Thinkerfromiowa's Blog

Conversation about a variety of subjects

Knowing Truth When You Read It

Knowing Truth When You Read It

Hello, everyone.

In a recent message, I gave the URL for a video of a Texas judge phyusically abusing his teen-aged daughter who suffers from a form of cerebral palsy. As I watched that video, one image became chiseled in my mind – that of James Dobson, hinceforth Jimmie Dee, beating up on his little dachshund Siggie. I even mentioned the incident in the message. Jimmie Dee mentions the incident himself in his “fbook” “The Strong-Willed Child.”

There are several sites that discuss this. The following is from a site ran by a fellow named Chris Dugan. The URL is   The article is dated August, 2000. I am editing it for purpose of space.

– – – – – – – – – –

In his best-selling book, The Strong-Willed Child, child-rearing author James Dobson describes how he abused his family’s pet dachshund, Siggie:

“Please don’t misunderstand me. Siggie is a member of our family and we love him dearly. And despite his anarchistic nature, I have finally taught him to obey a few simple commands. However, we had some classic battles before he reluctantly yielded to my authority.

“The greatest confrontation occurred a few years ago when I had been in Miamifor a three-day conference. I returned to observe that Siggie had become boss of the house while I was gone. But I didn’t realize until later that evening just how strongly he felt about his new position as Captain.

“At eleven o’clockthat night, I told Siggie to go get into his bed, which is a permanent enclosure in the family room. For six years I had given him that order at the end of each day, and for six years Siggie had obeyed.

“On this occasion, however, he refused to budge. You see, he was in the bathroom, seated comfortably on the furry lid of the toilet seat. That is his favorite spot in the house, because it allows him to bask in the warmth of a nearby electric heater. . .

“When I told Sigmund to leave his warm seat and go to bed, he flattened his ears and slowly turned his head toward me. He deliberately braced himself by placing one paw on the edge of the furry lid, then hunched his shoulders, raised his lips to reveal the molars on both sides, and uttered his most threatening growl. That was Siggie’s way of saying. “Get lost!”

“I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me ‘reason’ with Mr. Freud.

What developed next is impossible to describe. That tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast. I fought him up one wall and down the other, with both of us scratching and clawing and growling and swinging the belt. I am embarrassed by the memory of the entire scene. Inch by inch I moved him toward the family room and his bed. As a final desperate maneuver, Siggie backed into the corner for one last snarling stand. I eventually got him to bed, only because I outweighed him 200 to 12!”

This is one sick puppy, and I don’t mean the dog, either. Dobson is OBSESSED with control….Now that he is a grownup, and too old to spank, he is determined to get everything HIS way, by golly! He is a 200 pound, verbally articulate version of the “strong-willed” toddlers whom he always exhorts parents to whip into submission “with a belt or switch” because “pain is a marvelous purifier.” Dobson is walking proof of how just how badly a spanked child can turn out. The fact that parents like this exist in the world is an excellent argument for why all forms of corporal punishment should be abolished forthwith.

[COMMENT: AMEN!!! Total agreement here!!]

Just in case the more slow-witted among his readers fail to grasp the obvious parallel between his relationship with his dog and the type of parenting advice the man as become rich and famous by dispensing, Dobson then lays it explicitly on the line….

[Later on, Dugan says:]

Dobson’s parenting style CREATES the sorts of problems for which he then claims to offer the only solution. He bullies children, and when they resist his oppressive, degrading treatment, he uses their “defiance” to further justify his behavior. He sees the family as “a heirarchy of strength” in which the one with the greatest physical might and the strongest will prevails. His books are full of military metaphors in which children “marshall their forces,” and “launch” every “weapon” in their “arsenals,”while parents are advised to “draw a line in the sand” and to “win and win decisively” whenever a child “sticks their big hairy toe over the line” because “the child has made it clear that he is looking for a fight and his parents would be wise not to disappoint him.” In fact, it is Dobson himself who starts out looking for a fight by his dysfunctional need for total control, (even to the point of dictating precisely where and when his dog sleeps at night). Yet, whenever his children can’t stand it anymore and mount a valiant, hopeless bid to resist his domestic tyranny, he blames it on the children, claiming that: “Perhaps this tendency toward self-will is the essence of ‘original sin’ which has infiltrated the human family. It certainly explains why I place such stress on the proper response to willful defiance during childhood, for that rebellion can plant the seeds of personal disaster.”

The “rebellion” which Dobson blames on the child’s original sinfulness is actually just the flip side of Dobson’s own authoritarian, Parent-Wins-Child-Loses, control-obsessed approach to parenting. Totalitarian oppressive behavior by dictators breeds insurgency – coercive bullying behavior by parents breeds “rebellion. ” Dobson CREATES this sort of behavior in children, and then uses it as proof that still more authoritarian bullying is the only solution to the “rebellion” by “strong-willed” children which his tyranny provoked in the first place.

