Stay Gold

I know. It's been a long, long time since I last posted. Sorry for that. Life has been a madhouse lately, and I only just now got time to write a blog post. I still have one in the works, but it's one that will take a lot more planning, rather than the rambling that is this one.

Anyway, I'll just jump right in and say - stay gold.

That's a line from one of my all-time favourite books: The Outsiders, by S.E. Hinton. "Stay gold, Ponyboy."

Now, I'm sure that can be interpreted in many different ways. But for me, I always considered it to mean 'stay young'. 'Stay gold'. 'Keep the wonder and awe alive in your life, and don't let it die'.

I wanted to focus on the 'stay young' interpretation of that. Let me go on a (possibly lengthy) anecdote ramble here. Just bear with me. There is a point.

Sorry for the dramatic expression, but I haven't had many
photos taken since I turned 18. This is one of the few.

I'm 18 now. So technically, a legal adult.

I haven't had a bad childhood, per se, but it hasn't really been a normal childhood either. My mother ended up too ill to drive me and my brother to events or clubs or anything of the sort early on - I think I was about twelve.

You have to understand that we live in an isolated area, so we had no friends in our neighbourhood. When we stopped going to our homeschooler group, and stopped going to our swordfighting group more than once every few weeks, and stopped going to our writing co-op... we didn't have social interaction with anyone but each other very often. There were the occasional meet-ups with friends from further away, but that was it.

My brother and I stopped getting along shortly after my father lost his job. So that was around when I was nine and he was eight. So we didn't really interact with each other much either, without it ending up in a fight. Our interests drastically changed - I wanted to play games that required imagination, and he wanted a BB gun to shoot things with. Polar opposites as far as interests went.

So we were more or less on our own without friends for most of our childhood. We didn't get out much. Our first and last vacation was in 2003; the first time we've had a vacation since then was in 2013, which I paid for with my own money, every bit of it saved up over the course of a year. We didn't go to amusement parks, or fairs, or even many parties after we were in our preteens.

Now, this wasn't our fault, and it wasn't our mother's fault. We just didn't have money for outings after my father lost his job, and then my mother fell ill and couldn't physically drive us even places near here. And she was far too protective to let us go anywhere with someone else, such as a friend's parents.

But we didn't have a normal childhood. We didn't get to go on playdates much with friends, or go to parties with them for their birthdays, or go to fairs and amusement parks. We spent most of our time doing school, or keeping to ourselves.

When I got older - about 14 - I couldn't really have a normal teenagehood either. For one, I went into college classes (real ones; not high school classes in college, I was literally enrolled in college) when I was 15. I still had two grades of high school to finish as well (I skipped twelfth grade). On top of that, my mother needed my help, and she needed emotional support. Badly.

Long story short - she is anorexic, due to feeling worthless and other issues that I don't feel it is okay to disclose here. When her cat died, it felt - to her - like she had lost a child. She loved that cat so, so much.

My father wasn't there for her. Neither was my brother. She has no friends nearby. So I had to set aside my own sadness at losing a pet, and be her shoulder to cry on. I never let her see me cry, because it would make her feel guilty, and she would stop leaning on me. And that would lead to disaster.

When I was about 16, I found out the truth of just how bad her anorexia was. She weighed 88 pounds. I didn't even weigh that little when I was ten years old. She is an adult.

So my being her emotional support doubled, and I took it upon myself to make sure she was always eating. I stole the scale from her bathroom and buried it away where she couldn't find it. I made sure she felt appreciated whenever possible, and I listened to her vent, and let her cry on my shoulder.

Since then, I have been her sounding board and support. When she needs to rant to someone about life, she comes to me. We don't have money for her to go to a therapist - so I've more or less taken on that role.

Ignore the photos, they're just dividers to let you know
when my personal story ends and the blog starts
again.

And what I'm trying to say is... I grew up. Way too fast. I never had a normal childhood, and for now, I have no chance to have one at all. And God knows how much that hurts me sometimes.

Because I just want to be able to go back to the years when I was supposed to be carefree. And take advantage of those years. Because when you reach a certain point in life, you'll never get that feeling back.

Someday, when and if I ever move out, I'm going to try and stay young. I'm going to try and shake off all the social rules I've had drilled into me, and just live. If I want to dance in the rain, I'm going to. If I want to run down the streets laughing and trying to avoid running into people, I will. If I want to act like a child while I'm in my twenties, I'm going to. If I want to hang out with friends and have squirt gun fights, I will. If I want to host a party where everyone plays dress-up, I will. If I want to drop everything and go on a road trip, I will.

Because I never really got to. I was always very closely watched, and I never got to experience anything outside of my house. And I want to make up for all the lost time of my teenage years, where I spent all my energy doing homework and taking care of my mother and making sure my household didn't fall to pieces.

What I'm trying to say is... don't be in such a rush to grow up.

In fact, don't ever grow up. Don't stop playing around or goofing off or seeing wonder in things just because society tells you that you should.

Don't let work and school take you away from having fun. And I don't mean harmful things, like drugs and alcohol. That isn't fun or staying young. That's being foolish.

I'm saying just... don't let work and school consume all your time. You have one life on this one world. (I believe that there is another life after this one, but that's my belief.) Don't waste it on school and work.

People like to tell you, "Don't waste your life away, do something with your life!" when they catch you hanging out with friends or going on walks in the woods or watching a good film.

But it's the other way around, really.

There is a balance. Don't spend all your time running wild, but don't spend it all running yourself ragged with jobs and homework.

And if you're young... don't be in such a hurry to grow up. Don't lose the spark of imagination and awe you have as a kid.

You know how you see something new, and it takes your breath away? Something spectacular? Look here...

Looking at those photos of the trip I took for my birthday, which would you say I was more in awe over?

Most people would probably say the glacier lake and the mountains in the second photograph.

But I was just as awed over that as I was the beauty of the flowers and the brick wall. Maybe not as awed, but still very much in wonder over both.

I still have that spark because, well... I never got to see these sorts of things growing up. It's all new to me. But even if this stuff was old to me... I don't want to lose the child-like way my eyes light up and a grin graces my face when I see the smallest of things, from a dragonfly to a meadow of dandelions.

