil. How convenient.

2. Family? Friends? Disposable!

TDS has reached the point where people are cutting off family members over their voting history. Imagine tossing a lifelong friendship because Uncle Joe wore a MAGA hat. For some with TDS, Thanksgiving isn’t a holiday; it’s a battleground. It’s not just about politics anymore — it’s a moral crusade where every dissenting opinion is a betrayal. Call it selective outrage syndrome.

3. Corporate Parrot Mode Activated

When TDS takes over, suddenly the most “anti-establishment” folks turn into the establishment’s biggest fans. They unironically parrot lines from Big Pharma, media conglomerates, tech giants, intelligence agencies, the military-industrial complex, and yes, even the World Economic Forum. In their minds, anything outside these sources? A dangerous conspiracy. “Think for yourself” only applies as long as you’re thinking exactly what they’re thinking.

4. Cancel Culture Gone Wild

Got a book that challenges the status quo? Banned. Statue of a historical figure? Torn down. Art that doesn’t align with the current narrative. Erased. For TDS-ers, history is only as valid as its alignment with their worldview. It’s a never-ending purge of anything that might cause them the slightest discomfort. The new motto? If it offends, it ends.

5. Segregation 2.0

In the wild world of TDS, segregation is back — but now it’s “progressive.” We’re talking division by race, medical status, and whatever category might boost moral superiority. They claim to champion equality, but at every turn, it’s “us versus them.” TDS has transformed inclusivity into a new, hyper-policed form of exclusivity.

6. Piercings, Tattoos, Hair Colors Galore

Extreme individuality, TDS-style: where everyone rebels in exactly the same way. TDS-driven defiance usually manifests in whatever new trend they’re convinced will “stick it to the man”. Just like TDS itself, this uniform has turned rebellion into a team sport. Black masks, blue hair — it’s the official TDS fashion statement. Strut your stuff with the same look as every other anti-establishment warrior on the block. For a movement obsessed with individuality, TDS sure has a strict dress code.

7. “Reproductive Justice” with Selective Amnesia

TDS champions “reproductive rights” but often glosses over the darker history of eugenics behind some early advocates. They’ll celebrate organizations without ever acknowledging where they came from. Bring up Margaret Sanger’s disturbing past, and watch them squirm — or, more likely, accuse you of “attacking reproductive freedom.”

8. Riot, Loot, and Celebrate Criminality (but Take Away the Guns)

TDS folks will tell you that looting and burning buildings are “mostly peaceful.” They cheer on criminality as “expression” but demand that law-abiding citizens be disarmed. In their perfect world, the government holds all the power, while citizens are stripped of their rights. Because nothing says “justice” like leaving the people defenseless.

9. Senile Man Isn’t Senile (and Don’t You Dare Say Otherwise)

Exhibit A of TDS reality distortion: insisting that “Senile Man” is sharp, focused, and totally not slipping. TDS defenders will rationalize every stutter, stumble, and lapse as just “endearing quirks.” They’ve become professional apologists for a guy who can barely string a sentence together without a script.

10. Open Borders Good, Secure Borders Bad

In the TDS worldview, open borders are a humanitarian triumph, and peace negotiations are…dangerous? They cheer escalating tensions and possible war, insisting it’s good for democracy. But God forbid someone suggests security at the borders. That’s “xenophobic” — unless they need walls and fences around their own neighborhoods.

11. MAGA and Russia: The Root of All Evil

To the TDS-affected, MAGA and Russia are the villains of every story. Whatever the issue, it’s their fault. Rising costs, climate disasters, bad sports scores? It’s all “MAGA” or Putin. It’s like a never-ending game of political Mad Libs, where every blank is filled with the same two villains.

12. January 6 is the New 9/11

The narrative: January 6 was on par with Pearl Harbor and 9/11. For TDS followers, a chaotic day at the Capitol has somehow become a world-altering tragedy on par with historic attacks on America. The comparison is absurd, but TDS won’t let it go. Any criticism? Clearly you’re downplaying “the darkest day in history.”

13. Blind Obedience Rebranded as “Saving Democracy”

TDS logic: the only way to “save democracy” is by silencing dissent, canceling opinions, and obeying government orders without question. It’s like a self-contradictory campaign slogan: “Destroy freedom to protect it!” And somehow, they think they’re the enlightened ones.

14. Buzzword Bingo

TDS rhetoric is powered by slogans that sound deep but are emptier than a plastic grocery bag in a windstorm. You’ll hear phrases like “destroy democracy to save it,” “compliance is justice,” and “love wins,” even when they’re trampling over their own definitions. It’s a language of feel-good contradictions — because if it sounds right, who cares if it is right?

TDS Prognosis: From Reason to Rage

Unfortunately, TDS seems to be getting worse, not better. Studies suggest that heavy doses of mainstream media, academic echo chambers, and social media influencers are turning normal folks into a rage-fueled army of identical outrage. And when you throw in teachers’ unions, college admin, and some politicians adding fuel to the fire, it’s no wonder we’re seeing otherwise smart, decent people morph into full-time outrage machines.

In the end, TDS has turned the political landscape into a circus of contradictions, hysterics, and nonsensical slogans. If you’re ready for an apocalypse, you might not need zombies — TDS has already created an army of the enraged, who follow the leader without question, convinced they’re fighting the good fight by shutting down everything they disagree with.

Treatment: A Cure for TDS?

Can you reason with someone deep in TDS? Sometimes it feels impossible, but it’s worth trying. A demoralized person is hard to reach, but most cases of TDS aren’t terminal. Many of those “80 million” Biden voters are reasonable, everyday people who just might be open to a conversation. Looking at the 2024 election landscape, Trump and the GOP have undeniably tapped into a broader, more diverse demographic. Today’s Republican candidates come from various backgrounds, with f igures like Tulsi Gabbard and Vivek Ramaswamy, representing unique perspectives, which is a first for the party on this scale. This diverse mix shows that the party’s focus is evolving—centered not just on identity but on a broader range of ideas​.POLITICO.