Dobson uses the same weapons which third world dictators utilize to break the wills of pro-democracy dissidents: pain and fear. The major difference is that when dictators torture and intimidate anyone who resists THEIR tyranny, THEY don’t claim to be doing it for their victims’ own good as an act of love. Dictators torture and intimidate because doing so meets THEIR needs. So does James Dobson.

– – – – – – – – – –

What wisdom and truth dwell in the final paragraph!!

I am going to copy part of the above. Those with intellects and open minds will see my point.

At eleven o’clock that night, I told Siggie to go get into his bed….he refused to budge….I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me ‘reason’ with Mr. Freud. What developed next is impossible to describe. That tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast….As a final desperate maneuver, Siggie backed into the corner for one last snarling stand. I eventually got him to bed, only because I outweighed him 200 to 12!”

For those who will not see it because of their hero worship of Jimmie Dee, for all practical purposes, this is the screenplay for the video of the judge physically assaulting his little girl.

There is one fallacy that Jimmie Dee and those with limited intellectual acumen do not get. That is the “One Size Fits All” fallacy. That fallacy holds that there is only one correct way to rear and discipline a child – the “James Dobson” way. Nothing could be further from the truth!! It is a known fact that each person’s fingerprints are unique to him. That is one way that law enforcement agencies solve crimes. It is also a known fact among psychiatrists and psychologists that each person’s personality is unique to him. That means that you deal with each child as a unique individual instead of as a member of a “one size fits all” community. During my training as a secondary teacher, I was taught endlessly about individual differences, and once I was in the classroom, I saw how true that teaching was.

Granted, there are some children that one must deal with in a more forceful way. But not all children are like that. When I was a kid, all anyone had to do to get me to catch the vision and toe the mark was to give me “the look.” In other words, merely a look or a gentle “we don’t do that here” was enough to get me to obey. I was a docile, compliant child. But what would have happened if they had used Jimmie Dee’s philosophy in dealing with me? I would have openly defied them in any way that I could. They would never have my respect, nor was there any way for them to earn it. My stepfather treated me like the Texas Judge treated his little girl when I was a child, and all he ever got from me for his efforts was my contempt. I think he realized it too, for it was always my mother who dealt with me whenever it was felt that I needed to be dealt with.

In my last message, I mentioned Kelly, the little girl who adored me. I never ever had to say a word to her in terms of her conduct. I was the substitute daddy in her life, and if I said anything to her, it had to be true. Oh sure she teased me mercilessly. But whenever my Ginny and I left her and her mother, she would not let me go without a good-bye kiss. In many ways she had as big a heart of love as my niece Hilary has. And I don’t know of one instance when either of those girls was slapped, let alone beaten with a belt.

When I was working for the non-profit, we had a hispanic lady working in our office who had a little girl named Kharizma. Kharizma was as sweet as were Kelly and Hilary, but she had the fiery personality that many latinas have. But Kharizma didn’t have a daddy either, and I filled that role for her as I did with Kelly. Like Kelly, Kharizma teased me mercilessly, but also like Kelly, what I said was the law. I had to read the riot act to Kharizma a couple of times, but each time I did, I ended the session by giving her a loving and affirming her and telling her that she was the little girl I always dreamed of having but never had. I believe that I played a key part in keeping her on the straight and narrow during her teen years.

What would have happened if I had treated these three wonderful girls the way that Jimmie Dee treated his little wiener dog? I would have deeply wounded three tender, gentle lives, and would have lost the love and respect of all three. THANK THE SUPREME GOD that I was smart enough to follow my heart instead of the stupid nonsense that Jimmie Dee vomits.

In case someone who is raising a small child reads this essay, I would only say this: The Supreme God gave us common sense when he created each of us, and I firmly believe that He expects us to use it. That means that he gives us instincts in regards to being parents. I have seen mother dogs and cats tend to their litters on the “Animal Cops” shows on Animal Planet. If the Supreme God gives maternal instincts to queen cats and bitch dogs, don’t you think that He just might give such instincts to us humans as well? Trust Him to lead you in raising your children. Wouldn’t you rather follow a God who is far beyond all Gods – especially Jesus – rather than a fallible human being like Jimmie Dee?

As to all the Jimmie Dee hero worshipers out there: I would FAR RATHER be queerer than a $7 dollar bill than be like you.

Have yourselves a good day tomorrow.




November 5, 2011 - Posted by | Uncategorized

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: