Posts
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Alright keep it up and you will put us out of buisness
Is it just me or have Candy's recent post been a little...uh....boring? Is she trying to wait us out? Has she changed? I think she truly believes that if she is boring for a week then we will go away. Well that might work in the world of Candy, but not in reality. We know Candy it is only a matter of time before you begin you self righteous notion that your way of living and religion is right for everyone. Why not just cut to the chase and continue? I am sure that the other sites are seeing a slow down as well. Surely we are not in a Candy recession?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
480 comments:
1 – 200 of 480 Newer› Newest»I'm sure she is stock piling scobies and kefir..the end of times is near you know!
Perhaps her prophet told her it was best to "Back Down" for a while.
You're not kidding. I need some new material!
I bet the dress pictures are killing you. I mean the last blog I almost o.d.ed on estrogen with all the comments about chafing and shorts under dresses. Maybe it is time to goat her into something. I will have to come up with a decent post for this weekend.
Ok, so Dr. Phil today is about a family that seems a lot like Candy's. Weird!! Anybody else see it?
The clinical definition for pathalogical liar is:
They lie about everything to make themselves feel better. Usually there is another medical issue at hand with this. Manic depressive, Bipolar, etc. They start believing their own lies and live their lives around that and anyone that stands in their path is just disgarded as being a intruder. A Pathological Liar will lie about anything and everybody. They tend to lie even when caught.
She is just deciding what to make up next. I'm sure we won't be bored for long!
Mr: thanks for that info. That sounds very interesting. I don't normally watch Dr. Phil but I think I'm going to try to catch this one.
Here's the url:
http://www.drphil.com/shows/show/1029
The promos sound just like the Brauer's. I am going to set the tivo for this one.
Those Dr. Phil people are crazy. I just read a bit with my coffee before heading out to work but they're whacked. They make me think of another whacked family, aside from Candy's.
http://www.thebuildingbrows.com/
I someone how ended up at their site several months ago - and Candy has posted there; they have shared trailer living stories. You know, cramming more people that logical into a 2 bedroom trailer.
They believe God has said she has to be a writer, from home and he has to be a builer, with income to support his family only half the year. They make no changes because they are where God has told them to be right now.
Crackpots hiding behind God to excuse their laziness and unwillingness to take care of their own family.
Argh. I shouldn't have read any of this stuff before going off to work; you know, that place I go and provide a service and gets things in return, like money to pay bills and insurance benefits and retirement benefits...I know I should rely on my husband to do all that but I, for one, would prefer to take care of myself in my old age and not live off a church or whatever may be left of his retirement or social security. It's very comforting to know that no matter what happens in the future, I have the skills, and retirement savings, to take care of myself. Given that, I'm already late because I ramble too much.
One week of feminine dress is better than another 62 part home management binder series.
"To make clean-up easier, try putting trash in the trash can. If you don't have a trash can, they sell them at Wal-mart. I got this one there, in this great green color!"
Mandy and Mr. I am reading that Dr Phil show and that is absolutely unbelievable!!!!!!!!
From the show:
"You said the Lord led you to the license plate blocker. You felt led to do that?” Dr. Phil asks.
“One hundred percent, I believe that,” he says.
“Now, my question is, do you really think that the Lord would lead you to do something that helps people break the law and escape accountability in good public policy, and allows people to break the laws of man and put other people’s lives in jeopardy?” Dr. Phil asks.
"Wow. Did you want to go research and find out what the deal is? The red light photo lights are all about money. In the whole statistics in my county alone, they made $3.5 million in less than a year —"
“Look, call me crazy, but if there’s somebody out there running red lights, I’d kind of like them to get tagged for it so they’d stop,” Dr. Phil says.
SO - This guy thinks God is calling him to help people break the law!!!!!!!!!! Ludicrous!!!
Yes the couple on Dr. Phil both have the thousand mile stare and creepy calm voices. God is leading them in everything they do, even if it lands them in a shelter because they are about to be kicked out of their home.
Ooops! I meant ME, not Mr! Sorry, me...
Isn't Candy's dress a little too tight today? I thought a woman shouldn't wear anything that snugs the body??
I must say, in their defense, the Building Brows have the best chore chart system I've ever tried.
I thought they stopped blogging? Maybe they just took a really looong break.
Isn't Candy's dress a little too tight today? I thought a woman shouldn't wear anything that snugs the body??
In her last "dresses" post (the one where she modeled several "new" thrift shop dresses) the last dress was very fitted accentuating her breasts, and she explained something to the effect that women should be proud of their curves, not hide them- they are what make the woman feminine. (I think her line is drawn at showing a particular amount of skin.) So...if you have 'em, Candy says, flaunt 'em!
Here it is in Candy's own words:There is nothign wrong with having curves. They are nothing to be ashamed of - we're women, we were born looking this way - so I see no reason to wear moos moos and other sack dresses to hide it.
On the other hand, I don't purposely flaunt it either. I don't particularly pick a dress based off of how form fitting it will be. Instead, I look at the cut, color, and style. I also like a lot of variety in my dresses, so that is also why my new 5 are each different from the other.
Most of the time, I go for dresses that tie at the waist, because I like it to pull around my waist. Most of my dresses have a pulled in waist.
You are woman - you are allowed to look it. Just make sure you're covered.
Candy | Homepage | 02.09.08 - 3:56 pm | #
Very odd standards.
So at last I understand her Meez's skin tight shirt. It doesn't matter if it's a second skin, as along as you don't show any cleavage.
I never tire of the way she cherry-picks from the Bible and spins the rules to suit her.
Candy's week of feminine dress is depressing. I almost feel sorry for her.
All week, my only real thought about her dress posts is that she looks frumpy. House slippers & baggy dresses; how is that feminine and nice? I looked more feminine, and nicer, in my black pants and print blouse this morning when I went to work. And, definitely more feminine due to the fit of my clothes.
I think the dresses only thing has gone haywire. Taking the "law" of wearing dresses has trumped everything else, like putting effort into your daily appearance and wearing clothes that flatter your figure. And, wearing shoes. Shoes that fit the outfit you're wearing. And doing your hair, and make-up if you wear it.
I think the dresses only thing has gone haywire. Taking the "law" of wearing dresses has trumped everything else, like putting effort into your daily appearance and wearing clothes that flatter your figure. And, wearing shoes. Shoes that fit the outfit you're wearing. And doing your hair, and make-up if you wear it.
Good point (again), Tia. The impression I've always gotten is that feminine attire is not only an issue of modesty, but also to make yourself pleasing to your husband.
If I wore some of her dresses, my husband would laugh from her to next Sunday.
Now granted, my husband isn't a lunatic like hers, but I know mine would be much more impressed by jeans, a tshirt, and hair and makeup done, than he would be by me wearing those dresses and slippers that should have been thrown away 5 years ago.
As much as she stresses wearing clothing that is flattering to your "womanly" figure, you'd think she'd take a look in the mirror.
I will make an official announcement: IF MY WIFE EVER WEARS ANYTHING RESEMBLING ANY OF THOSE OUTFITS, unless she is in a play about Amish people, I WILL DIVORCE HER.
My wife doesn't wear much make up, just because she is pretty naturally (mind you I just said I was going to divorce her, thus if she reads this by chance...insurance). Anyway I think that women feel good when they are "dolled" up, but also when they come home from work, or have a very long day, and they want to relax, sweatpants and a t-shirt is completely appropriate.
Seriously, isn't that the part about being married? You know the wake and see then at their absolute worst, and still be happy you are there? Isn't that the best part about being married? The idea that you can be yourself, you can have off days, and things don't always go your way, but to have all that and have someone there to be your rock?
Your significant other should (at least what I think) be your foundation. The person that you can count on to step in when they get home so you can retrieve your sanity. The person that you can take the kids outside while they try and wind down from a hard day.
That is the best part about being married, and the idea that you have to be on your toes to please or submit to the other is not at all what I am talking about. I am referring to the comfortable, I can be myself, kind of relationship, and I don't see that there. It looks like someone to teach others how to please and obey. It seems very one sided
And to me that is not a partnership, regardless what a book, that was written during some of the most horrid, sexist times since the caveman, says
My husband isn't anything like hers either, Amanda. (For that, I will give thanks until the day I die.) He would go off the deep end if I dressed like that. I won't deny that he likes seeing me in dresses, but that's more because when I do wear dresses, it is to be "dressed up", so I am not only in a dress, I am in heels I don't normally wear, and take extra care with doing my hair and make up, etc. The dresses I wear are also stylish, flattering to my body, and not ones I've worn 20 times in the last month. So, yes, he does like to see me in a dress. But, he wouldn't be so thrilled if it were every day, and he would definitely not be even remotely happy if it were frumpy, ill fitting and unattractive (re: ugly - in his opinion or mine).
These are personal preferences and I get that. But, I still can't help but think that if you choose to wear a dress/skirt every day, in order to be feminine, why don't you at least choose to wear decent ones that flatter you and bring out your femininity rather than covering it all up and hiding it behind crap? I look better and more feminine in my sweats and tee shirt half the time than some in their daily dress.