A lot of people lose that because they want to grow up. They want to get cars, and go to 'grown-up' parties, and be old enough to drink and smoke. Or there are people who just begrudgingly grow out of enjoying the little things because 'that's the way it is'.

It shouldn't be that way.

Just don't grow up completely. When Johnny told Ponyboy to 'stay gold' in The Outsiders, he was telling Ponyboy not to grow up and become what the others around them were. Bitter, world-weary, angry, and solemn young men who had to grow up too fast.

He wanted Ponyboy to continue to gaze at sunsets and ponder the world. He wanted Ponyboy to keep reading poetry, and writing stories, and not to grow into the steel-tough man that their friends had become.

And that's what I'm trying to say. Don't lose all of the innocence and wonder of being young. Don't stop enjoying the little things.

Because when you grow up, whether you did it on purpose or were forced to... things like that slip your mind. It's like everything resets itself into dull shades, professional shades, and life loses the bright, vivid colours that sparkled when you were a kid and everything was new.

You become a cynic, sometimes. I have. No fifteen-year-old should fall into the habit of seeing life as 'being born, going to school, going to college, working your head off, getting old, dying'. I did, and I do, and it's not right. No kid, no person ever, should end up having such a cynical view of life.

When I say to stay young - to stay gold - I mean don't let the joy, the wonder, the awe, the newness, the feeling of being carefree when you're a child fade away. Don't let the monotony of work and school drown you.

Take some time off. Do something fun.

Run through a meadow of wildflowers, go swimming in a river, climb a mountain, travel to another country, tease your friends, blast music at full volume while driving aimlessly down backroads, curl up in a blanket fort with all the junk food you want and watch a cheesy rom-com or a Disney film. Run and sing and dance and laugh and play.

The world is really so beautiful. Yeah, life's difficult sometimes. But beauty of the natural world can be created from fires, earthquakes, floods, blizzards...

Maybe when life is difficult, it's just a way of making you beautiful too.

You are alive, and the sun rises every morning. There are mountains to climb and rivers to cross and hilarious films to see - and so much more to explore and wonder over.

Don't let growing up rob you of those things. Don't be in such a hurry to grow up. Don't ever grow up completely. Just stay gold.

Stay young.

Heart Topics: Is Suicide Selfish?

Greetings to any and all who stumble upon this blog article.

This is the first in a series. "Heart Topics" are, in short, any blog posts I write on a topic close to my heart - animal rights, depression, LGBTQ rights, womens' rights, pro-life topics, the effects of porn, etc.

As you may be able to guess... these topics and some others are very personal to me. This means they can sometimes trigger negative memories and emotions, or at the very least, cause me considerable pain.

I tell you this so that you know - it takes great effort for me to write on such things. But I will write, for people need to hear about them. All I ask is that you treat any and all of my Heart Topics with respect when commenting on them.

Now that that is out of the way... we move on to my first Heart Topic.

Suicide. Or, rather, whether or not it is selfish.

As with most aspects of life, this is not black or white. There is no clear-cut answer: no 'yes, it is selfish' and no 'of course it isn't'. It is far, far more complex.

Do I believe suicide is selfish?

Well, I believe it is about as much as I believe all apples are rotten.

(Hint: that's not much.)

Just as not all apples are bad apples, not all suicide cases were because of selfish choices. In fact, eight out of ten people who commit suicide do so because of other people. Observe the following thoughts:

"Everyone will be better off without me."

"If I do this, my parents/spouse will have more money for debts and bills."

"At least now my failures in life won't upset Mom and make her cry."

"I won't be able to constantly upset my friends anymore. I could never help them anyway - like this, they have the ability to go find someone else, someone who can help them."

I can promise you that those thoughts and ones just like them are what goes through a person's mind when they consider suicide.

Why?

Because I have seriously considered it more than once. I've sent out the goodbye notes and had plans to end everything. I never did succeed.

But I can say with complete certainty that my thoughts were not centered on myself - some of them may have been, but the majority revolved around other people.

How much better their lives would be, how many things that would be set right when I was gone... always other people in my mind.

Was I correct? Probably not, on most counts.

I may have been wrong - but I was not being selfish. The definition of selfish is 'concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself'. Which I was not - I had a few thoughts for myself, of course; one of them being, "The pain will finally be gone". But the rest of my thoughts were excessively about other people.

That means that - if I had succeeded - my choice to commit suicide would not have been considered selfish by the dictionary definition of the word.

Neither would the suicides of any person who had felt and thought the same as I did in my situation.

If a soldier kills himself or allows himself to be killed for the greater good of his comrades and his country, he would be considered a hero for 'doing what he had to do for the sake of all'.

When a person ends their own life, often they are doing the same thing - trying to do what they feel is best for the greater good of those they know.

Are they correct? No. But the pain, the feeling of being lost and drowning, make it so that they believe that ending their life is the best thing to do. They are no more selfish than the soldier is - the only difference is that one's mind is clouded by pain, and they are believing something that isn't true.

It is not logical... but it is definitely not selfish either.

Now... can suicide be selfish in some cases? Yes. Sometimes, a person commits suicide and is only thinking of themselves. How to end their pain, why they deserve death, etc. I do admit that.

But I'm going to give anyone who immediately wants to announce to the world, "That was selfish and wrong!" a quick lesson in something called empathy.

I know how hard it is for those of you who have never been truly depressed to understand. Trust me, I do know. When you've never been that low, never been drowning in the dark and lost, unable to find a meaning to anything...

It is only too hard to understand how it feels and the motives behind what happened. Sometimes, it is impossible to figure out the exact motive.

That never - never - gives you cause to be callous and proclaim to anyone who will listen about how selfish and wrong and disgusting a person is for... simply trying to end the agony in the only way they knew how.

My mother's cat died from kidney disease. In her last weeks, she was in agony. Finally, my mother made the decision to euthanise her - to end her suffering instead of prolonging it.

Elderly folk in many places have a choice - if they are getting sicker, and in a lot of pain, they can ask to be 'put down' in a peaceful manner so that they no longer have to suffer.