Let’s resist the divisive forces that are feeding TDS and bring civility back into the mix.

So, here’s the prescription:

  1. Step Away from MSM: The first step is to lower their dose of mainstream media. It’s like a detox.
  2. Upgrade the Information Diet: Guide them toward new, independent sources of information. Look for voices that don’t just echo the usual talking points.
  3. Watch The Coddling of the American Mind: This documentary challenges the ideas that have cultivated TDS and offers perspective on resilience and openness.
  4. Take a Walk Outside: Nature is good for the soul. Sometimes, the answer is as simple as fresh air, sunshine, and a reminder that the world is bigger than our screens.
  5. Hit the Gym: Physical exercise has been shown to reduce anxiety and improve mental clarity. Plus, it’s hard to hold onto bitterness when you’re in the zone.
  6. And Most Importantly, Laugh: Humor can bridge divides faster than any debate. Remember, we can disagree and still respect each other.

Let’s turn down the heat and work on genuine conversations—who knows, maybe one by one, we can cure TDS for good.

But on the real though, breaking through what’s commonly called Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) requires understanding why these deeply polarizing reactions arise and how to gently engage people in constructive, open-minded discussions. Here are some insightful resources and strategies to help you navigate TDS, improve communication, and potentially help those caught in it see multiple perspectives more clearly.

1. Books on Political Polarization and Media Influence

  • “The Coddling of the American Mind” by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff
    This book explores why younger generations are more anxious and polarized, linking it to trends in education, media, and social conditioning. It discusses the impact of overprotection and “safetyism” on mental resilience, which can feed into extreme reactions to political figures like Trump.
  • “Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion” by Jonathan Haidt
    Haidt’s book explains the moral psychology behind political divides, providing insight into why people demonize others for their beliefs. It’s a resource that encourages empathy and offers tools to understand why certain people feel so strongly about political figures.
  • “Hate, Inc.” by Matt Taibbi
    This book takes a deep dive into how the media creates division, rage, and fear to keep audiences engaged. Taibbi argues that both sides of the political spectrum are manipulated by media tactics, which can lead to knee-jerk reactions and a lack of critical thinking.
  • “Thinking, Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman
    Kahneman’s insights into the psychology of decision-making and biases are incredibly valuable for understanding how snap judgments form. This is essential for recognizing why some people react so viscerally to certain public figures and how they might break out of these biases.

2. Documentaries and Videos

  • “The Social Dilemma”
    This documentary shows how social media platforms amplify outrage and division. It explains how algorithms reward extreme views and reinforce confirmation biases. Viewing this can help someone understand how media exposure may fuel polarized reactions.
  • Interviews and Talks by Jonathan Haidt
    Haidt’s lectures on YouTube about political polarization and moral psychology provide easily digestible explanations for why people become entrenched in their beliefs and hostile toward others. His work emphasizes empathy and understanding, which are key in bridging divides.
  • Interviews with Matt Taibbi on Media Influence
    Journalist Matt Taibbi frequently discusses media’s role in inflaming division and mistrust. Hearing his perspective on how media drives certain narratives can help someone rethink their news consumption.

3. Podcasts and Alternative Media Outlets

  • The Joe Rogan Experience
    Rogan’s podcast often features diverse viewpoints, including from figures who challenge mainstream narratives. Rogan’s open-minded, questioning style can encourage listeners to think independently.
  • Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar
    This independent news show is known for covering both left-wing and right-wing perspectives critically, making it valuable for people seeking balanced information. Hosts Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti offer nuanced discussions that don’t fall into mainstream narratives.
  • The Glenn Greenwald Podcast
    Greenwald, a journalist and political commentator, is known for challenging establishment narratives. His independent reporting encourages critical thinking and skepticism, which can help break through one-sided views.

4. Online Resources

  • AllSides.com
    This news aggregator presents articles from the left, center, and right, helping people see how the same story can be framed differently depending on the outlet. Regularly reading across the spectrum can help break the habit of ideological echo chambers.
  • Media Bias/Fact Check
    This site is useful for assessing the political leanings and reliability of different media outlets. People with TDS often trust only certain sources; this tool can provide insight into the biases of those sources, helping individuals diversify their information diet.

5. Therapeutic and Self-Awareness Tools

  • Mindfulness Practices
    Practicing mindfulness or meditation can help people become more self-aware and less reactive, making it easier to engage in rational conversations without emotional bias.
  • Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) Techniques
    CBT exercises help people examine the roots of their thoughts and emotions. While this isn’t TDS-specific, understanding thought patterns and challenging automatic, often emotional, responses can reduce irrational thinking related to political issues.

6. Constructive Engagement Tips

  • Ask Open-Ended Questions
    Instead of directly challenging someone’s beliefs, ask them questions that make them think deeper: “What made you come to that conclusion?” or “Have you ever looked into other perspectives on this?”
  • Seek Common Ground
    Finding points of agreement before delving into differences can make conversations less confrontational and more constructive.
  • Limit Media Consumption Together
    If you’re close to someone who seems highly affected by TDS, suggest a “news detox” where both of you take a break from mainstream media. Instead, engage in activities like reading books, listening to long-form discussions, or spending time in nature.
  • Use Humor
    Humor can lighten intense topics and make them more approachable. It’s easier to discuss differences when the conversation doesn’t feel like a battle.
  • Encourage Journaling or Writing
    Writing can help people clarify their beliefs and analyze their emotions. It encourages self-reflection, which is helpful for overcoming rigid political opinions.