It's not fair of me to drag others into this and I admit that fully. I take responsibility for my own actions, and will continue to do so if there is fall out from this. But, I just have to post an example of exactly what I mean.
http://muchforgiven.blogspot.com/
Can anyone tell me exactly how that is feminine? Attractive? Flattering?
Tia are you my wife? You must have posted right as I did. I just referenced t-shirt and sweatpants.
I keep getting redirected
Hahaha! Someone told Candy she looked like a nun today! I bet she pulls that picture off pretty quickly. Sister Candy, doing her housework.
Tia,
I have to disagree with you about the muchforgiven blog. She looks happy and her dresses are okay. Denim and appliques aren't really my style, but I don't think they look *bad*.
The black one I would probably wear myself (with a belt and heels, though).
Then again, I'm a filthy Catholic.
Can't you just tell the woman from Much Forgiven is a Candyhead? There are certain clues on these types of blogs. Menu planners + Home Management Binders + mentions of "sweet hubby" + frumpy dresses, etc. This sort of thing on her profile: "I make no apologies for my faith, so if you can't handle the Truth, then this is not the blog for you" clinches it!
And can I just say that white socks with black shoes never, ever works. I don't care how nice the rest of your outfit, that's just wrong.
The fact that she has a sidebar labeled "Removing the Vail" tipped me off.
Why bring skiing into it?
Now, THIS is scary:
We recently sold our house and moved to a new city due to dh's job promotion. Our new city is expensive and we can not afford a house here. My question is what should we do with the money we made off of the sale of our old home? We are practically debt free and want to something with it that would be being a good steward.
Surely there is SOMEONE in Mandi's life who could advise her? Someone who has experience being a good steward over a large sum of money?
And, I think white socks and black shoes go very nicely with poodle skirts.
And, *ahem* my outfits when I'm too lazy to match up a pair of colored socks. *ahem*
About two years ago, she was posting some similar pictures of her week in dresses, and a friend and I had found her website and were both just guffawing. I wonder the same as you guys: how is it that wearing those frumpy, hanging, outdated dresses (that should have been rejected by Good Will) looking feminine and, to borrow one of her favorite words, lovely??? My husband would high-tail it if I started wearing dresses that look like Candy's. When you become a Christian do you loose all sense of style? Is that part of the package deal? Hey, if you've got to wear a dress around the house why not opt for a cute sundress that you can wear with flip flops, or a crinkle skirt and tank top....oh never mind that's not modest enough is it. Sigh. As for "pleasing my husband," he has told me one of his favorite things to see me wear is a pair of jeans and a fitted tee. Well I'm sure that's because we're a couple of heathens.
Amanda (muchforgiven) is most definitely a Candy follower; her blog is in Candy's sidebar under "some blogs I read." They are buddies.
Oh, and thought you all would be interested in this old quote from Candy, dated July 2005:
The Bible says that women are to dress like women, and men are to dress like men. (Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.) Unfortunatly, most women I see in jeans and T-shirts, are dressed like men, or androgenously. You can tell they're a woman, by their face and body shape, and that's it.
There is something beautiful and inspiring about wearing a pretty, feminine, modest dress. It flows with you, is MUCH more comfy than pants can ever be, and you are treated with high respect. Especially from elderly people. For so many of the elderly, it blesses them to see a young mother dressed in a nice dress, tending lovingly to her children at the grocery store. It blesses them to see that there are still values and Christianity.
Another problem with T-shirts and pants, are how they draw the eyes. T-shirts draw people's eyes to the chest. The material stretches and pulls across the breasts, and often T-shirts have pictures or words, which further draw eyes to the chest. However, if you wear a baggy T-shirt, then you loose your feminine shape, and become frumpy.
As for pants and Jeans, they draw the eyes to the thighs and back side. Furthermore, I know that many men look at the crotch area on women with pants. I'm not going to say why; it's disgusting.
Wearing a dress makes your light shine. It draws attention to your face, and your countenance; Not on how big your boobs are, or how shapely your tush. When you go out in public in a modest dress, people look. But it's for different reasons. The looks are not ones of envy, or lust. They are ones of respect, awe, (or in some cases) startled surprise (especially if you're in an area where you're the only one with your tummy covered). You may also make new friends. I now have women that are complete strangers, that come up to me, asking advice on various things. The other day, a lady came up to me with a Bible question.
When a woman is adamant about staying in her jeans and T-shirts, she really needs to examine why. My main exuse used to be because it's "comfortable" (a dress is MORE comfy). But my real reason was because I have a very nice body, and liked to "show it off". I still like to show my slim waste, and feminine shape, but now I've learned to do it modestly. And now, I don't show off my shape to get the jealousy of women, and the lust of men, I show off my shape to "get" my dear husband. I wear dresses that he and I both like; dresses that we agree upon. On a few occasions, I even let him completely pick out a dress for me.
Some women think that they're dressing modestly if they're in sweats and a T-shirt. No, you're just a shapeless, frumpy blob. Dress nice. It'll please your husband, and you'll be amazed at how it will please you.
Milehimama, I have no idea what poodle skirts are. They sound ugly. And I meant no disrespect to you by the crack at white socks and black shoes. I myself would never wear that combination ...
I personally refer to my husband as "sweet Hubby" or my hero sometimes too. However he works his butt off and then comes home and helps me with the kids or helps clean. he even watches them one or two days a week while I work on his days off.
Ugh, reading that Flash-Back to 2005 makes me gag. I love dresses, but Candy is ruining them for me. I want to have as little in common with her as possible.
The main thing I found amusing about MuchForgiven's blog, especially in light of "Modesty Week": check out her Meez. You can even argue that at least the skin is covered. I know it's imaginary, but if you're SO convicted that women should be feminine and modest, shouldn't you reflect that in all things?
It was clare that told her she looked like a nun. lol
Other clues that MuchForgiven is a Candy-Head: the posts "are you going to heaven?" and "commenting on my blog".
So, she says this:
Wearing a dress makes your light shine. It draws attention to your face, and your countenance; Not on how big your boobs are, or how shapely your tush. When you go out in public in a modest dress, people look. But it's for different reasons. The looks are not ones of envy, or lust. They are ones of respect
Makes it sound like dressing like Candy is a guarantee that you won't be oogled. Yet, she also wrote this in April 20005:
On Monday we spent much of the day at the zoo, and hubby also put in an application at a near by airport, for an Avionic Technician position. That night, we headed out to the next state in our plan. After being in a big city in that state for 5 minutes, and having several men look at me like a piece of meat, I felt quite uncomfortable. Hubby didn't like the area either. I suggested to hubby that we just turn around, and go back to the state we were having so much fun visiting, and cancel the interview. Hubby agreed. So, we turned around.
Too bad they turned down what might have been a good job because of all those respectful looks she was getting in her modest, yet clingy, attire.
After being in a big city in that state for 5 minutes, and having several men look at me like a piece of meat, I felt quite uncomfortable.
They weren't oogling you Candy, they were just wondering what kind of cult you belonged to.
BTW, did anyone catch the Dr. Phil show today?
Anne-Marie:
Poodle skirts here:
http://www.costumesupercenter.com/csc/prod/116604/i/1/product.web
And, I'm not insulted, I'm ashamed at my lack of fashion sense.
Tee shirts are too tight across the chest? Like the nun dress she was wearing today?
How to tell if your top is too tight: it pulls in at the sides and you can bounce a quarter off your chest.
Well, I like this Candy commenter's outfit:
http://travelinpilgrim.blogspot.com/2008/07/cleaning-today-feminine-way.html
I saw the Dr. Phil show and WOW....they were crazy and sounded just like the Brauers. Did you notice the husband had total crazy eyes? The wife actually looked normal, but a whipped dog.
Milehimama, I agree - that's a pretty outfit. But that woman would probably look lovely in a sack. And thanks for the link about poodle skirts [we call them rock 'n' roll skirts]. Hmmm. If you took the poodles off the skirts would be quite pretty. Not to my taste though.
A question for American readers that I've always wondered since stumbling upon Candy's blog: are people like her common in the States? I can honestly say I've never met - or seen - any one like her here in New Zealand. I live in a very conservative town with a large Exclusive Brethren and Tridentine Catholic population, but even they don't dress like Candy.
Cajunchic - I do not mean this ugly AT ALL, but I am glad your husband does that, but I am sure you work your butt off all day and then on his days off you said you work and he watches the kids. I hope he gives you the accolades you deserve, as you do him.
Let me preface this next statement with, THIS IS NOT DIRECTED TOWARDS ANYONE ON HERE.
I always see women praise their husbands when they help with the kids and I am always baffled by it. It is their kids....they should be taking care of them other than just working to provide!! My husband always wants fireworks and a marching band when he gives the kids a bath. I tell him thanks and say, "now, can you get them dressed?!"
My big pet peeve is when women say their husband is at home "babysitting the kids".
Umm...you can't babysit YOUR OWN children!