Why, then, is it so much more 'selfish' and 'cowardly' for another sufferer to try to end the pain in the only way they can think of? Yes, it is wrong, but one who has been in their shoes cannot blame them for it. We can grieve, but knowing the pain they were in, it is impossible to condemn them for their choice.

They were only doing what animals and the elderly have a legal right to do. It isn't logical, yet it is nearly no different, but for the stigma around it.

Not only that, but you never know who might be reading your posts or listening in on your conversations at the store. A severely depressed person may come across something you said about the horrible wrongness of suicide.

The resulting emotions you give them may have disastrous effects.

When Robin Williams committed suicide, and I found out, I was heartbroken and devastated. I still am - I was crying over it the other day. He was the man who did everything for everyone else, and gave them joy... but was going through so much pain, he could never do the same for himself.

Someone on Facebook spoke harshly against the people mourning the loss of the bright soul who had lit up their lives for so long - implying that those who mourned him were foolish. In the comments, more people started to talk about how selfish a choice it had been, and how Robin Williams would surely end up in Hell.

I saw this. I took part in an attempt to explain things to them, as did several others who understood.

I have depression. It was so much worse at that point, because someone I had looked up to had been struggling for years with the same thoughts and feelings I did - and had, the night before, lost his battle with the agony.

And because those feelings of pain were so much more intense for me at such a time, the words those people spoke were a personal blow. I found myself, yet again, suicidal as well.

I wasn't planning on doing anything - 'being suicidal' means that one wishes to die, and may even entertain thoughts of it - but does not plan on going through with it. And I was wishing for death then.

Why? Because I felt like a disgusting human being - I struggled with depression, and I had so many times thought of suicide... and here, I was seeing implications that that made me a bad person, selfish, horrid, and that if I ever made such a mistake, I would end up in eternal damnation.

Do you know what that does to a hurting soul?

I wept the rest of the night, mainly for Robin, but also because of the pain I was going through.

The point I'm trying to make with that anecdote is... you must be empathetic. You must be loving. You must be gentle, and kind, and understanding.

Because you never know who might hear your words. You never know who might feel your words are validating how they already feel - worthless, horrid, and hopeless. You never know who might make the ultimate decision to end it too, solely because they feel from your words that it's true - they don't deserve life and they are horrible for having a medical condition they cannot change.

The bottom line is - even if suicide is done for selfish reasons, shouting it to the world and acting in such a way (without compassion and understanding), is very wrong. You will dig a knife into the wounds of people already hurting from the loss, and possibly cause pain to others.

When something like this happens, offer condolences and reach out to the family and friends who lost their loved one. Pray. Post comforting words.

Do not condemn or judge or make assumptions about how selfish the person was, when you do not know the whole story.

In conclusion to the question - is suicide selfish? - my answer is that it's complicated. It is not black and white. Sometimes people will commit suicide for themselves and not for the perceived good of others. (Most times, as I said, however, it is for the perceived good of others.)

Even if something does seem selfish, it may not be.

Even if it truly is, being callous and uncaring about the gravity of such a situation... is wrong.

And that's all I really have to say on the matter for now. I may write a follow-up in the future.

God bless,
~ Theodora Ashcraft

A Plea and a Prayer: No More

Leelah Alcorn. A bright young lady, only a few months younger than me. She ended her life recently, because she was shown no love, no acceptance, and felt as though the world would never have any hope in it for her, as she was.

Jamey Rodemeyer. 14 years of age.

Jacob Rogers. 18 years of age.

Seth Walsh. 13 years of age.

Asher Brown. 13 years of age.

Eden Wormer. 14 years of age.

And so many more, over the years and through the ages. Gone too soon. They took their own lives, driven to suicide by hatred, by neglect and feeling as though they would never fit in.

Suicide is on the rise because the more time that  passes, the more one realises that love and acceptance are becoming rarer and rarer in society. Bullies run rampant. The 'mongers' - the mongers of hate, and war, and fear - roam the streets and the cyberworld, waiting. Waiting to strike and then disappear, anonymous and uncaring.

Why? Why do we sacrifice souls of beauty, people of worth? And we do. We do sacrifice them. We sacrifice living beings with hearts and emotion, solely for our own agendas - or our own fear of taking a stand, taking their hand, and protecting them whatever the costs. We betray them to the abyss of agony, in an act of self-preservation.

We allow men, women, and children to die - because we are afraid. Afraid to love unconditionally, afraid to accept them, flaws and all. Afraid to get too close.

Because if we had let them get too close, what if they had dragged us down with them? What if their dirt and grime had brushed off on us and turned us - horror of horrors - into them? We could not allow ourselves to get close enough for that to happen... to have their dirt and grime mingle with the dirt and grime we ourselves already carry.

Don't you see? Can't you understand?

It was not only their hand that brought them to the next life. We - the fellow humans, the fellow souls - played our own parts. We did nothing to stop it. In some cases, we may have even caused it to happen.

This needs to stop.

We need to learn to love, to care, to feel. Apathetic is a pathetic way to be, and yet many who do not actively try to hurt others make it no better with their apathy.

Imagine a world where love reigned - a perfect ideal, where love replaced all pain, no exceptions. There would be no war; there would be no bullying; there would be no murders. Because everyone would love one another, and by extension want the best for every person they came across.

How many more innocents must die before we as a species realise that as long as hate, bigotry, fear, and superiority rule, there will be no peace? No hope for a gentle-minded world, no hope for the rescue of our children from depression, bullying, and anxiety.

How many more times will the Leelahs and Seths and Edens of this world have to die by their hands - and by extension our own - before we begin to change?

How many beautiful souls must we lose before it all becomes clear and we begin to hold them dear?

Please.

No more.

No more of this. No more pain, no more neglect, no more attacks hidden behind veils of sweetness-tinged judgement.

No more suicides, brought on by feelings of worthlessness and hopelessness.