Breaking the cycle of TDS is more about cultivating open-mindedness, empathy, and critical thinking than directly trying to “change minds.” These resources and strategies can help create a space where productive conversations can happen.

Posted on in americanpolitics, Bible, biblicalworldview, challenges, christianfaith, christianpatriarchy, coercivecontrol, conspiracies, cults, deconstruction, faith, history, influencers, manipulation, mental health, mentalhealth, mindset, misinformation, nervous system, nutrition, physiology, podcast, politics, progressives, socialjustice, socialmedia, stress, theology, trump, womenssuffrage, worldview

Creating Dialogue: Moving Beyond Division in Politics

As we move past the recent election, I’ve been reflecting on what it’s taught me about our culture, politics, and the conversations we have about faith and values. I want to share this reflection, not as a definitive answer, but as a personal journey that might resonate with others.

Discovering the “Deconstruction” Community

When I first started questioning my beliefs, especially within Christianity, I found myself among a group of people known as the “deconstruction community.” Many of these individuals were dealing with anger and disillusionment—much of it directed at political figures like Trump, the MAGA movement, and the perceived traditional values upheld by many evangelicals. They spoke openly about issues like spiritual abuse and cult-like dynamics in religious spaces, which resonated with me as I navigated my own experiences of questioning and stepping away from past beliefs.

But as I spent more time in these spaces, I noticed a paradox. The community had an “us vs. them” mentality that was very similar to the kind they were critiquing within conservative Christianity. The language, often harsh and divisive, didn’t align with the openness and curiosity I’d hoped to find. It seemed that some had merely replaced one set of rigid beliefs with another, creating a new kind of fundamentalism in the process.

Moving Beyond Anger and Righteousness

In these circles, I encountered scholars and advocates who passionately spoke against certain ideologies—sometimes with a level of certainty that left little room for nuance. I can empathize with this; when I began deconstructing, I, too, was filled with anger. I often felt morally superior, eager to “call out” harmful ideologies. But as time passed, I began to see that this anger, while understandable, could also be limiting. It kept me in a space where I saw the world in black and white, where there were “good” people on one side and “bad” on the other. I realized that this wasn’t a mindset I wanted to live in forever.

The Value of Autonomy and Discernment

During this election cycle, I found myself reflecting on the importance of autonomy, critical thinking, and discernment. These are qualities that the deconstruction community often claims to uphold. Yet, at times, it feels as though a different kind of fundamentalism has taken root—one where there’s pressure to align with a specific, “acceptable” narrative. I believe we need to make space for people to question, to think deeply, and to weigh their values without the fear of being shamed or silenced.

For instance, while I see harm in patriarchal structures, I also believe it’s damaging to label every conservative viewpoint as “fascist” or “racist.” These labels are extreme and can create walls instead of bridges. This is especially concerning when public figures or communities use this language to fuel fear rather than to inspire honest dialogue. It’s a reminder of how easy it is to fall into binary thinking, even when we’re trying to escape it.

Real-World Impact of Ideas

The power of ideas, especially those circulated in liberal spaces, has had a tangible impact on my life. Phrases like “sex work is real work” and “it’s just a clump of cells” influenced me in ways that I now wish had been more nuanced. I deeply regret some choices and wish I’d had more support, better information, and a broader perspective at the time. This experience fuels my passion for helping others get a fuller picture as they make decisions, especially those that impact their health, values, and future.

The Importance of Diverse Voices

As I look forward, my hope is to help foster a healthier America where diverse voices and perspectives can coexist. This includes voices that don’t necessarily align with mainstream narratives. Figures like Robert Kennedy Jr., for example, are often labeled “conspiracy theorists” within certain circles, including parts of the deconstruction community. But Kennedy has a message that challenges corporate narratives, and I find it disheartening when people dismiss him without truly engaging with his ideas. This tendency to label and dismiss is something I hope we can move beyond.

Building Dialogue Over Division

In closing, my commitment is to create a space where the priority is truth-seeking, not winning. It’s easy to fall into the trap of quick judgments and polarizing narratives, but real growth comes from dialogue, from listening, and from respecting the humanity in one another—even when we disagree. The recent election has reminded me of the importance of these values.

Let’s keep questioning the narratives, seeking understanding, and holding space for multiple perspectives. After all, this isn’t about “winning” or “losing”—it’s about building a more compassionate, informed society.

Thank you for reading, and let’s keep this conversation going. Let’s choose curiosity over condemnation, dialogue over division, and remember there’s always more to the story.

#drlauraanderson #traumarecoverycenter #politics #deconstruction #deconstructingfaith #peteenns #cultlike #election2024 #polarization #lessonslearned #divisivenarratives #democracyinretrograde #emilyamick #democratic #democracy #harris #trump2024 #maha #rfjk #newevangelicals #exvangelicals

Posted on in Bible, biblicalworldview, christianfaith, christianpatriarchy, chronichealth, coercivecontrol, commericalcults, conspiracies, cults, deconstruction, faith, influencers, manipulation, mental health, mentalhealth, mindset, podcast, progressives, self-help, selfcompassion, socialjustice, socialmedia, spiritualabuse, stress, stressresilence, testimonies, theology, womenssuffrage, wordofgod, worldview

Understanding the Group Mind: A Double-Edged Sword

Navigating the waters of community can feel like a tightrope walk, especially for those of us who’ve been through the storm of spiritual abuse. This week on Taste of Truth Tuesdays, I’m excited to welcome a guest who dives deep into the concept of “Group Mind”—the idea that a collective can elevate individual voices, creating a harmonious collaboration. While this concept sounds beautiful on the surface, having walked the line between healthy and toxic communities myself, I can’t help but question: What happens when “Group Mind” becomes a vessel for manipulation rather than a source of strength?