AMEN!!
concernedcitizen,
Totally understand what you are saying. He does do that more than you would believe. I know they are his children too but we know many people where the wives stay home and the husbands come home expecting to do nothing because Well they worked all day! It infuriates me but at the same time makes me realize how lucky I am to be with him. Actually maybe they are the lucky ones because if they were married to me I would have killed them by now. lol
That rocking chair meez is making me seasick.
I was reading this website (www.rickross.com) when I was looking for more info on those snake handler ppl from sweepings site (no I'm not joining, hubby asked a question about them and I was looking it up...lol). I've never heard of this guy so I don't know how legit he is,but I guess he is pretty popular and knows his stuff on cults. I'm assuming from what I read he is Jewish so maybe its his point of view, I don't know. From his list on this site, it looks like everything is a cult. I didn't see RC on his list but looked like there were some spin offs of Catholism. I was interested in his definition of a "cult" and what some of their characteristics are and how some of them start out in the FAQ section. Hmmm...I'm wondering if we can get Candy-ites and the Church of Candy on this list.
Apparently, there are a lot of women participating in the "Week In Feminine Dress" extravaganza.
I just searched for "week in feminine dress" and found more modesty than I can handle.
Maybe someone should start something like "Week in Feminist Dress".
I wear skirts most of the time during the summer. My workplace is pretty casual (we're in a beach town), so I can get away with broomstick skirts, flip-flops, and a t-shirt. If I have a meeting that day, I might dress it up by wearing a denim blazer. :)
I predict that Candy will claim some undisclosed persecution in the near future that will render her unable to post for several weeks. During that time, she will stockpile posts and gather information, but will eventually have to return to the blogosphere for her ego fix.
With renewed vigor, she will attempt to ignore Those-Who-Call-Her-To-Truthiness but will fail. Many of her followers will, in the meantime, find other blogs to consume and identify with and Candy will have to resort to hanging out on message boards.
LOL, "truthiness"!! Are you a Stephen Colbert fan too?
I'm just waiting for Candy and Erik to start their own homechurch. I'm surprised that haven't already.
More evidence that Candy's followers cannot think for themselves (this is in the comments section under her "Thursday food prep" post):
We recently sold our house and moved to a new city due to dh's job promotion. Our new city is expensive and we can not afford a house here. My question is what should we do with the money we made off of the sale of our old home? We are practically debt free and want to something with it that would be being a good steward.
Oh puke. Seriously, the last people that lady should take financial advice from is the Brauer's. They will tell her to invest in Erik and his Hall of Fame worthy inventions. I am telling you that we need to get a group of people together from this site, get a mystery van like Scooby and go on rescue missions all over the US to knock some sense into these people.
I feel really sorry for the young women who have latched onto her. To go to some woman, through a blog on the Internet, to ask financial adivce? What does her HUSBAND think? What do professionals say? What do her parents, or in-laws say? Why go to Candy? It boggles my mind in ways I can't even explain.
People need to get out from under the Candy spell, use the brains given to them, or at least he brains of their husband's, and just smarten up. I find it difficult to believe there are that many stupid, insecure women in the circles in which Candy roams on the Internet. Was there a homepage provided by the person who asked about what to do with her money? If not, I'd bet it is one of Candy's imaginaries. I've been convinced for a long time that she makes up names and posts her own praises, just to fill up her comments section and pump herself up. This financial question is, seriously, beyond ridiculous and I just can't wrap my brain around the idea of someone asking it.
I eagerly (not) await today's dress. I, personally, chose a pair of cotton shorts and a t-shirt from Hawaii, that is a little big, for today's attire. It is a day of lots of work around, inside and outside the house, so I am being a grub. But, tonight, for fish Fryday (mis-spelling intentional; ya' gotta' be a Wisconsinite to get it) I'll be wearing a new pair of jeans and a tank top, both purchased on clearance yesterday from Old Navy. I love end of season sales!
Um, is anyone else curious about what Candy is hiding behind her back in Thursday's picture?
I don't see anything wrong with Candy's dresses. They aren't anything I would choose personally, but come on, do we seriously care what she wears? I really could care less about fashion. It's her crazy eyes and weird ideas that give me the creeps.
I don't think she's hiding anything. I think she's trying to put focus on her ample bosom. She is all about her feminine curves, doncha' know. Either that, or she wants to make sure her long hair shows since she is quite impressed with herself for that hair.
Oh, that is hair? I thought it was straw.
I thought the same thing as Tia - or that she was pulling her dress a little tighter in the back so it wouldn't hang too much and make her look "bigger than she is" like in the pictures earlier in the week.
Oh, and today's dress pics are up. What confuses me is why half her kids are wearing long sleeves. Don't they live in Oklahoma? Isn't it hot down there in July?
Not only long sleeves, but one looks like he is in a dress shirt.
I think she put her arm behind her back to show the size of her waist, trying to prove that she is not fat. She must read here. She has to. Her blog has changed drastically since this site got popular. Good job guys!
For the record, I disagree with her about dresses and skirts. How can they be more modest if at any time they could fly up and expose everything? If I wear jeans, people will see my ankles and that is it. If I wear a skirt, even a long one, people will see more. Wearing skirts and dresses certainly makes it less of a hassle to engage in sexual activity. Of course, maybe that is why she wears them! LOL. So her "sweet hubby" can get his groove on without fumbling for a zipper.
This morning I was watching Joni Lamb (it's a Christian talk show), and ironically enough, they were talking about modest dress. But not on the importance for Christian women to dress modestly, but also attractively so as to be good witnesses for Christ. They then had three girls (ranging from 12-20) come out in very modest, but very attractive and modern, outfits. One girl wore pants, the other two wore leggings under a short dress, but I assure you, they all looked feminine. Perhaps I should send a link to Candy?
(If you go here, on the video link, the girl on the left in the yellow was one of the models.)
This line:
"But not on the importance for Christian women to dress modestly...."
Should read:
But not ONLY on the importance...
Maybe she lets them dress themselves. (She doesn't seem to let them do anything else without strict instruction, but you never know.)
It was 98 degrees yesterday and my 7 yo was wearing her winter coat (inside) because they were playing sled dogs.
And today my 4 yo is wearing black velvet pants because she thinks they "feel like a kitty".
Then again, I let my kids wear what they want around the house as long as their bodies are generally covered (I've got a houseful of wannabe nudists).
Hey, I have the same skirt (I think) as Prov31lady is vacuuming in (mine's black).
It's one of my favorites, but it's horrible to iron. I got it at The Limited.
http://www.christa-taylor.com/
Modest clothing website
Esther, I love that page! It just proves that you don't have to dress like a Mennonite to be modest and feminine!
Exactly!
Hey, Milehimama, you said...
"The fact that she has a sidebar labeled "Removing the Vail" tipped me off."
I missed that the for time so went back to look at it. After reading her Christian Science post some one told her it was spelled wrong. Here's her response:
"Actually there are TWO spellings of the word vail/veil in scripture :o). I chose this spelling because it was the one mostly associated with truth/light/etc being blocked or withheld from someone :o). Learn something new everyday eh? :o)"
It does look silly at first though, and seems to give the wrong impression...
"Actually there are TWO spellings of the word vail/veil in scripture :o). I chose this spelling because it was the one mostly associated with truth/light/etc being blocked or withheld from someone :o). Learn something new everyday eh? :o)"
It does look silly at first though, and seems to give the wrong impression...
Good grief. Why would you deliberately choose the more obscure spelling? Just so someone would ask you and you could impress them with your knowlege?
Amanda, my thoughts exactly.
Hey, I just looked at Friday's pics again. Notice how none of the pics shows her feet!!
I read her comments and curiously went to one of the commenters pages. As I was reading I noticed on a post last month that the lady said:
"Here is something I have been pondering for a while during my spiritual struggle. Like I said, there are numerous books and websites that we ladies read diligently about being a good wife, Christian, homeschool mom, housekeeper, etc. They are good and I am not bashing them. However, sometimes it can cause a lady to become obsessed with works and trying to meet all these standards and then feeling condemned when she is unable to do so."
That's so sad. It's even more sad that she still reads Candy. Candy is one of the big causes of this.
Regarding Erik's induction to the Inventors Hall of Fame:
I was looking on the old posts of Candy's and about two or I think it was three years ago she posted Erik's resume to try to get him a job through her blog buddies.
He had listed the award: "the Advanced Technical Theory Award from the Inventors Clubs of America International Hall of Fame as part of the Dennis Lee Group May 11, 1996."
I looked around for more info on the net and if you google Dennis Lee you'll be quite surprised. He is actually more loopy than Erik. They (The Dennis Lee Group) went around the country doing a bogus skit to try to con people into joining their pyramid scheme.
There is (or I should say, was) an Inventors Club of America in Atlanta, but it folded and was a small regional club. The only thing "International" about it was the bogus title on their little award display.
http://kingdomgrant.org/woj/index.html
I believe this is the newest Dennis Lee endeavor
Thanks for the info about the Inventor's Hall of Fame, Erika! I searched and could not find anything. Interesting. Dennis Lee looks like a con man.