No more deaths. Please, God, I beg you, no more. No more executions by the barrage of stones from the falsely righteous, justified by cries of 'sinner, foul sinner!'. No more worn and weary hearts pleading for Death to take them away from the day-to-day struggles of abandonment, cruelty, and unbelonging. No more light-filled souls shattered into shards of darkness.

No more, my God, I beseech thee.

No more.

Please... no more.

A Response To a Blog Post On Emotional Purity

I don't know whether I would address this to the writer of the guest post (Emily Long), the owner of the blog (Reagan Ramm), or both. So I'm afraid I'll have to address both of you, skip formalities, and just introduce myself.


Hello, Miss Long (and Mr. Ramm, though he already is acquainted with me to some extent). I'm a 17-year-old Christian girl who has found it much easier to befriend guys for most of her life; my love language is physical touch. If you're not familiar with the love languages, check out some of the information here.

I've made many different friends and been through a lot of different scenarios, both painful and helpful. So I feel at least slightly qualified to respond to your post on "The Arsenal": The Struggle For Emotional Purity: Guest Post - Purity Part 3.

This is my first open letter to anyone, so it may be rather unconventional, and for that, I apologise. I also apologise beforehand if I come across as harsh at any time. I don't intend to.

I basically saw a few points in the article that seemed a bit flawed and at times harmful. This may be due to the fact there was a lack of clarification on some points, I'm not certain. Either way, I'm going to copy over those statements and give my thoughts on them, whilst trying to shed some light on the fact that emotional purity is different for everyone. Which seemed to be a fact completely ignored in the article.

That just needed to be said before I continued on.

"I hardly hear anyone talk about looking out for the best interests of others. I believe that we should be seeking to help one another, and as men, we should especially seek what is best for women."

Quite right. One should seek to help others and look out for the best interests of others. And men should definitely seek what is best for women.

But you see... all women are different. You can't decide on a specific law that details what is 'best for women' and stick to that in all scenarios. You have to face the facts that everybody is different; everyone has different ways of thinking, different beliefs, different lives, different heartaches. Every person has a story that is beautifully different from everyone else's. You can't just throw everyone into the same box and proclaim them the same, and try to use a method with them that you deemed 'best' for everyone. It just doesn't work.

What might be best for one woman, might not be the best for another. It's like the food pyramid; it's deemed ideal, and considered the best way to organise one's meals. But some people have chronic illnesses or allergies; and suddenly, that way that is supposed to be best for others isn't the best for one. Everyone has different needs.

"Interested, he spends a little time with her. He is not in love, has not stated anything, and is possibly not even entertaining thoughts of that sort. She has noticed him as well, and believes that perhaps he is also interested. Their families spend more time together, giving Joseph and Krystal ample opportunities to talk, form opinions, and seek each other’s attention. In Krystal’s mind, thing are getting serious, especially since “the families are involved”. Joseph has never said anything, but he genuinely seems to be seeking her out."

There is a problem here. Most certainly. And that problem is that neither of them were honest and upfront in the beginning. 

Mainly Krystal. If she had feelings for Joseph, she should have said so way before she assumed things were 'getting serious'. She shouldn't assume things just based off of her thoughts on it, and should have asked him outright if he had feelings for her - or, better, told him that she had feelings for him.

Assumptions are harmful no matter what, and this is no different. The problem doesn't arise from spending one-on-one time together in this scenario (which, if the families are involved, are they truly spending one-on-one time together?); it arises from miscommunication. 

Joseph is treating her as a friend. She is letting her emotions take off with her and assuming he's treating her as something else, because that's what she wants. It's important to be honest, and especially with such a subject as this. 

Would the same thing have happened if they had never spent time with each other? Maybe, maybe not. It's impossible to tell, because everyone is different. Romantic feelings can develop for another person in group settings or alone. The place you are makes no difference; all that factors into the feelings is whether you've interacted with the other person. You can interact with them in the middle of a group of people after church - feelings may develop. You can interact with them one-on-one over a chatroom - feelings may not develop. You can interact with them while hanging out by yourselves at the local park - feelings may not develop. Or they may.

Emotions are emotions. They often have their own way whether you like it or not. They're unpredictable and they're sudden. The only way not to possibly receive romantic feelings for someone is to lock yourself in a room by yourselves for the rest of your life.

  "As the months progress, and they learn more about each other and grow closer, they never really talk about their relationships with God, they kind of focus more on each other. They start spending time, not technically alone, but away from the group. Their friends start teasing them, and Krystal is getting kind of excited. Could he be the one? She is attracted to him, and he seems to feel the same way…"

Okay, see? They just now are starting to spend time away from the group. So Krystal's romantic feelings for Joseph developed before they even started spending alone time together. That kind of breaks the whole 'spending time in groups will restrict romantic feelings' idea. 

And again, why has Krystal not said anything yet? If a girl or a guy is talking to someone and starts to think that they're 'the one', I would imagine that it's high time to tell the other person so. I'd go as far as to say that they should have said something far earlier, when they began to assume that the feelings are mutual.

The current underlying problem seems to be that Krystal is allowing things to get out of hand, rather than be upfront much earlier on - which would have saved her considerable amounts of pain, so long as Joseph was, in turn, also honest and told her that he did not feel the same way.

 "But month after month passes, and although they are now offhandedly talking about their futures, i.e. What state they would like to live in, how many acres…etc. Joseph has never intimated or said anything about moving into that phase of a relationship. Now she is beginning to grow frustrated. He has been giving her compliments, standing way too close to her (dangerous to do by the way: it really knocks a girl for a loop), and has started saying hello and goodbye accompanied with side hugs. All her longings are being fulfilled, but now she believes herself in love. She can talk of nothing else, and she is sure he will ask her dad to enter into courtship. It’s been a year since they met. What is he waiting for? Maybe if she tries harder for his attention. So now she is pursuing him. He enjoys the attention, and returns it, but he still is not stating anything or talking to her dad."

Here's where things get even more absurd. Months have gone by. They're both being talkative about their dreams for the future. There is nothing wrong with that - nothing at all. What's wrong with this is that Krystal still hasn't said anything about her feelings and is just blithely waltzing through life assuming things that she has no proof for.