The Allure of Community

Let’s face it: we all crave connection. From childhood friendships to spiritual gatherings, our lives are woven into a fabric of social interactions. In healthy communities, each thread—each individual—contributes to the larger tapestry. Group Mind can be empowering when everyone contributes their unique strengths. Think of a brainstorming session, where different ideas build on each other to create something innovative. But in controlling groups, individuality is suppressed, and members are pressured to conform, stifling creativity and critical thinking.

The Double-Edged Sword of Group Mind

Our guest shares their experience in an improv class, where the idea of Group Mind became both a revelation and a source of anxiety. It’s fascinating how the language of community can feel welcoming yet be weaponized against those who seek authenticity. This mirrors the complexities of modern social dynamics, especially in the age of social media, where radicalization can happen at lightning speed.

In Episode 5 of my podcast, we tackled the “crunchy hippie to alt-right pipeline,” but now it’s time to shine a light on the radicalization of the left—a topic often overlooked. Why did I go from progressive circles to mingling with Trump supporters and Christians? This shift was marked by a range of events and trends reflecting broader changes within progressive movements and their impact on American politics and culture.

The Irony of the Deconstruction Space

As I navigated the deconstruction space, I noticed something ironic: when the deconstruction movement defines a cult and unintentionally describes their own playbook, the irony is hard to miss. Many who now identify as progressive or left leaning have simply swapped one form of fundamentalism for another. They may have shed their evangelical past, but the same dogmatic, ‘us vs. them’ tactics remain. It’s like they never fully untangled themselves from the rigid mindset they claim to oppose.

Social justice has become their new ‘End Times,’ and the tribalism is painfully obvious. Conformity, consequences for stepping out of line, leaders who set the narrative… sound familiar? 🙃

🔍 “It’s not your enemies, it’s the system.” We often fall into the trap of seeing our political landscape as a battle between two sides—one fighting for democracy, the other autocracy. But this binary thinking misses the larger issue: who really has power in shaping policies? Research, like the 2014 study by Gilens and Page, reveals that economic elites and organized interest groups wield far more influence over government decisions than the average citizen or voter. This isn’t about a single party; it’s about a systemic challenge that transcends partisan lines. 🧠

Instead of feeding into divisive narratives, maybe it’s time to ask: Who benefits from keeping us divided? 🤔 Progressive politics can impose control using a power/victim binary that’s reductive and lacks nuance, leveraging the fear of being labeled an oppressor as a tool for compliance. Reflecting on my journey of deconstruction and exploring progressive spaces, I’ve noticed a concerning trend: the lack of nuance and the prevalence of an ‘us vs. them’ mentality.

Even within progressive Christianity, there’s pressure to conform to certain social norms and ethical behaviors. Disagreement is often met with resistance, and group identity politics can dominate discussions. As I listened to a friend lecture me about the systems of whiteness and how white people are part of the problem, I couldn’t help but feel a visceral response in my body. Wasn’t she aware of how she was marginalizing voices that do not align with CRT principles and fostering division rather than unity?

It’s one thing to leave behind a belief system, but if you’re still using the same control tactics, are you really free? Or are you just in another form of groupthink? Many who now identify as progressive or left-leaning have simply swapped one form of radicalism for another.

In navigating my journey, I’ve discovered that while community can be a source of strength, it can also be stifling. Let’s strive for more open dialogue where diverse perspectives are valued.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” — Martin Luther King Jr.

Seeking Authentic Community

This brings us back to the concept of Group Mind. While it has the potential to uplift and unite, we must critically assess the communities we choose to engage with. Are they empowering our individuality, or are they reinforcing a new set of dogmas?

As we explore these themes in this week’s podcast episode, I invite you to reflect on your own experiences with community—whether online or offline. Are you in a space that nurtures your authentic self, or have you found yourself caught in another web of control? Let’s challenge ourselves to seek genuine connections that celebrate our uniqueness, rather than merely conforming to the expectations of a collective.

Navigating Community Dynamics

One critical takeaway from my own experiences and the stories shared by others is the importance of asking ourselves the right questions. When evaluating any community—whether it’s a religious group, a social circle, or even an improv class—we should reflect on whether we’re being encouraged to grow into our full selves or if we’re being pressured to shrink into submission.

Key Questions to Consider:

  • Am I celebrated for my unique contributions, or do I feel like a cog in the machine?
  • Is my voice heard and valued, or am I met with silence (or worse) when I express dissent?
  • Does this community expand my horizons, or does it confine me to a narrow worldview?

The Importance of Individuality

One of the most powerful realizations is that a thriving community doesn’t demand the extinction of individualism; it nourishes it. Just as the author of the guest post observed in an improv competition, the true beauty of collaboration lies in the ability of individuals to bring their full selves to the table, enhancing the group dynamic rather than diminishing it.

In my journey, I’ve learned that safe communities are those that not only say, “Yes!” to your ideas but also invite you to share more, to dig deeper, and to embrace the weirdness that makes you unique. They celebrate individuality as an essential ingredient for collective success, transforming “Group Mind” from a potential source of control into a powerful tool for creativity and support.

The Path to Healing

For those of us recovering from spiritual abuse, the journey to find a healthy community can feel daunting. It requires us to sift through the rubble of past experiences, recognizing patterns that once suffocated our voices. But it also offers a chance for healing, a space where we can reclaim our identities and forge connections based on respect and authenticity.

Ultimately, the quest for community is about more than just belonging; it’s about finding spaces where we can be our true selves. It’s about navigating the complexities of connection with our eyes wide open, ready to discern the difference between a supportive group and one that seeks to control.