HEY!!!!!!! Her meez is gone! It was there earlier, but now it's gone!! When you click on the rocking chair lady on her page it no longer takes you to her profile, it says it's been deleted or banned?!?!?!?!
HEY!!!!!!! Her meez is gone! It was there earlier, but now it's gone!! When you click on the rocking chair lady on her page it no longer takes you to her profile, it says it's been deleted or banned?!?!?!?!
I've just gone to it and could see it on meez.com no problem. Probably just a temporary glitch.
I am shocked, though, shocked, that her background appears to show her husband working in the kitchen whilst she lazed away in a rocking chair.
rosemundi,
Hey, I just went again and now it's there, odd!!! Yes, and I thought that, too when I first saw that backdrop. What in the world kind of Christian woman would let her husband in the kitchen??
Gosh, my first comment. Please be gentle with me...
So much to say...where to begin...okay, how about:
There is no possible way Candy reads everything on her sidebar.
She has claimed to be a "speed reader," but I have always highly doubted she reads everything that is listed (except the crazy Jack Chick type books). Also, why is it so important that her readers know she's read something "multiple times through" or however many times? She never comments about the great literature she supposedly reads except to say something completely meaningless (Don Quixote was "funny.") When I was in college (a real, live college where we LEARNED stuff), comments like that were a sure tip-off that someone was faking in a conversation.
Wow, the Dennis Lee stuff I found doing a quick Google search is so insane. Seems Erik isn't alone in his crazy notions and scam artistry. I'm amazed people fall for that kind of malarkey.
Just had to put this in:
From April 14, 2005:
"I remember one time when he [the five year old] was putting away his clothes, and he decided to open all of the drawers at the same time. I was in the kitchen cooking dinner, oblivious to what was going on in his room. I heard a strange scream. I went in there to find a very funny scene. He was on the floor, with his dresser on top of him... I had a hard time keeping a straight face, but I managed. Later that day, when I was alone with hubby, I related the story to him, and we had a good laugh."
How mean can you be to think a dresser falling on top of your kid is funny???????
If by dresser she means one of those little, three-drawer rubbermaid things, then yeah, that might be funny, but I'm assuming she means a real dresser. And in that case, that sounds dangerous--I'd be concerned for my child, definately not laughing!
Some body needs to tell Candy that if she wants men to stop looking at her lustfully she should stop sticking her boobs out like that! Honestly, it just looks bizarre. May be it's a hangover from her modelling days.
This is turning into an interesting group. Too bad (IMO) that it has to be focused on criticizing another person.
When I first visited this site I thought it was distasteful to read all the nitpicking. The Mensa, hall of fame stuff, etc. seemed petty, maybe inflated or reframed a bit but not a big deal, not worth calling her a liar. The Mr. stuff was definitely creepy and alarming if true, but maybe it was not true (some of her explanations seemed reasonable). Her hair, her clothes, how much she weighs - it seems like spite to make remarks about that. Could she have read all those books? Of course she could have. There's no time frame given. She could have read them all in a few months. It's not a long list.
When I first looked at STH I had really bad junior high school flashbacks and had to go lie down in a darkened room with a wet lavender-scented towel over my eyes to recover. I won't say there isn't humor there and some of the comments are interesting. (IMO it would be funnier if the background and ebook pictures were not identical to KTH.) But it bothers me that its sole purpose is to make fun of someone, maybe because I got mocked too much in jr high school and still have the emotional scars. Ridicule is too easy.
I don't know if I'm a Candy-head or not. My opinions are mostly 180 degrees from hers on politics and religion, and probably on child-raising too. My opinions fit more with Tia's. The people here and on STH seem more interesting than many of the women who comment on her site. It would be nice if it turned into something more than a just a MST3K review of KTH. I do get the humor and the gossipy interest of that, but I feel bad about it at the same time, because I enjoy Candy's confidence and cheerfulness. (Alas I can't get forgiven, not being religious. I'm stuck being an imperfect human.)
I think candy's self-confidence is the strength of her blog and also what gets on people's nerves. Her confidence attracts people who are unsure or discouraged. And her absolute conviction that she's right is grating on people who disagree with her. The combination of her confidence about daily living and the controversy about her religious beliefs is probably what keeps me reading her site (as well as curiosity to see what she will post about next in her life.)
On the bureau falling on her son, yeah, I had the same reaction. She laughed??? But I think her bureaus are just lightweight plastic 3-drawer storage units a few feet high. It's not as if a big wooden bureau fell on a child. Still alarming though. And some kids would find it funny after the surprise but others would have their feelings hurt by laughter.
(FWIW, YMMV, IMO etc.)
I can't call Candy or her husband a liar for this, but it bugs me: in his first anti-evolution post he added on a section where he said that according to Hovind, only 55% of scientists thought man came from evolution. I sent her a comment, and I think she posted it at the time, that Hovind was misrepresenting a poll - really the number was 95% (at least). But she and/or her husband never edited the post, and of course my comment is long gone.
It's not an actual lie because Hovind did say that. But it's a lie by implication, since her husband appears to accept what Hovind said - and because of my comment, they now know it was false. It would have been easy to amend the post to add the correct info, and I sent several comments hoping she would do that. But she (and/or her husband) has chosen to let the incorrect implication stand. It bugs me - but does it matter? Probably not at all.
When my brother was about 4 he also tried to climb onto his dresser and it fell on top of him. My mom heard him screaming and ran to find him pinned under his dresser and in much pain. She immediately took him to the doctor to check for broken or cracked ribs, and although he turned out to be okay, he was all bruised up. It was no laughing matter.
This is turning into an interesting group. Too bad (IMO) that it has to be focused on criticizing another person.
If you don't like the personal criticism, or the picking apart of her lies then what would you suggest for a theme for the blog? What point would you find worthwhile?
If you want intellectual discussion of her views on Catholicism, you could try Visits To Candyland, but otherwise, what sort of full time counterpoint blog is worth running about Candy?
What's your point? Why are you here?
Highdesert: I think you really have to stick around for awhile to get the jest of our conversations. Rarely do they completely center around Candy, but actually talk about issues that are associated with Candy's post, but in a normal conversation.
So when you show up, judge a book by its cover, and then are surprised that the welcome is not warm, well I think that is in the eye of the reader personally.
Yes we did just start out for a place to vent, and to some extent it still is, but I think what it has turned into is two-fold:
1. A place for people to congregate and put a normal perspective on whatever Candy is talking about.
2. Truly to keep Candy in check. Candy at this point is horrified of being attacked the same way she does. We copy her tone. That is what makes her post pictures of dresses for a week.
So I understand that you feel like the blog could be better if it were more like x, but really we all have something in common, our inability to understand Candy. That gives us a starting point to have open dialog about whatever topic. We do not have a consensus of opinions here. They are incredibly diverse
There are some that are dresses only, some that are detergent makers, some that are Christians, some that are Catholic, some that are atheist, some that are stay at home moms, and the list really goes on and on. The only true commonality within all of us is that we all respect each others opinions on subjects; regardless of whether we disagree.
Anyone who references Hovind is an automatic write off, as far as I'm concerned. I believe the man to be nothing more than a quack, and a criminal quack at that. But, considering the rest of her so called sources, it is not the least bit surprising. In fact, it's expected.
I am not surprised either that the quoted stats weren't changed. Apparently, not many people check sources and it seems Candy & Erik are not only aware of that, they take advantage of it. If more people, including her on line friends, would just check sources (and not just her source - a 10 second Google search can often bring up more information to contradict what she writes than support it) for the stuff she rambles about, more people would call her out and it wouldn't be just a bunch of people on a separate site like this one who pick everything apart.
That's just another example of their less than honest posts/rants/whatever. It's also another example of the fact that they are unteachable. How many times has she been corrected about her Catholic posts? Too many to count, but would she bother to admit it, make changes or do real research? No. Why? Because then she might have to actually examine her beliefs and choices, and that is, above all else, what I think she is trying to avoid.
Left unchecked, people like that become menaces to their community, and with the advent of the Internet, that community encompasses way more than their physical neighborhood. There are bunches of innocent, new Christian women who go to her for guidance. The why of that is another mystery, but I suspect it is at least in part the confidence she conveys. It's just too bad that the confidence gets in the way of factual information and misleads so many women who are searching for guidance and fellowship.
I think this can serve to answer highdesert's first post as well regarding why we all do this. Someone has to. Is it our job to be the truth telling Internet police? Of course not. But, if people who read her site eventually find their way here, they may find - amongst the nit picking and personal ragging - real information. And, they may find that to be a Christian does not mean conforming to Candy's life and beliefs.
Is it for the better good? No. I thinks it's entirely for Internet time killing and yes, gossip. But, what the heck? There is valid information amongst the gossip and nit picking. There is also a lot more respect shown among people who post here than at Candy's site. She prevents dissenting opinions and beliefs and even questions. Here, they're all out in the open for everyone to read and respond to.