She's beginning to get frustrated. Well, yeah. Maybe she should say something. And yet she still doesn't. It's this lack of honest communication that causes so many problems, not the alone time on its own. The alone time and friendly talking is a factor, not the cause.

Compliments are not bad, no matter what gender. Especially if one is trying to cheer a friend up by way of compliments. And standing too close to someone? That's dangerous? How exactly...? I don't know of a single girl that I've met in all my seventeen years who got wrong ideas from a guy standing too close.

And side hugs. Physical touch is not bad. It should not be an indicator that there is something 'more' to the relationship. It is friendlieness. Pure and simple. And some people need that touch to feel adequately loved. I wrote a blog article on the subject here.

The problem is, yet again, lack of communication. Is the attention she gets from him inappropriate? No. Did it cause the romantic feelings? No. Does it further the romantic feelings? Yes. But he could treat her in a kind, friendly way without these problems if she would just tell him how she feels. Then he could back off and let her mend after he tells her he does not feel the same way. There would be less pain, and then eventually, they could go back to being good friends.

(Plus, the fact he hadn't said anything to her dad should have been a major indicator he didn't feel the same way, if she knew he was a courtship advocate and would most certainly talk to her dad first.)

Okay, this is getting long, so instead of copying-and-pasting snippets from your post, I'll just sum it up.

So, Krystal goes to an event where Joseph and various other families will be. She sees him talking with another girl and doesn't think anything of it, because he has other friends but 'she's special' (she being Krystal, in her mind). Then she finds out later on that Joseph is now courting that girl, and Krystal becomes heartbroken, asking herself why she wasn't good enough.

Is that Joseph's fault? No... because he had no idea of the emotions and he didn't cause them by being friendly. She developed feelings for him long before they started spending 'alone time' together and let her emotions get out of control, never saying anything.

All that to say, the way he treated her were factors. Not the underlying cause. And that is the truth more often than most people like to admit - the feelings develop before the two spend more time together on their own, hugging, talking, etc.

"When a guy starts paying attention to a girl, whether out of politeness or genuine interest, it is the inclination of a girl to want to run with it. If a girl feels safe with a guy, she will start to share her heart with him. The more she shares her heart, the more “in love” she feels. While the guy is merely being nice and chivalrous, the female tends to think his intentions are more of a serious nature."

So it was the guy's fault? No. The girl (I don't use female in this instance because quite honestly using it here it reminds me of a British introducer on a documentary about animals) is the one who let her feelings get carried away. He was simply trying to be kind, friendly, and chivalrous.

Just as it is a man's duty to keep his emotions and thoughts under control as best he can (regarding the issue of modesty), a woman has a duty to keep her emotions under control as well. Are they okay to have? I say yes. But do not let them get carried away, do not keep silent and miscommunicate, and do not make assumptions about the man's intentions until he himself brings them up.

A man should not stop being friendly and showing a girl he cares simply because she might develop feelings for him. That is not fair to any girls who genuinely want to be friends and nothing more. It's ridiculous to assume that in order to protect a girl he has to hold her at length with a ten-foot pole in the middle of a crowd and speak stiffly and formally to her. "Hello, Ms. [Name]. The weather is quite warm today, but I managed to finish mowing the lawn..."

Now comes the part of the article I had the biggest issue with.

1. Never make physical contact unless absolutely necessary. No hugging, touching her arm, and don’t stand too close to her.
2. Try to remain in a group setting. Don’t take off with her somewhere or separate a little from everyone. The female may very well take that as a sign of interest.
3. Don’t ask about her feelings, and don’t ask her what she is thinking. She is likely to share her heart, because she will feel like her words and thoughts are valued, and that is a danger zone. I think this is the most important point of all (hence why I put it last!).

One. Physical contact is necessary. There are stories of children who ended up severely mentally disabled in Russia, or became violent and emotionally unstable. Studies showed that it was because no one in the orphanage every held them, touched them, picked them up, showed them they were loved.

If someone doesn't like being touched, then yes, by all means, don't hug them or what-not. If they don't mind it, don't freak out about it. Standing close to someone is hardly going to automatically equal that you are in love with them, to either you or the girl. And hugging someone isn't going to destroy their emotional purity. This girl isn't going to look back ten years down the line and tell her husband, "I have something to confess. I hugged this guy at Sunday School ten years, six months, and four days ago. I feel so ashamed of it, and I am so sorry, please forgive me."

Nor will she say, "I used to have a crush on so and so way back in high school, and I am so sorry."

And even if she did... any real man would not go berserk and get angry over this. This was years ago. She obviously loved him enough to marry him. A crush ten, seven, or even three years ago is not going to cause issues. Crushes are crushes. Almost everyone gets them. It's not going to wreck your marriage at any point down the line.

Two. I wholeheartedly admit that one should stay in a public setting with guys they don't know well, or with the family, simply because you don't know him well. But if you trust a guy, you've clearly known him long enough to either know you don't have feelings for him (thus meaning you can go out for a walk through the park without going crazy), or to know that you do have feelings for him.

At that point, it's up to you to decide whether you trust yourself and him enough. And your parents, obviously, but that should be a given - unless you are 18 or older. At that point, you are an adult, like it or not, and while you should listen to your parents' counsel, you are your own authority. 

I've spent time in semi-alone settings with lots of guys before. I'm still here, still safe, and still saying it's perfectly fine. My best friend and another friend (both of whom are guys, though I don't talk to the last one anymore) used to visit every month or so. We'd go out to the woods outside my house and goof off, talk, swordfight, re-enact films, and whatever else.

I was always safe. I never fell in love with either of them. I've spent time alone at Renaissance faires, in the forest, at parks, in my neighbourhood, in a city square, at events, etc. with guys. There was never any trouble. No feelings ever developed because I spent a day alone with a guy. 

All that to say that emotional purity does not hinge on being in a group setting all the time, because feelings can still develop in such settings - and in fact, often do. You meet guys or girls at church, or at youth group, or at concerts, or at school, or at co-op, etc. - the feelings develop in a group setting most of the time. 

Three.

Three upset me, because you seem to be implying (whether you meant to or not) that a girl's feelings and thoughts should not be valued; that they're not important.