Conclusion

As we move through life, let’s remember that community can be a double-edged sword. For some of us, especially those healing from trauma or navigating complex PTSD, the journey may be best supported by solitary pursuits—like books, pets, and podcasts—before stepping into the vibrant chaos of group dynamics. We must be vigilant in recognizing when connection serves us and when it threatens to silence our individuality. Here’s to seeking out those communities that empower us, uplift us, and invite us to shine our light—together.

Posted on in Bible, biblicalworldview, challenges, christianfaith, christianpatriarchy, deconstruction, faith, history, LDSchurch, mormoninfluencers, newagetojesus, podcast, scripture, socialjustice, theology, womenssuffrage, wordofgod

Nostalgia,The Trad Wife Movement, and the Illusion of a Simpler Time

Nostalgia has always been a powerful psychological force, often serving as a coping mechanism during times of uncertainty or rapid change. In recent years, its resurgence could be linked to various social and cultural factors, including economic instability, political polarization, and the overwhelming pace of technological advancements. However, nostalgia isn’t just about reminiscing; it’s a complex emotional response that plays a significant role in our psychological well-being.

The Psychology of Nostalgia: Comfort in Uncertainty

Nostalgia was once viewed as a negative emotion, associated with homesickness or a longing for the past. However, modern psychology recognizes it as a complex, bittersweet experience that can foster a sense of continuity, meaning, and identity. Nostalgia tends to emerge more during periods of transition or distress, offering comfort by reconnecting individuals with a perceived “better” or simpler time.

Nostalgia serves as a mental protective mechanism. Through a process known as “rose-colored retrospection,” people tend to recall the past in a more favorable light than it might have actually been. This selective memory process can result in an idealized version of the “good ol’ days,” where negative aspects are minimized or forgotten, and positive experiences are amplified.

Nostalgia as a Tool for Emotional Regulation

Interestingly, nostalgia isn’t just a passive experience; it can be consciously invoked to regulate emotions. When people deliberately recall positive memories, they can stabilize their mood, reduce anxiety, and increase a sense of control over their current situation. This is because the past, as we remember it, is fixed and unchangeable, offering a sense of predictability and safety that contrasts with the unpredictability of the future.

Nostalgia also acts as a psychological anchor during times of upheaval or change. By tapping into nostalgic memories, individuals can create a mental environment that feels familiar and safe, reducing the anxiety that comes from unpredictability. This sense of predictability is particularly comforting during periods of rapid change, as it provides a mental sanctuary in a chaotic world.

The Trad Wife Movement: Nostalgia as Identity Anchoring

The rise of the Trad wife movement—a trend where women embrace traditional gender roles and domesticity—can be understood as a form of nostalgia-driven identity anchoring. In a world that often feels chaotic and uncertain, many women (and men) find comfort in returning to what they perceive as a more stable, moral, and ordered past.

For some, adopting the Trad wife lifestyle is a way to reconnect with what they believe to be a more “authentic” version of femininity or womanhood. This version is often based on an idealized image of the past that emphasizes domestic skills, submissiveness, and clear gender roles. By embracing these ideals, individuals may feel that they are preserving a core part of their identity that they believe has been lost or undermined by modern society.

The Dangers of Nostalgia-Driven Resistance

While nostalgia can provide comfort and continuity, it can also serve as a form of resistance against social progress. The Trad wife movement often emerges in response to the perceived erosion of traditional values due to feminism, LGBTQ+ rights, and other social changes. In this context, nostalgia becomes a way to resist or reject modernity by clinging to a past that is seen as morally superior or more “natural.”

This selective use of nostalgia can reinforce regressive social norms and create tension between those who long for the past and those who advocate for continued social change. By idealizing a past that may never have truly existed as we remember it, the Trad wife movement and similar trends risk promoting an illusion that can hinder progress and inclusivity.

Conclusion: Navigating Nostalgia with Awareness

Nostalgia is far more than mere longing for the past. It’s a sophisticated psychological tool that individuals can harness to enhance their well-being, regulate their emotions, and maintain a sense of control. However, it’s important to approach nostalgia with a critical eye, recognizing that the past may not have been as perfect as we remember it.

The Trad wife movement, driven by nostalgia, may offer comfort in a rapidly changing world, but it also risks perpetuating outdated and harmful gender roles. By understanding the psychology behind nostalgia, we can better navigate its influence in our lives and make more informed choices about how we engage with the past—and the future.

Want to learn more about the complex interplay between nostalgia and modern social movements like the Trad wife trend? Tune into this week’s episode of Taste of Truth Tuesdays where we dive deep into this topic.
https://youtu.be/15kgRldlqoY?si=L_uToPjGIQTf_kIl

Posted on in Bible, biblicalworldview, challenges, christianfaith, christianpatriarchy, conspiracies, deconstruction, faith, historicalfigures, history, holistic health, influencers, JesusChrist, LDSchurch, mental health, mormoninfluencers, nervous system, new age spiritual, newagetojesus, physiology, podcast, progressives, pseudoscience, scripture, socialjustice, socialmedia, spiritualabuse, testimonies, theology, trad wife, trump, womenssuffrage, wordofgod, worldview

Breaking down the Power Play:  Women’s Suffrage, Christian patriarchy, and Trad Wife Propaganda

This week, I’m diving headfirst into the turbulent intersection of women’s suffrage, the resurgence of Christian patriarchy, and the trendy ‘trad wife’ movement. Buckle up as we unravel how these historical battles and modern movements collide, revealing their surprising connections—from the ongoing struggle for gender equality to the modern reinvention of traditional roles. Prepare for a journey through past and present that challenges conventional wisdom and ignites critical conversations.

🎧Listen here!

My Deconstruction Journey

In recent months, I’ve explored how radicalization, conspiracies, and religion have shaped my life. In Episode 5 of my podcast, we tackled the “crunchy hippie to alt-right pipeline,” but now it’s time to shine a light on the radicalization of the left—a topic often overlooked. Why did I go from progressive circles to mingling with Trump supporters and Christians? This shift was marked by a range of events and trends reflecting broader changes within progressive movements and their impact on American politics and culture.