And, you know what? There are a few people who regularly post here who, prior to this site, I wasn't too impressed with. There are still many I don't agree with. But, after the past few weeks of bantering back and forth, I learned a few things, not the least of which is that when the gloves come off, you see who people really are. And, I personally like the real people a whole lot more than the guarded people who watch every word they say.
This site isn't exactly a benefit to society. But, it definitely has its place.
candyisascrazyasitgets,
I get that about people being able to discuss her topics more generally. That's why it's getting more interesting to me - because different people are talking to each other more as a community. I don't know what could take the place of Candy as a focus, but maybe something will. Your own post heading kind of hints at this - if Candy doesn't give you material for posts, what will happen to the blog? I don't like the criticism of her looks, but OTOH I like the way people get a chance talk about the subject of modest dress. So I'm torn.
luz, I read the blog for entertainment and time-killing.
That is all that a blog is and ever will do; kill time. You have a valid question about Candy and being tame. If she continues to talk about mundane or non offensive material, what will we do?
There is plenty out there to talk about, and I have thought about taking on another site or two, but really having the time to incorporate one more site, to me, seems unattainable.
So maybe a modification to where I pick some offensive topic from web surfing, or taking a suggested link from a comment.
There are several options, BUT I mean really, do you think she can keep this up? It wasn't twenty four hours after she made a proposition (about not talking about Catholics for a while) before she did a 180. So if I were a betting man, and I am, I would put about 25 to 1 that this site will continue under the same premise for a little while longer.
Candy will not disappoint, and there are two prophecies, so there is something coming. Pandering for money, some scheme, or just another rant is on its way. That is how she works. That is why her readers read her blog.
I guess there are options, but honestly I don't think it is possible for Candy to not be offensive.
Highdesert, truthfully, I would love to see what Joel & the bots (and Mike, too) would do to Candy.
Maybe not.
I read Candy off and on, but her anti-Catholicism really bothered me and I am not Catholic.
I posted something about feminine dress a while ago, when she said something about skirts not being advisable. I wrote her to say that I mainly wore skirts and, as a wheelchair user, skirts were easier for me to deql with. She did not post it. I can't imagine what was "rude" about my post.
highdesert,
I stand by everything I posted on this site. Of course some of her explanations SEEM reasonable. She had ample time to draft plausible responses.
I am stunned that after reading her blog and this one that you say you like her confidence, and that is what draws you to her site. Don't you get the fact she lies about EVERYTHING. She can fabricate as much joy and confidence as she needs to for her various posts. Candy's whole identity is tied to some made up world she's crafted on a blog. She is not capable of living her life without KTH because then the reality of her REAL LIFE would come crashing down on her, and she couldn't cope with that! That is why she wouldn't shut it down even when she was SUPPOSEDLY being stalked.
Well, Mr,, if that's true, it still makes it interesting to read her blog and see what will happen next. (I did say it was the controversy that her confidence causes as well as her confidence in itself that makes it entertaining.)
(In my first post, as an intro I tried to be honest and not two-faced, which is tricky because I manage to be entertained and bothered by things at the same time. That's all. I don't have the goal of defending Candy or of changing how people post here.)
Highdesert: I think you might be under the impression that I sought the hall of fame, Mensa, or her certification myself (like Candy just said these things in passing, and I jumped all over it). That was just not the case. Candy stated these claims in response to comments. She states them arrogantly and states them to give her credibility on particular subjects.
She stated the Mensa comment to prove how intelligent she was. The only problem with her statement is that the description (and even the one in her response) does not jive with the actual process, in reality, that Mensa does.
That is just one example of her lies that she states or has stated. She states these in order to say basically shut up and quit questioning, because ..I or my husband are blank.
These are easy statements to look up. The Hall of fame issue we have new information. She was referring to some obscure, now out of business, but not the real Inventors Hall of Fame. It was some local group that calls itself the international..., but is so ridiculous that it only acknowledges inventions nationally. See the irony?
She uses these lies to silence her critics, like the misquote that she gave about evolution. I mean those are flat out lies that are used to disprove someone making a counter argument. Thus I see the necessity of this site for that.
Although it may seem petty, but it is in the context of a larger argument, always. Look at her responses, and take out the answers to stuff like birth certificates, Jane Austen and etc. She added all the others in order to make it seem more plausible to believe her.
See you just stack things in a discussion in order to keep the reader reading things that seem ridiculous to question, and then easy to disprove. This way when she gets to the five or six real lies she already has the reader believing that she is logical.
Easy solution to several of these lies:
Post a link of her husbands induction.
She can't answer the Mensa issue unless she admits that she lied.
Show us your itu certification.
But instead, as she did with her spider bite, she just let it sit there and fester until the itch got so bad she had to address it.
She had plenty of time to retort. I am sure she worked with her husband and they teamed up to answer. But some of her claims she just can't defend.
So yes her answers may seem plausible, but I am not asking you to take my word for it, but I am asking that you don‘t take hers either. I am telling you the information is out there, and it would take about thirty minutes of your time to address it all. Do that and they YOU determine if she is telling the truth or not.
But, as many others have done, if your answer is that it is not that important to you, well then there is not much to do about that.
All I know is that if you take the time, do the research, you will see that she does not tell the truth, and it is rather consistent. I mean look how long she fought with Elena at the VTC, and compare that with the time that she spent, and then dropped, discussing us. These are just facts, and I figured that would be easier to refute than theology.
She dispenses opinions as an expert, but she isn't. I think that fact is important, and I think it should be important to her readers as well.
I don't pop in here anymore, but something has been eating on me about the Mensa thing. She is so insitant, even with the facts being put out there, that Mensa asked her to join. Do you think that she didn't take some free test at all, but took a free test with strings attached? Have you ever gone to a site, looked at something or done something like that and within a few days you have an email from them? They used the "test" to have you purchase something.
For example, our local paper has an ad in it (very often) for a test for the local police dept. Supposedly they are hiring and you can take this test if you call the 1-800 number. You call and it's actually a study guide for a generic police exam. But the wording is very carefully put out there to make you think they are the police dept. without actually saying that. Maybe she got one of those and honestly believes it to be true.
Just thinking here. It could be a total fabrication and no test was ever even taken.
Did anyone check out her "feminine" dress today? Would someone please tell me how those boots with that dress are feminine?
And maybe men would "leer" at her less if her clothing fit. You can see that the buttons across her chest gape. I understand than when your clothing comes from thrift stores it doesn't always fit perfectly, but come on. (And I want to make clear that at least half of my wardrobe is from GoodWill, so I'm not judging on that, strictly fit.)
Having your clothes and buttons strain across your chest is modest? Or, is it modest just because it's a dress? My tank top doesn't even fit me that tightly and reveals a whole lot less than that stretched dress.
Seems to me she wants people to gawk at her, particularly men since she makes it so obvious and easy to do. Do you think she could stick her chest out any further for the pictures?
I don't have a clue where modest comes into play when one dresses and poses like that.
Alright, where is everybody? I know it is Saturday night, but I'm home with a sick husband and bored. I was hoping there would be a praise party and some mocking fun.
Oh well. All Saturday nights can't be winners, I guess.
I'm around intermittently recently, Tia. It's Sunday afternoon here and I'm sick with bronchitis. I'm surprised there's no Meez party tonight over at KTH. What exactly happens in one of those? It sounds kinda weird.
There's one going on right now.
Oh but Tia, remember, she has wonderful posture so that's why her boobs stick out. And that's ok, as long as you don't show too much leg. ;)
oh a prayz party.. how thrilling... NOT!!
Okay, I made it into the "Prayz Party" tonight. I lasted 10 minutes. I couldn't force myself to waste any more of a perfectly good Saturday night. Remember those jr. high parties you went to, where everyone stood around and no one said anything? And there was one dorky girl dancing by herself and singing along? Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.
Maybe it gets more exciting late at night, but I can't force myself to find out.
Amanda, maybe you should back after 11 p.m. I think that's when they bring the snakes out.
There's going to be snakes!? Gee, why didn't you say so sooner?!
Perhaps she'll also give out her cure for snake bites. It probably involves mixing bleach and ammonia. I can hear it now, "I know they say you shouldn't mix these two chemicals, but I've done it many times with delightful results."
Sorry, Tia, I went Ikea. A girl's gotta shop sometime.
I think the problem with the dress is that it looks like a petite size - the waist is in the wrong place as well as the bust issues.
Oh wait, there IS a praise party tonight!
Do you think sandals are immodest?
What is with some of these comments?
Didn't Jesus wear sandals...does that make them men's clothes?
Amanda, she doesn't have a snake bite cure because she is so "holey" that she doesn't get bit.
If you do use the bleach and ammonia, let me know how that works for ya, ok..
AIADW: I'll make sure I send a message from the great beyond. I'll probably have a prophet relay it to Candy.
I went last week. Everyone stood around, Candy wasn't there but Erik was, and a couple of Meez started quizzing Erik on salvation doctrine.
He ignored them and concentrated on selecting music.
Oh, and an occasional heathen stumbled in, and Erik immediately asked them if they were saved. No small talk, just jump right in!