This is the most important rule? Don't ever ask a girl how she's feeling or what she's thinking, because then she will likely 'feel like her words and thoughts are valued'?

Take a minute to think about how that sounds from an outsider's view - it sounds like you're saying a girl's words and thoughts are not valued. 

Never, ever should anyone feel like their words and thoughts are not valued. It doesn't matter if you are a guy talking to a girl in private online. It doesn't matter if you're two girls sitting in the office chatting over lunch. It doesn't matter if you're a kid talking to an adult after church.

You should always ask a person how they are feeling. You should always show that you care about them enough to ask, to want to help if they're having a bad day, to listen to their thoughts and opinions - to show them that they matter.

Because everyone matters. Their value and the value of their thoughts and feelings don't lessen just because they're a girl and you're a guy. Their future spouse is not going to flip over a table in anger just because they talked to you about how they felt and what they thought and what their dreams were and what their hopes were. 

More likely, a future spouse, if the subject is even brought up, is going to be upset that someone treated their husband or wife disrespectfully and acted like you didn't care about them; that you treated them as lower life forms.

Always ask someone how they're feeling at least some of the time. 

If you treat anyone with all three of those rules... they are most likely (not all the time, but often) going to consider you cold and emotionless. They're going to think they did something wrong to upset you. They are going to feel unloved, worthless, undeserving of attention or time, and like you do not care about them.

You're not keeping them safe by not hugging them, not expressing care towards them, not spending time alone with them - you are sending the message that you dislike them and that they are not worthy of your time.

Trust me, and take it from another girl - the majority of us will feel that way if anyone, male or female, treats as such. We're going to feel like you think us inferior and unworthy of your time and effort as a friend.

I'll stop here, because I don't want to start sounding angry (because I'm not). I'm letting my emotions get carried away, and that is not your fault - it's my duty to control my emotions. Not anyone else's. 

That was what I had to say about the blog post. I understand the intentions were good, but there were a lot of flaws, and what appeared to be a misunderstanding of how a lot of girls feel and think and are wired. I don't say all girls, because there are obviously girls out there who feel like that. But many don't.

Remember what was said about seeking what is best for women? You should do that - but you can't stereotype and do one thing. You have to do what is best for each individual woman.

Because it's different. We're all the same in that we have hearts, minds, souls, emotions - but we're all so beautifully, miraculously different and unique at the same time. And that needs to be respected. 

Thank you for listening, and please don't take anything of what I said as a personal attack. This article was simply my thoughts on your blog post; I would have normally posted my thoughts on the original post, but there were too many things I wanted to say and I didn't want to clutter the comment section. So I wrote them up here.

God bless,

Theodora Ashcraft

"You're Going To Go To Hell!"

If you don't stop thinking like that, you're going to go to Hell. I'm sorry. It's just... well, you're wrong. You have to fall to your knees on the floor and beg God to change your mind, because if you don't, you will end up in eternal fire. Repent and be changed. Because as an afterthought, I wouldn't want you to end up burning in Hell, after all.

If I know people like I think I do, then many of them just became quite offended. And many of you also had your curiosity piqued as to why I'm making such a claim to my dear readers.

I'm not. So take a few minutes to calm down, slow your heartbeat, and get rid of the anger.

Calmed down now? Good. I'll get on with the actual point of this blog article now.

I'm sure there are a few of you who caught my sarcasm. But those of you who were offended and took it seriously, or can possibly put yourself in another's shoes - how did that make you feel?

I'm not going to tell you how you feel, but I'll list a few emotions that go through a person's mind when they're told out of the blue from someone they hardly know that they're going to go to Hell for whatever reason if they don't change:

• Resentment.
• Fear.
• Anger.
• Offensement.
• Bitterness.
• Annoyance.
• Shock.
• Hopelessness.
• Disgust with either themselves or the person condemning them.
• Confusion. 

I know that those are all valid and possible emotions, because they're the emotions I've felt - all of them - when people have told me I'm going to go to Hell for feeling a certain way or doing a certain thing, or that I will go to Hell if I commit suicide, or do whatever else.

I rarely felt repentance. I just got a bombardment of negative emotions, towards myself, towards whoever was talking to me, and towards God.

One reason is because that, as always, a person was condemning me without stepping into my shoes, and without showing love, gentleness, and respect. They were most likely in my face, matter-of-fact, blunt, and cold.

If a person is to judge another person, they should do it kindly, right?

Actually, no. A person should not judge at all. At least, not in the sense of what the word means now - the sense of that word now basically means acting superior, telling people point-blank they're going to go to Hell, belittling them because of their feelings/their beliefs/their life in general, and other such things like that.

Lovingly pointing out things that you believe are wrong, and expressing concern over a behaviour that is harmful, is what one should be doing. But I'll go into that in a second.

There are numerous Bible verses that speak out against judging others.

"Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."

- Matthew 7:1-5 (NASB)

A favourite explanation people like to use is, "Well, it says if you do judge, you will be judged by the same standards."

Don't ask me how that's an explanation against its command not to judge, because I don't know. I don't understand the logic in that explanation.

But they neglect to pay attention to the next verses - the ones about the speck in your brother's eye, and the log in your own ('your' being in the metaphorical sense here).

Sawdust. Or... specks. Heh.

What I'm gathering from that passage - and I specifically said 'what I'm gathering', because I don't claim to know everything and certainly not what Bible passages mean - is that you shouldn't judge at all, because we all have our own problems that we should try to fix, instead of trying to fix everyone else.

Those verses to me are saying three things:

1. Don't judge others.

2. But if you do judge them, expect to be judged in the same way and by the same standards.

3. However, if you decide to judge others, you are a hypocrite for paying attention to their faults rather than your own.

Overall, I still get the 'do not judge others' vibe from this, regardless of the whole thing about the same standards. But let's take a look at another Bible verse on the subject:

"Do not speak against one another, brethren. He who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks against the law and judges the law; but if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge of it. There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the One who is able to save and to destroy; but who are you who judge your neighbor?"