Black Lives Matter Protests and Social Justice Movements

The murder of George Floyd ignited the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, but what often goes undiscussed is the scrutiny BLM faced over fund management. Allegations of financial mismanagement emerged in 2021, raising questions about how substantial donations were handled. The movement also brought the call to “defund the police” into the spotlight, advocating for reallocating funds to social services and community programs. However, cities like San Francisco, which initially reduced police funding, faced rising crime rates and eventually reinstated funding in 2022, acknowledging that some defunding measures had not achieved their intended outcomes.

Increased Political Activism and the Role of Cancel Culture

The 2020s saw a rise in intersectionality and identity politics, aiming to address overlapping forms of oppression. However, this sometimes led to contentious debates over ideological purity and inclusivity, particularly in online activism. Cancel culture became prominent, with debates over holding public figures accountable for perceived offenses. While some view it as necessary for social justice, others argue it suppresses free speech and stifles constructive dialogue.

Vaccine Hesitancy and the Crunchy-to-Patriarchy Pipeline

My reluctance to receive an experimental vaccine led to severe ostracism, as those hesitant about COVID-19 vaccines often faced dehumanization and cancel culture. This harsh treatment highlighted how cancel culture can suppress nuanced debate and alienate individuals with genuine concerns.

Dr. Stanley Plotkin, a prominent figure in vaccinology, and some of his colleagues recently published an article that has drawn significant attention. The article acknowledges that vaccines are not as thoroughly studied as previously claimed, particularly in terms of safety, both before and after they are licensed. This has raised concerns among critics, who argue that for decades, the public was assured that vaccines underwent rigorous safety testing.

Key points from the article include the admission that prelicensure clinical trials often have limited sample sizes and short follow-up periods, which may not fully capture long-term safety data. Additionally, there are currently no dedicated resources for post-authorization safety studies, relying instead on annual appropriations approved by Congress. This lack of resources for ongoing safety monitoring has been criticized as inadequate, particularly given the widespread use of vaccines.

This revelation has been met with strong reactions, especially from those who have long questioned the rigor of vaccine safety studies. They argue that these acknowledgments confirm their concerns that vaccine safety has not been as thoroughly investigated as it should be.

Read the paper here

In a previous episode, we scratched the surface of the Trad Wife and Stay-at-Home Girlfriend Movements. These movements, advocating traditional gender roles, see them as spiritually fulfilling and empowering, rejecting modern feminism while embracing modern cultural influences. We discussed the fear tactics within this online content that manipulates users by promoting apocalyptic scenarios and moral decay. Today, we’re diving deeper into this topic.

Historical Context and Kitchen Design

Before delving into the 19th Amendment, let’s explore the evolution of kitchen design as a reflection of changing gender roles and societal expectations:

  • Post-Civil War to Early 20th Century (1865-1930s): Kitchens transitioned from being managed by enslaved people to paid workers, with labor-saving appliances emerging and the housewife ideal taking shape.
  • Mid-20th Century (1930s-1960s): The post-WWII era emphasized suburban living and reinforced the housewife’s role as a symbol of the American dream, driven by economic prosperity and suburban expansion.
  • 1974 Bill on Women’s Financial Independence: The Equal Credit Opportunity Act granted women the right to open bank accounts and obtain credit cards in their names, a significant step towards financial equality.

Today’s ‘trad wife’ movement glamorizes the mid-century housewife as a personal choice, not a patriarchal trap. But let’s be real—this nostalgic comeback is less about empowerment and more about rolling back feminist progress, cherry-picking conservative values to fit a romanticized narrative. It’s time to call out the toxicity and acknowledge that the nuclear family ideal doesn’t have to be a patriarchal prison.

Connecting Women’s Suffrage and Christian Nationalism

This week marks the anniversary of the 19th Amendment, a milestone for women’s rights. However, despite granting voting rights, many women of color continued to face disenfranchisement. The rise of ideologies challenging this progress, such as Nancy Pearcey’s claim that women’s suffrage was a net loss, reflects a broader trend of dominionism and Christian nationalism. Pearcey’s book, The Toxic War on Masculinity, embraced by right-wing fundamentalist figures, has been criticized for its logical fallacies and misrepresentation of research.

A Critique of Nancy Pearcey’s The Toxic War on Masculinity

Pearcey argues that the expansion of women’s roles and rights has led to a “war on masculinity,” promoting binary gender stereotypes and overlooking intersectional perspectives. Critics point out that Pearcey’s use of John Gottman’s research is misleading. Gottman’s studies indicate that emotionally intelligent husbands succeed in both egalitarian and hierarchical marriages, but Pearcey omits that her argument falls apart when complementarian men abandon hierarchical behaviors, exposing a significant ideological bias in her work.

Contextualizing These Views

These views reflect a broader conversation within conservative Christian circles about gender roles. Figures like Joel Webbon and Doug Wilson argue against women’s suffrage from a theological standpoint, emphasizing traditional gender roles and critiquing the expansion of women’s public and political presence as contrary to biblical principles. The Southern Baptist Convention’s conservative shift and the rise of New Calvinism further illustrate this trend, as these movements emphasize male-led church governance and promote traditional gender roles.

Motivations Behind the Movements

Supporters of traditional values aim to uphold stability and traditional family roles, rejecting modern feminism and valuing a nurturing home environment. Fear tactics are prevalent in online content that merges wellness with extreme ideologies, manipulating users by promoting fear of worldly dangers, apocalyptic scenarios, or spiritual consequences.