Everyone else just stood or sat around and occasionally tried to make small talk but it was... awkward. I won't say who I was. I just might have been a heathen.
I was bored; I stopped back in. There were more people this time, but it was no more exciting. Again, I lasted 10 minutes. As MHM said, very awkward.
I even mentioned the "C" word (Catholic *gasp*) and didn't get a rise out of anyone!
When I went last week, I was asked if I was 'born again.' Since I can give an honest answer, I didn't mind answering in the affirmative.
Maybe this week, I'll get saved.
Not giving away my Meez ID, either.
ok, I made a meez and went in for about 5 minutes.. awww.. BORING!!! And why is Candy's hubby the only guy in the room with a bunch of women? Creepy, ha!
Geez.. those people have too much time on their hands.. that is just too crazy!!
Are sandals immodest???? lol I am rolling on that one. If that is the case then my entire town is immodest. We wear them year round since it is so hot here. There is actually such a thing as dressy flip flops that we wear to work. lol
I went but then I could not figure out how to do anything so I stood around like an mute while they danced and said hi to me
I went and couldn't figure anything out. Then again, i created a Meez me in a matter of a few minutes and got to the room - I didn't exactly have or take time to figure it all out.
Her husband was in there dancing and banging hips with some woman while Candy stood in the corner and talked of God.
Shouldn't her husband be dancing with her? Even in the virtual world of computer animation? Isn't all that dancing just air fornication?
Oh well. I went. I saw. I left. How anyone can spend hours doing that is beyond me. And, I am even bored silly tonight due to an incapacitated husband.
I doubt seriously anyone was "saved" last week, after seeing it for the mere minutes I did. I have no idea how it would have been possible.
Alas, it doesn't matter, I guess.
I'm sure Erik is there to make sure that no one accosts Candy in the online realm. With those "feminine curves" who could resist?
By the way, was it one of us who commented: "I was wondering, I have a couple of similar dresses - and they are a little tight in the bosom like yours - is it okay for me to wear them you think?" Because if it was, I'm very jealous that I didn't think to ask first!
What did she say?
Oh, that comment cracks me up. I wonder if she gets it? I don't think she really does because if she did, it wouldn't have made the cut. She sees someone asking her a question and nothing else. The rest of the world sees someone making fun of her.
Again showing how one can see what they want to see instead of what is actually there. It makes me chuckle though.
Okay, woman, what's with the boots? I don't care how feminine you think you look; to the rest of the world, all they're seeing is a woman without a mirror.
Has anyone seen her latest post? She shows off her Sunday dress. No wonder she didn't make it in the modeling world, look at those poses.
Pose 1) Look out the window
Pose 2) Sit and look at a book
Pose 3) Stand and look at a book
Pose 4) Quick, your kids just came in from outside and they've got mud all over their feet. React!
I find it funny that she's not looking at the camera in any of the shots, which leads me to believe either
A. She is trying to keep her face hidden so that online viewers will not be jealous of her supermodel looks
or
B. She has some major ADD issues
I thought she looked like she was about to take off to fight for truth and justice in the last picture.
Comments that remain unanswered, yet crack me up:
From Saturday
Interesting shoe choice.
From Friday:
who took your pictures all week? Was your husband on vacation?
From Thursday:
My question is what should we do with the money we made off of the sale of our old home?
From Monday:
I do wonder why, with everything that you do to the fullest, does your daily shoes stay at a house slipper.
and, of course, the questions about immodest sandals and tight bosoms. But I don't think those were "real" comments from Candy's friends.
I don't do style, and I don't get style. I don't think style is required (unless for a job). But also, I don't see how the boots are necessarily wrong with the light blue dress. I see all kinds of combinations that I don't get. It seems like the boots just need some other accessory to make them look intentional - like fuschia socks instead of white? A pastel plaid flannel shirt or ratty handknit sweater tied over the shoulders? (kind of a grunge, shabby chic look) Something that says it's a deliberate stylistic choice?
I would wear a non-stylistic choice and not care, and if that's her choice I think it's okay. But I do think there are ways she could wear the dress and boots and make it work - am I wrong?
Today's dress looks more normal with the boots to my eyes because it's longer.
Just curious who on here reads a book or the bible sitting like that with your chest stuck out and your wrapping your hand around the chair. The last pic of the four looks like she is ready to do a cheer. The boots don't look good period. Seriously, I am glad the week of dresses is over.
I can hear it now:
"Gimme a K!
Gimme a J!
Gimme a V!
What does that spell?!
All Catholics are going to hell!"
(Okay, so it doesn't totally make sense, but neither do most of her posts.)
Just in case you're wondering, Candy has removed her "sticking out chest/reading the Bible/seated in chair" picture from the Sunday modest dress.
Bless me father for I have sinned. . . You people are too funny! I feel so guilty, the good Catholic kind, when I read these posts and comments, yet I cannot resist. I haven't had this much fun in years. I'm not kidding. I'd like you to consider renaming this blog "A Near Occasion of Sin"
I still wouldn't be able to avoid it though.
Faithful, I feel the same way. Part of me feels guilty for mocking her, but then I remember the "Catholic, are you an anathema?" post and the guilt washes away.
In the same way that I believe some women deserve to be slapped, I firmly believe she deserves to be mocked :)
Some very nice ladies must have sent her a private comment letting her know that the sitting picture was unflattering.
Or she reads here.
I tried. I really really tried to get saved last night. I so wanted her to convince me out of the "great whore." But I just. couldn't. stand. it.
The trite music, the little fake people sitting in fake rapt attention looking at the fake screen where the videos were playing.
As a reflection of her actual world, it seemed realistic. And more's the pity...
I'll take the Real Thing, thankyouverymuch.
A photo of her sitting, reading the Bible and sticking out her chest? By the time I read today's post, it was gone, so I found it, in case anybody else missed it. Sitting and Reading Photo
That is a very strange photo.
Could her poses be any more staged or fake? I'm assuming also that those boots and her too-big slippers are her only shoes? I have nothing against not having lots of shoes, it's just that they are quite ugly. A blue dress, white socks and brown shoes? If one lives in a relatively Southern state, weather alone would dictate not wearing suede boots and socks in July. To each his/her own, I guess, but my feet would retaliate in huge ways if I did that to them.
Again, nothing overly feminine about Sunday's clothes. More like a mish mash of whatever was in the closet.
This is odd
http://copyofcandyland.blogspot.com/2007/12/wow.html
I wonder why they stopped the blog.
I don't want to post a link to this photo for obvious privacy reasons, but does anyone know if the picture of the house with the arrow pointing to it in her photo bucket file is the photo of a blogger's home that Candy posted on her blog as a "warning" (for lack of a better term)? If it is, how very nice and Christian-like of her to keep that pic in her photo archives. I have sent Candy various comments about that incident as I it view as a major demonstration of some serious character flaws on her behalf, but she never seems to want to answer the questions. Gee, I wonder why??
KitKat,
I noticed that too. I don't know if it is or not, as I did not see that particular post. Something tells me it is and I thought it was rather odd that she kept it in her photobucket.
I saw the post before she was hounded in to taking it down and I'd be willing to bet a week's salary that it is the same picture.
Does it surprise anyone that she holds onto such things? Considering what was done in the first place, further steps are not exactly unexpected, or out of character.
You know what they say; actions speak louder than words. Her actions have spoken on more than one occasion.
I wasn't able to see the original post, but I am truly not suprised that she hung onto that picture if it is the one. I have just always wanted to "see it for myself" that a person could be that vindictive and unrepentant, yet still try to hold herself up as a Christian role model. What a farce!! I try to think the best of people. I really do. I always wait until I have absolute proof of someone's nastiness before I really go on the attack. But if that is the photo, I really need to thank Candy for holding onto and proving (to me, at least) what a horrible and nasty person she really is behind that scary pasted on smile. Thanks, Candy! I needed that! Now I don't feel nearly as guilty for reading and agreeing with this blog. Freedom is a wonderful thing.
I can't see it, or I'd tell you. How do you see her photobucket? It's password protected.
milehimama, Go up to synchroswimmer's comment about 7 or so comments up from here and click on the "sitting and reading photo" link. From there, you can click on "see all" and it is a few pages in. I would post a link, but as it is to someone else's home I am not sure if that falls under the same offence as what I am so appalled at Candy for.
She never acknowledged she was wrong or posted on her blog. If you go back to that time period, she's posting about a new bible she got and having long hair. Not a mention (although the post with the pic is still gone; somehow I doubt it is deleted, just unpublished.)
Oh yeah. It is.
Wonder how long we'll be able to access it? Even though she never reads here, I bet it's gone by the end of the day.
And, I forgot how gross Kombucha looks. It smells really bad, too, if none of you have seen it in action.
I just saw it. It is not password protected. It is the two or three pages. I believe she posted 3 pics of it. It will be down soon, so you better hurry. You know Candy reads this blog.