- James 4:11-12 (NASB)

That one seems fairly clear to me - there is only one Lawgiver and Judge. And He is not any one of us. So who are we to judge others? 

One more verse before I move on:

"Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God."

- 1 Corinthians 4:5 (NASB)

That one is basically saying not to judge until the Lord returns. Again, fairly clear and there really isn't all that much more I can say on those verses. So I'll move on to talking about just how to point out what someone is doing wrong.

Should we just ignore people who are doing something to harm themselves or others, or doing something that we perceive is wrong? No. But there is a right way and a wrong way to do that.

First of all, let's just halt all notions of waltzing up to complete strangers or acquaintances and telling them that they're sinners, that what they think or beileve is wrong, etc. Even in a loving way. Seriously, just stop. 

Why? Because you haven't even shown them you care about them yet. You have no right to go around telling people you hardly know things like that, because... well, you hardly know them. You have no idea what they're going through, you have no idea what their past is like, you have no idea who they are.

If you're going to go around pointing out what you perceive someone is doing or believing that is wrong, you should only do it with someone you love and care about. And I mean genuinely, not pretending you do just to gain their trust.

Because, if it makes you feel any better about yourself, they'll be more likely to listen to you if you both have a good relationship before you start pointing out wrongdoings.

And also, it's just not generally considered kind or loving to go and point fingers at the beliefs and lives of people you don't know very well, for reasons I've already mentioned.

So how to go about it? Lovingly, gently, and kindly to someone you know well already. And make sure you're not acting like you know everything there is to know ever about the Bible, because let's face the cold, hard truth - you don't. And your denomination of Christianity isn't 'the only right' denomination. So make sure you explain to them why you think something is wrong; don't just tell them that it's wrong because you say so. And again, I cannot stress this enough: be respectful!

Seriously. You don't want to end up like these people. Cruel, hateful, disrespectful - the definition of 'unkind' incarnate, I tell you.

That's how you go about it. Consider this verse:

"Do to others as you would have them do to you."

- Luke 6:31 (NIV)

If you're going to tell someone that you think what they're doing is wrong, tell them in a way that you would want them to tell you. Which I would imagine means gently and respectfully. 

Now, if someone is doing something that you know is harmful to themselves, you should most certainly tell them it's wrong. But again, don't beat them over the head with a medical guide and go crazy shouting at them that they're hurting themselves and they have to stop. That won't get you anywhere.

Take it the same way as I suggested earlier. Kindly and gently, and informing them what is wrong with their behaviour and why it's harmful; drinking, smoking, etc. 

(Now if you know someone murdering other people or abusing other people physically, thaaat is a whole other kettle of fish that I'm not going into. Obviously, the whole gentle-and-loving approach will most likely not work out with that.)

I think that's all I have to say. I'll leave you with this passage:

 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

- 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

"It keeps no record of wrongs". That's one part of that passage that is key to this article. But the entire thing is relevant - treat others with that sort of love, no matter what. Because that's what one is meant to do - not harshly judging others for differences of opinions.

That's two hearts and a cross in the middle, in case it's hard for anyone to see.

God bless,

Theodora Ashcraft

Physical Touch - The Five Love Languages: Part 1

(Before we start, a big thank-you to my sister Snow for 'donating' the last photograph, and for seeking permission from those involved, so that I could use a 'real-life' picture for an example. <3)

This series of blog articles has been long in coming - I've been planning them out for months, as well as writing and rewriting, then deleting and starting all over again. I don't think I'll ever get them perfect, so what I have come up with shall just have to do.

The next six posts will be on the Five Love Languages. The first five will be in-depth opinions on each of the languages, and the sixth will be a sort of epilogue explaining them as a whole. I will add that I have no particular organization for the posts, so I may address different aspects or opinions for one love language than I do for another - there aren't any bullet-point subjects I'm going to address in every single article.

With that out of the way, let's get started.

~

I'm starting with physical touch because it's my own love language. And it is the most misunderstood among Christians (mainly very conservative ones and/or legalists), I've noticed. Words of affirmation also gets a lot of hate in such circles, but I won't be going into that one today.

The love language of physical touch is basically when you show someone you care about - family member, spouse, friend, acquaintance, a stranger who needs comfort, anyone at all - love and comfort by touching them in some way. This is the description for physical touch from the Five Love Languages website:

A person whose primary language is Physical Touch is, not surprisingly, very touchy. Hugs, pats on the back, and thoughtful touches on the arm—they can all be ways to show excitement, concern, care, and love. Physical presence and accessibility are crucial, while neglect or abuse can be unforgivable and destructive. Appropriate and timely touches communicate warmth, safety, and love to you.


I can hear the ones unaccustomed to such a love language exclaiming in wide-eyed horror, "Physical touch?!"

Physical touch doesn't have to be intimate in the way it is between a husband and wife, you know.

Here's a question for all of you. Ignoring the fact this is a drawing and not a real photograph - this depicts Jesus hugging a girl. Christians often talk about Christ 'holding us in His arms'. Does that mean they love each other romantically or are dating? Erm... no.  So why does physical touch = romantic thoughts/intimacy with our brothers and sisters in Christ?

Hugs, holding hands, a pat on the back or shoulder, a handshake that goes on for a few seconds longer than normal, dancing, playing with someone's hair (usually in the case of girls, but it doesn't have to be; close friends can too without a problem), high-fives... the possibilities are endless.

The 'love tank' is a concept talked about often when it comes to the Five Love Languages. In order to completely fill a person's love tank (i.e., make them feel completely loved), you need to at least try to figure out what their primary love languages are and attempt to love them in that way.

If their love language is Words of Affirmation, compliment and encourage them a lot. If their love language is Gifts, try to give them a special gift every so often, even if it's something small. If their love language is Physical Touch, give them more hugs and touch them on the shoulder or what-not more often. They will come away feeling totally and completely loved, whereas if you try to show them love in a different way... well, they'll still feel loved, but not as much as if you had shown them you love them (as a friend or otherwise) in the way their love language calls for.

Me, physical touch is my love language through and through. If you want me to feel safe or comforted or loved, hug me or play with my hair or put an arm around me - stuff like that.

There is one misconception about physical touch that I have heard so often it angers me. Yes, angers me.

And that is the lie that physical touch between anyone but a family member means you love someone romantically, or means you will end up loving them romantically, or means that you and whoever it is are a couple.

THAT IS JUST NOT TRUE. I'm sorry for the caps, but like I said, this infuriates me.



Hugging a friend or a person of the opposite gender frequently or even once doesn't mean you'll all of a sudden, one day, have a burst of fireworks explode over your head, hear an angelic chorus playing in the background, and think, "I am in love with this person, and I am going to date them because I will die without them".

Sorry, but no. That's not true. And by the way, dancing with a person of the opposite gender or holding hands with them won't have the same effect all the time either. Just so you know. Neither do kisses on the cheek or the forehead, believe it or not.

Oh, and treating friends of the same gender in that way does not make you gay. (Not that being gay is a horrible and bad thing either, by the way. It is in no way an insult. Go ahead and send the hate mail at me for saying that now. :P)

One aspect of physical touch beyond people who feel romantically to each other, and beyond friends and family who love each other, is comfort.

Do these two people look like they're in love? They might be, but what does it look like they're doing? To me, it looks like he's comforting her.

Just face the facts, people - physical touch is comforting to most people. Take, for example, this video of me:

(Don't laugh. I know I'm bad at dancing. At that point in my life, I had taken exactly two dancing lessons, and danced with another person exactly once.)

Oh my gosh! I'm dancing with a man who isn't a blood relative! And he's touching me! He has my hand in his, and he had an arm around me, and everything! I must be dating him, and we must love each other, and we must be planning to get married (until we break up in a few months' time and call the wedding off).

No, sorry. He's from Ireland, and I asked him to dance with me so I could get a video of it for my friends. (Not to mention he was a very gentlemanly adult and wouldn't feel romantically towards me in the first place). This was the second time after my camera had blinked out on me the first time and not gotten the video. So I danced with an adult man twice.

I am not in love with him. I didn't feel romantically towards him. I was having fun. 

Now, anyone who knows me well knows one thing - I am easily scared. When I got up in front of all those people to dance, I was surprised (I had thought we would dance in the back of the room) and scared out of my mind.

His touches - not inappropriate, just simply holding my hand and putting an arm around me when we twirled - calmed me down. They comforted me. His hug and the kiss on the cheek at the end helped me to stop shaking. And then when it was my turn to sing karaoke (something I was point-blank terrified about) came around, it was him who stood by my side and reassured me in the same way he did while we were dancing - putting a hand on my shoulder, giving me a hug or two, etc.

Yes, his dance moves got a bit goofy in the beginning. He was a pretty silly and loves-to-make-people-laugh guy. There was nothing inherently wrong with it.

He wasn't being inappropriate. Trust me, he wouldn't have been with dozens of adults, my brother, and my mom standing right in front of him filming. He was just being a friendly guy who was perceptive enough to notice that when he hugged me or patted my shoulder, I stopped shaking. Nothing more, nothing less. He is from Ireland, a place that - from all the Irish people I've met in person - is unafraid of physical touch among friends.

As for me, I never fell in love with him, I never thought he had any ulterior motives, I never wanted to date him - none of those things. I simply was comforted and having fun. All I was thinking was "I've never danced before and he's so friendly, maybe he'll dance with me; it would be a new experience and I'd like to try dancing at least once in my life" and "I told my sisters I'd get a video of me dancing on this trip".

Physical touch is comforting. There is a reason people hug each other and hold each other after a love one dies. There is a reason children cling to their mothers. There is a reason children in orphanages in impoverished areas who don't get touched or held by anyone grow up to have mental and emotional problems. There is a reason friends and family hug one another when they say goodbye.

Physical touch - being hugged, being held, an arm around your shoulder, and all those things - is one of the main ways of showing comfort. The feeling of someone hugging you lets you know that you are not alone and that there is someone who is going to support you - mentally, emotionally, and physically if need be - in your struggles.

We are all family in Christ. Biological brothers hug biological sisters all the time; fathers hug their daughters and mothers hug their sons. Romans 16:16 even states:

"Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you." (NASB)

Now, that probably - judging by how kisses on the cheek are apparently a somewhat common greeting in Italy - means a kiss on the cheek. I'm not telling all of you to greet everyone with a kiss. That is a bit overboard.

What I am saying is that back in the times of Jesus, things like that were normal. Usually between people of the same gender, from what I can tell (but I am not extremely knowledgeable about the Bible yet, so feel free to correct me), but the principal stands, considering so many people can't even hug someone of the same gender without being called 'gay'.

Most Christians are big on the idea that 'we are all brothers and sisters/family in Christ!'. And you know what? I agree.

And it is because I agree that I say we should stop treating each other like strangers and potential wives or husbands, and start treating each other, first and foremost, as siblings. 

Give each other a hug without worrying about what people will think (unless, of course, the person you are thinking of hugging doesn't like hugs; then show respect, as you would to a sibling). Don't be afraid to hold hands with your best friend, whether they're of the opposite gender or not. Hold someone who is crying, whether they're the same gender or not. Comfort each other with hugs when you're sad or hurting or crying because you have to say goodbye to your friends.

Thank you to Sarah Millz for taking this photograph, and to those involved for allowing me to use it!

Just don't be afraid to hug someone because you 'might develop romantic feelings for them'. The world won't end if you do; unless you have no confidence in your ability to handle such things in a mature, kind, and gentlemanly/ladylike way. And if you're afraid of the fact that 'loving someone like that is dangerous and it hurts'... well... all relationships cause pain. Families cause pain, friends cause pain, significant others cause pain.

Love hurts. It wouldn't be true love - Biblical love - if it didn't hurt. If it was completely painless, where would the preciousness in it be? It would not be as special, because there would be no effort needed. No risk. It would show you only care about a person as long as it doesn't hurt you. You don't care enough about them to love them no matter what. Just a thought.

I think that's all for this post. Keep an eye out for the next post in this series - Words of Affirmation.

God bless,

Theodora Ashcraft