Historical Precedents: Satanic Panic and Moral Panics

Movements like the Satanic Panic of the 1980s and ’90s stoked fears of occult influences, leading to widespread moral panic. Similarly, today’s online narratives can exaggerate or fabricate threats to bolster ideological adherence, using fears of societal collapse or moral decay to urge followers towards conservative values.

Personal Reflections: Manipulation and Belonging

I remember the day I was first drawn into evangelical Christianity. It wasn’t through logic or a carefully reasoned argument; it was through the power of a story—a testimony, to be exact. The speaker shared a dramatic tale of transformation, from the depths of despair and darkness into the light of salvation. Her voice trembled with emotion, and tears glistened in her eyes as she described the overwhelming peace and joy she found in Christ. I was captivated. It wasn’t just a story; it was a call, a plea for me to experience the same miraculous change.

The manipulation was subtle but powerful. The emotions stirred within me were intense, almost overwhelming. I felt a sense of urgency, as if my own life depended on making the same decision she had. It was as though I could feel the darkness closing in on me, and the only escape was to step into the light she described so vividly. Fear played a significant role in this manipulation. I was warned of the dire consequences of rejecting this path, of the eternal damnation that awaited those who turned away. This fear was not just for my soul but for my life here and now. I was told that without Jesus, I would continue to live in confusion, loneliness, and despair.

What made it all the more compelling was the promise of belonging. I had always felt somewhat out of place, disconnected from those around me. But here was a community that promised acceptance, a family where I would always belong. The concept of biblical femininity and submission was introduced as a path to fulfillment, as a way to finally fit into a role that had been designed specifically for me by God. I was told that by embracing my role as a submissive wife and mother, I would find true happiness and purpose.

But looking back, I realize how these tactics exploited my vulnerabilities. The emotional manipulation, the fear-based messaging, and the promise of belonging were all tools used to mold me into someone I wasn’t. They weren’t concerned with my true self; they wanted to shape me into their image of the ideal Christian woman—submissive, obedient, and unquestioning.

What’s more disturbing is how these tactics aren’t unique to evangelical Christianity. I’ve since learned that similar strategies are employed in other religions, such as Islam. I’m sure you’re like me, and have heard that it is the fastest growing religion, but have you looked into the pew research into why? There’s a growing pressure on women within some Islamic communities to recruit other women. They shower potential converts with love, bombarding them with messages of acceptance and sisterhood. It’s all designed to draw them in, to make them feel special and chosen. Once they’re in, the pressure to marry and fulfill their role as a wife and mother can be intense. Just as I was drawn into a community that promised to complete me, these women are often led to believe that their worth is tied to their role within the family and the broader religious community.

The parallels are striking. Both exploit the human need for connection and purpose. Both use emotional manipulation and fear to control and convert. And both can lead to a loss of self, where the individual’s identity is subsumed by the demands of the group.

Reflecting on my experience has been painful, but it’s also been empowering. I now see how I was manipulated, how my fears and desires were used against me. And I’m committed to helping others recognize these tactics for what they are—tools of control, not pathways to truth.

Delving into Christian Interpretations of Morals and Values

As we wrap up today’s discussion, let’s delve into the complexities surrounding Christian interpretations of morals and values, particularly through the lens of historical and cultural relativism. Critics of biblical revelation question the reliability and authenticity of the biblical manuscripts, highlighting the human elements that have shaped the text’s transmission and interpretation.

Read more here on why I think Biblical Inerrancy is harmful.

When it comes to contentious issues like abortion, the selective interpretations of scripture used by some pro-life Christians illustrate a broader trend of reconciling faith with personal and societal values. Historically, Christian views on abortion were more diverse and often more permissive, with significant shifts occurring in the 1970s with the rise of the Religious Right.

Reflecting on these issues, Niel Van Lewen pointed out an intriguing observation: the pro-life stance might often function more as a signaling mechanism than a genuine, consistent commitment to protecting life. This dichotomy suggests that pro-life evangelicals might seek to pass laws protecting unborn embryos while avoiding practical measures—like universal daycare—that could significantly reduce the number of abortions.

This illustrates the ethical and scriptural inconsistencies surrounding the pro-life stance. By examining these discrepancies, we gain a clearer understanding of the challenges inherent in reconciling pro-life advocacy with practical, compassionate approaches to supporting life.

The Trad Wife Controversy: Unpacking Traditional Values in Modern Contexts

The discussion around traditional values and gender roles is gaining momentum, and the “trad wife” movement sits at the heart of this debate. One prime example that brings these ideals to light is the Ballerina Farm controversy, a social media phenomenon showcasing a curated version of traditional domestic life. This aligns closely with the trad wife ideals, which have faced criticism for romanticizing a regressive view on gender roles.

The Ballerina Farm Controversy: Empowerment or Regression?

Ballerina Farm presents a vision of traditional domestic life that resonates with many who see it as an empowering choice. However, it also faces criticism for glamorizing roles that are deeply rooted in patriarchal norms. Houseinhabit, a popular commentator, argues that Ballerina Farm isn’t about regression but about choice. She suggests that Hannah Neeleman, the face behind Ballerina Farm, embodies success measured not by corporate titles but by personal contentment and family harmony, grounded in her faith. This perspective emphasizes that true feminism should respect the diverse paths women take, fostering understanding rather than division.

The Patriarchal Norms Behind the Ideal

While Houseinhabit’s perspective is important, it’s crucial to examine the patriarchal underpinnings of such movements. Practices that might seem problematic to outsiders—like Daniel’s rushed engagement and control over Hannah’s education—are often normalized within their cultural context. These actions reflect broader adherence to patriarchal values, including homeschooling with a Christian Mormon syllabus, underscoring a commitment to traditional gender roles.

Mormon Influencers: A New Recruitment Strategy?