I'm with you, milehimama. I wouldn't be suprised if it is gone by midafternoon. She must erase all evidence of her nastiness, lest she get caught in her own lies. Pathetic.
Back to the Meez party...
What's the difference between sitting in reverence and attention at images of Christ while bagpipes play Amazing Grace, and having a crucifix or picture of an angel on your wall at home?
There seems to be no problem with praying and praising in front of images of Jesus, but Catholics are going straight to hell if we do that in our home???
About the copyofcandyland blog, I would love to talk to the originator of that blog. I am guessing that Candy asked the person to stop copying her posts and got that person to stop. In the comments to the post that was linked here, Candy says that the situation has been resolved. I would love to know more, mostly because I am curious (or call me nosy).
So taday she posts an apologia of why she is dresses only. I must say, I grew up in a dresses only house for a while and STILL KNOW many, many ladies who are against women wearing pants.
And... this is the most superficial and poorly thought out reasoning for dresses only I've ever seen.
Candy quotes Deut. 22:5 (common enough), but CHANGES the meaning through her question: "Are women to wear the same type of clothing as the men OF THE DAY?"
That is not what the Scripture says. The Scripture has no time reference, but merely says that women should not try to look like men (and vice versa). Apparently there were transvestites, even in Moses' time.
Further, she admits that she wears pants sometimes, when she has a good enough excuse, I guess. Sorry, but if you truly believe dresses only is a spiritual principal, then wouldn't you ALWAYS follow that principal, not just when it is convenient?
Maybe that's why she's against skirts and tees? Men do wear shirts, after all. Most men I know wear socks, and boots. Why is she wearing socks and boots?
It is also interesting to note that the passage appears in a section of Deuteronomy that is basically "rules for decent living" (not the Ten Commandments)
Deut. 22:4 tells people that if they see someone's cow fall down don't hide, but go over and help them pick her back up.
And Deut. 22:6 tells people that if they come across a nest with a bird still on it, don't take the momma bird, just the eggs.
I would love to know more, too, about the copyofcandy blog. Just goes to show that we were far from the first to notice the discrepancies (wow, was that a Candy spelling or what?!).
I've never met a man who wore pink fuzzy houseslippers, though, so she's good to go there.
I'm still trying to figure out why anyone would ask her for a camera recommendation. Those pictures are TERRIBLE! They look like they've been taken with an old camera phone.
I think she took them all on the same day. Just changed dresses and posed in different ways.
Theory: She has lost a good number of readers over her latest round of nuttiness. So she is doing this trying to get "Ladies Against Feminism" to link to her and send her some traffic.
MHM, though it's not shown here, your comment was emailed to me, since I subscribe.
I have ALWAYS been annoyed by her "dresses only...except when I decree other wise, b/c surely it would be dangerous to exercise in a dress." You can't say, "I'm dresses only b/c I'm so feminine and modest and Christ-like" and then turn around and change the rules to suit your mood.
And those boots are NOT feminine! UGH!
Anyone else laughing at the thought of her on a motorcycle?
I deleted the comment so I could add something onto the bottom of it. It's reposted now.
I am dresses only and do not exercise in shorts or pants. I exercise in a skirt type culotte where it is a skirt all the way around and shorts underneath. It is definitely not dangerous.
Good point, Cajun--what about tennis players and cheerleaders? I have a hard time believing Candy is doing anything as dangerous as flipping around in the air.
Though after the mysteriously disappearing "run like the wind" post, nothing would surprise me anymore.
Well, come on. Women plowed fields, rode horses, even made bricks for Pharaoh in dresses. IMO, wearing pants for some activities are a matter of convenience.
Now, I can see how not wearing a dress to swim would be a safety issue...those long skirts would drag you under!
Actually MHM I wear the same culottes to swim.
To clarify those culottes are not dangerous at all because they are only right past knee length and very light weight. We wore the same thing to go canoing.
Really!?
We have to have her shining femininity posted TWICE??????
OMG, "shining femininity"! I'm choking on my pop over here.
I wasn't able to see the original post, but I am truly not suprised that she hung onto that picture if it is the one. I have just always wanted to "see it for myself" that a person could be that vindictive and unrepentant, yet still try to hold herself up as a Christian role model.
The original post was a subtle threat to Elena. Candy posted it as helpful advice to her followers. She said that "a friend" had recently bought IP hider software which was very expensive. To prove that it didn't hide anything, she posted these satellite pictures. They are the same pics, because I remember her pointing out the business parking lot.
She didn't identify who the house belonged to, the address, or any other personal information. Only Elena would have known that.
She took the post down without comment. Someone commented on the next thread, asking where Candy's post on internet safety was, because she wanted to send it to some people. Candy replied that her friend wasn't comfortable with the pictures, so she had taken them down and apologized.
Has the 'Candy line' dried up? Everyone seems to be rehashing the same old gripes.
Luz, thanks for the info on the original post. I am truly glad that no names were mentioned but I still feel that her behavior was hideous, contemptible, and very un-Christian. IMHO, it was quite dishonest to try to mask it under "internet security" and then not 'fess up when she got busted. (And isn't that what this blog is all about - her dishonesty?) I find it hard to believe her apology without her disclosing the real motives that drove her to that post. She was just sorry that she got caught.
Names of people were not mentioned, but the name of the street was. The post basically said, "I know who you are and how to find you, and here's a picture of your house on my blog to prove it."
Candy gave the name of the street as well as posting the picture of the house. She also made a snide remark about the parking lot behind.
I read her blog. But I got the idea to show the week in feminine dress to my husband. He said flat out that he did not like ANY of the dresses and he said sarcastically about the boots, "Yes, those just make the outfit." We are an extremely conservative (politically)Christian family. He likes it when I wear skirts but doesn't care as long as I look nice. But if I want to wear shorts or sweats because I don't feel good or I am tired, he doesn't care. I am still a woman in my capris or shorts. I just don't get and neither does my husband how I can be more feminine or Christian by having my hair to my butt (he does like long hair on me but not that long) or wear dresses all the time. If YOU are convicted of that, then fine. I am not. And it isn't because I am not as Christian as some. A person that says or implies that they are more Christian because of what they do with their appearance is a Pharisee. I have tattoos and want my nose pierced. Does that make me less of a Christian? I believe that Jesus is the ONLY way to heaven and I strive to follow Him daily. THAT means I am a Christian.
My husband met a great guy who happened to have a lot of tattoos and piercings. He was not a Christian. Would a person that got all over him for having those things bring him to Christ? Or would a person that maybe had those same things and was a friend show him the love of Christ? Who can bring my beer drinking dad to Christ? A man who looks down upon him for drinking beer and says it is a sin or my husband who drinks a beer or 2 a day (sometimes not even that)?
If you are ramming YOUR convictions down other people's throats that will NOT bring them to Christ.
Well, I for one am diggin' those elf boots! She needn't wonder why people look at her when she's out in public--it's not a mystery, considering her attire. I always wondered about the "dresses only, unless it's a time I think I should wear pants" mentality too. But then, consider whose mentality, or lack thereof, we're talking about. I suppose I'm just not as good at Biblical interpretation as Ms. Brauer. It seems more and more like she's writing her own comments and answering her own questions for the most part...perhaps her fan base has fallen off a bit. Pity.
I stand corrected on the street address. I'm going by memory, like everyone else. But I do remember that while this episode had taken on a life of its own, she didn't actually put up a picture with a big sign saying "This is where Elena lives." Close, though.
You know, when the boots showed up on Saturday, for family fun day, I assumed they were going hiking. That's a dress she doesn't mind getting caught in briars, and boots for hiking.
But when the boots showed up as part of her dressy Sunday attire, then I decided they must be the only shoes that she owns.
I wonder why we weren't treated to another church summary this week. She's keeping me in suspense. Was it 4-square, the other new church, or back to the home church with a heart that she finds boring?
Luz, I thought, too, that perhaps they were going hiking Saturday. But in the Meez party she said she went to a Christian bookstore and a homeschooling store.
I like the 'dresses only except when it makes sense to wear pants' way more than a view that it must be dresses only at all times. The more rigid people's adherence to their understanding of the Bible, the more scary, IMO.
(and maybe Candy would say that her view IS a complete adherence to the Bible. But some of her choices do seem more moderate than some people's choices out there.)
I don't understand a literal view of the Bible - I guess I can imagine the emotional benefit of choosing that, but I don't understand how someone could choose that in the first place. (I think Candy has some arguments, maybe about lack of contradictions in the Bible, not convincing to me.) That kind of belief scares me because once you decide that the Bible's literal words take precedence, it seems like you could throw any kind of reasonable argument or information out the window.
At the Meez party, she said they were planning on going to the 4square in the AM and the IFB for good preaching in the PM.
Although why you need a church with good preaching when you have the Holy Spirit gifts of infallible interpretation is beyond me.
I own more than one pair of shoes, but wear the same pair almost every day. Nothing wrong with that.
And I only own white socks. My bad.
;>D
Many people, from what I understand, feel that the Bible is a linear textbook of history/commandments.
It's really more like a quilt, imparting information, infallibly the Word of God - yet not every single thing is a commandment to be rigidly held.
Sometimes analogies, idioms, or other literary devices are used to make a bigger point.
Of course, being a filthy Catholic, I rely on the great minds of Christianity from the last two millennia to inform my understanding of the Bible, instead of just my own rattling thoughts.
I am going to assume this was directed at me since I just said that I am strictly dresses only. I guess I find it a little insulting that I am so scary to you. Just because I follow a strict guidelines of the bible does not mean that I am out trying to hurt people. I believe that if I am going to be dresses only then I ought not be hypocritical in it. I could say that I find it scary when people do not believe the Bible's literal words take precedence. They are from God so why should someone else's reasonable argument sway me.
Darn you are too fast MHM. That was directed at highdesert not you.
cajunchic, that was not intentionally directed to you, although I see why you could think that. You don't sound scary to me in your posts and I don't know anything about you personally.
Some people's beliefs do scare me, and I don't know if that would include you or not.
That's okay Cajun. I'm not insulted.
I'm not faulting you for being dresses only; I was previously faulting the sad, poorly thought out explanation for being dresses only on the KTH website.
The only "dresses only" women that scare me are the ones who don't shave their legs.
lol If I did not shave my legs my husband would refuse to sleep next to me.
Hey, has she said they don't file taxes or is that just the impression being put out because of Erik's tirade about them?
This little gem made me think of it:
1/18/06
Q With tax season coming up... Do you file your own taxes?.. I'm working on ours and it can be so confusing! -Yvonne
A Either hubby's dad does it, or we do. Last year I did my mom's taxes for her. I've been doing taxes since I was 16. Lately hubby's generous dad has been doing them for us.
Wow, while googling prayzgod's views on taxes, I came across her old "Welfare is unconstitutional" post which still had the comments attached.
Candy's husband says...
We do not accept any tax credits. By not having Social Security numbers for the children we are automatically disqualified from claiming them in order to receive the tax credit.
Which puts to rest the question as to whether her children have SS#'s. Remember how she changed the question to whether or not they have birth certificates?
This strategy, of filing taxes but not accepting any tax credits, actually has the opposite effect - Candy's husband is actually paying MORE in taxes into a flawed system and putting MORE "fuel on the taxpayer slavery fire".
If they actually do file.
(cajunchic, I feel bad about insulting you. I honestly had no negative reaction to your post about swimming in culottes. If I had reacted to it, I would have phrased my post differently and not been so oblivious. For whatever reason, I didn't assume based on your dresses only choice that your views would be scary to me, maybe because of your posts here.
Probably we do disagree a lot about some topics.)
Eh I have pretty thick skin once you said it was not directed at me I blew it off. Dont worry about it at all.
Well, if Candy's boring dress posts aren't interesting enough to keep conversations going, looks like her fruity friend is picking up her (Candy's) slack.
http://fruitofthespiritg.blogspot.com/
I wonder if her "fruitness" is just trying to get attention to her blog by posting all that crap. Candy probably asked her to take some of the heat for a while.
Well, at least Dr. Brewer actually exists and IS an ex-priest.
But, man, there's that table claiming Catholics invented wax candles again! (Why is that a problem again, anyway?) Didn't bother to read through after I saw that.
I won't go into the other problems with the article, since this isn't really the place for it.
I will say that if anyone DOES read it, and wants to ask a Catholic about it, drop me a line.
And I have a better Internet than Candy, so your comment probably won't accidentally get deleted by the server :-?
Although, I must say, Fruity's first pic of dresses are cute!
Not modest according to Candy's standards. though.
Oh praise God. I can still get my daily dose of "Catholics will burn in hell."
Like you could get away, Amanda. Now that we have your blog address, we would hunt you down and force you to convert. With pitchforks.
*shudders* I can live with the pitchforks, but, please, for the love of God, don't bring the garlic!
Regarding "Fruit of the Spirit"
Does anyone else find it ironic/amusing that she condemns 'paganism' and yet her Yahoo avatar (top of the left column) is of someone in Greek attire in front of a Greek temple?
I'm just sayin'......
I noticed the Greek theme, too. Really funny, huh. I think what I am most impressed with is the fact she owns 13 dresses!! WooHoo!!
Well, one certainly shouldn't have more than three (one to wash, one to wear, one for church.) How materialistic! Am I right?
What's with the wolf-familiar in the avatar?
Sorry, I just got sucked into her "blog parodies" post and once again would like to note that SSSlander is SSSpoken. A blog may be libelous, (doubtful, but technically possible) but not SLANDEROUS.
I also notice that FruityG reminds us Scripture commands us not to bear false witness. And I thought she was Candy's friend!
MHM, you're mnemonic devise for slander was much cleaner than the one I devised for my friend...
You see, SLander and SLut both start with SL. And sluts give a lot of ORAL s*x....in the same way that slander is oral.
Surely I get points for creativity.
Well, say mine with a Jim Carrey flair for extra points.
SSSSpoken!
Isn't it ironic...when non Catholics attempt to explain Catholicism. I would laugh, but it's too sad, really, because somehow, people actually go to non Catholics for information about the Catholic faith. That is the worst part of these tirades and rants by Candy and pals, and the people they get their information from like Jack Chick and JIL and Bible Believers...seriously, isn't going to any of them for valid, verifiable information on the Catholic Church sort of like someone going to the President of Iran for a fair, unbiased history of the United States and what its current policies truly are?
I can only hope that people who truly want to know something, anything, about Catholicism will go to reputable sources like, oh, say...a Catholic! Or, the Catholic Church. You know, people who know what they are talking about. The rest? The ones Candy and her buddies claim to have "saved" from the evil Catholics - well, I doubt they exist so I can't really say much about people I do not believe to be real.
I hope and pray I never run into ms. fruity and her husband at a rally; unfortunately, we share a state and, apparently, a hobby. I can only hope that's the last of what we may have in common and I never run into her anywhere, at any event, under any circumstance. That thought gives me the willies. Almost as bad as they'd be if I lived anywhere near Candy and had even the slightest possibility of ever seeing her.
Now I need a shower. I do not feel clean. I should not have discussed that.
Oh, but Fruity WAS a Catholic, and that's why she knows all about it.
She hadn't been to church in years, but then wanted to start going again with her girls. Somehow, she got saved by Candy, and she is the one that Candy sometimes refers to how a whole family came out of Catholicism thanks to her.
If you read through the early VTC archives, you can see Fruitys very unpolite comments about Candy there, under a previous screen name. I forget what it is, but she always uses the wolf as her avatar, so she's easy to spot.
Wait, I found one. She is posting as Lady of rfh.
I enjoyed Candys blog a lot until she started bashing Catholics. That's how I found Elenas blog. MDC is fabulous! I enjoy this blog as well. The Catholic bashing really bothered me. You know why? Cuz my roots are RC. I have had other people related to me through marriage (not hubby)complain about the RCC as well. That bothered me too!
What makes Candy an authority on the Bible? On Christianity? Cuz she picks up a book & reads it, likes it, & then tells everyone on her blog it is a reliable source of information? Please! She has a lot of falsehoods on the RCC & other religions listed in her posts. Talk about the blind leading the blind.
I don't really care one way or another about what any of the Candy followers think of me. I pride myself in being open minded not close minded. I think many could take some cues from that. I have friends that are Earth Based, Catholic, Christian, & Spiritual. Do I toss them on their * to the curb because of it? No. I don't say they are bad people cuz we differ in beliefs. I know that even though we are of different beliefs that they are still worthy of my respect & friendship. I don't try to recruit them every chance I get. I don't tell them that they are going to burn in hell cuz they aren't saved or how they aren't praying to the one true God...blah blah blah Do you know why? Cuz I myself am eclectic. Spiritual. I am open to learning about more Christianity & staying in touch with my RC beliefs. People can call me what they want. They can't hurt me.
What Candy & her followers do is turn people off of Christianity.
Yeah, I knew ms. Fruity had a history with all this, and that at one time she was Catholic, or claimed to be. The issues at VTC clued me into most of that. But, I did not know she and her family were the ones Candy refers to when she talks about the saved famly. Oi. How weak can you be (and I mean that seriously) to be led from one belief system to another through a personal blog on the Internet? Especially one you seemed to vehemently disagree with at one time.
Me thinks ms. fruity isn't all that sure of herself and never has been, therefore she must go on the offensive towards everyone and everything she has even the slightest disagreement with. It's so much easier to attack than it is to defend.
At least I know why she has always seemed like the Candy Clone. Because she is! I wonder what her saved by Candy family thinks of all of that? I can promise you that if I decided to entirely turn my belief system on its ear based on someones blog on the Internet, my husband wouldn't go along with me willingly. He'd think I'd lost my mind, among other things.
OMG, did you all read today's comments. How about this:
"Candy,
You are a true inspiration to us all. I look to you for guidance when I experience self doubt."
Where can I vomit?
Seriously, if you're looking to someone on the internet for guidance, I think you have some life-issues you need to address.
Post a Comment