Adding another layer to this discussion is the role of Mormon influencers in social media recruitment. Recent research reveals how the LDS Church uses social media to attract new recruits, with influencers, particularly families, promoting Mormonism on platforms like Instagram and YouTube. This strategy leverages the appeal of traditional family values and domestic harmony to attract a broader audience. The Church’s use of influencers as a recruitment tool highlights the appealing aspects of traditional lifestyles while potentially overshadowing the complexities and criticisms associated with these roles.

Media, Tradition, and Patriarchy

This interplay between traditional values and modern media illustrates a broader societal pattern where the presentation of traditional roles can obscure their roots in patriarchal structures. Media portrayals, while sometimes uncomfortable, are not about dehumanizing individuals but about revealing systemic issues. Often, patriarchal norms are defended as personal choices, overlooking the deep societal influences at play. If gender roles were reversed, these issues might become more apparent, prompting a need for more nuanced discussions on how traditional values intersect with contemporary gender dynamics.

My Experience with Patriarchal Ideologies

Critically evaluating such content is essential, as these narratives can have far-reaching implications for personal beliefs and societal attitudes. From my own experience with evangelical Christianity, I was involved in a biblical counseling program that reinforced patriarchal control, severely limiting my autonomy. In one workbook, I was given an excerpt from The Excellent Wife by Martha Peace, which outlined ways a wife should glorify her husband. The expectations included:

  1. Asking your husband about his goals for the week.
  2. Organizing household duties meticulously, prioritizing your husband’s needs over everything else.
  3. Talking about him positively to others, regardless of the truth.

These teachings were not just fringe ideas but central resources within Biblical Counseling, the Southern Baptist Convention, and many non-denominational churches. This ideology, deeply woven into church communities, perpetuates a system where a wife’s identity and value are entirely subdued under her husband’s goals and image.

The Harmful Implications of Patriarchal Ideologies

  1. Idolatry of the Husband: Obeying a husband is equated with obeying God, placing the husband in the position of an idol. This subordinates divine will to a human figure, distorting spiritual faith and leaving no room for a wife’s autonomy or moral agency.
  2. A Warped View of Womanhood: Women are seen as more susceptible to deception, and their rightful place is akin to a ‘slave’ who should expect no recognition. Basic human desires, like wanting to be treated with kindness, are labeled as ‘idolatrous.’
  3. Enabling Abuse: The book glorifies suffering within marriage as a form of righteousness, encouraging women to endure cruelty and manipulation. This traps women in dangerous, often life-threatening, situations by positioning divorce as rebellion and making church discipline the first recourse instead of contacting authorities.
  4. Stigmatizing Mental Health Care: Seeking professional help is equated with a lack of faith, alienating women from essential support systems that could help them navigate emotional and psychological challenges.

These ideas, while well-intentioned, perpetuate a system where the wife’s identity and value are entirely subdued under her husband’s goals and image. The dangerous implications of this ideology are not confined to overtly religious communities. Similar themes of female submission are found in movements rejecting modern egalitarian values in favor of a constructed ideal of natural order, which often masks deeply patriarchal and oppressive beliefs.

The Bigger Picture: Understanding the Trad Wife Trend

The trad wife trend isn’t just a nostalgic yearning for the past; it’s a deliberate effort to reinstate rigid gender roles that diminish women’s rights and freedoms. By critically examining resources like The Excellent Wife and drawing connections to broader social and cultural trends, we can better understand and challenge the insidious nature of this propaganda.

For those still in the church, it’s crucial to stand up against these harmful teachings. From my own experience, gender norms that emphasize tenderness over assertiveness hinder a woman’s ability to address unfair treatment effectively. Women submitting to their husbands is a dangerous ideology. Research shows that conservative, highly religious men are far more likely to perpetrate intimate partner violence. Hypermasculinity is one of the most powerful predictors of men’s likelihood to commit assault, and couples where the husband dominates decision-making processes are more likely to experience lower marital satisfaction.

Liberation and Progress

The liberation of women from oppression is crucial for fostering a more equitable and just society. When women are fully liberated, they can contribute their talents, perspectives, and skills to all aspects of life, including politics, economics, and culture. This liberation not only benefits women individually but also leads to societal progress by dismantling systemic barriers and promoting inclusivity.

Conclusion: Opening the Dialogue

I invite you to join the dialogue about gender, family, and cultural norms. Have you observed or encountered these dynamics? As a collective, we cannot ignore the role of algorithms and social media in amplifying compelling narratives and creating echo chambers. Understanding the motivations behind these movements allows us to engage in meaningful dialogue and advocate for continued advancements in gender equality.

Through my journey of deconstructing abuse within the church, I’ve realized that complementarianism, often presented as a theological stance, is fundamentally patriarchal and a root cause of oppression and abuse. Navigating these dynamics helps us grapple with the complexities of today’s ideological landscapes and invites us to critically evaluate how historical precedents and technological influences continue to shape our beliefs and societal structures.

Thank you for joining me in this exploration of faith, ideology, and societal change. Let’s continue to question, reflect, and engage with the world around us. And as always, maintain your curiosity, embrace skepticism, and keep tuning in.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/traversmark/2024/01/06/a-psychologist-explains-the-dangers-of-the-tradwife-movement/?sh=42f211f79c3b

19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Women’s Right to Vote (1920) | National Archives

19th Amendment ‑ Definition, Passage & Summary | HISTORY

Women’s Equality Day: Celebrating the 19th Amendment’s Impact on Reproductive Health and Rights – Center for American Progress

Overview of the Nineteenth Amendment, Women’s Suffrage | U.S. Constitution Annotated | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

Women’s Suffrage Was a Net… LOSS?! | The New Evangelicals (youtube.com)

https://bethallisonbarr.substack.com/p/maybe-i-agree-with-pearcey-after

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/