Churchhoney

Quiverfull is not an official group, with a leader or a membership or even a set of principles, beyond certain basics. Fundie Christians with 19 natural children are Quiverfull because being a fundie Christian who believes that the right thing to do is to have 19 biological children is the definition of Quiverfull. (ETA: Duggars' quiverfullness, in particular, stems from Gothard/ATI) What I'm saying viewers pick up from the show is not some name --which is in fact essentially meaningless -- but the anything-but-meaningless idea that being a fundie Christian who is "open to as many children as God wants to give us" and who carefully studies your fertility chart to ensure that God wants to give you lots is a great, rewarding, wonderful thing to be and in fact what God recommends for Christians. .... It's the belief and the principle that they're selling, not the name of it. And in selling that belief and principle, they are, indeed, selling their cultish religious beliefs. This is an agree to disagree situation. We aren't going to convince each other, so we might as well not worry about it!

I would argue that it was. But that it was particularly insidious because it never mentioned any of those things by name. (or hardly ever -- Big Sandy and ATI came up a few times by name, especially in the early years, I think). Nevertheless, they repeatedly --nay, constantly -- spoke of, showed off, described, recommended, harped on and bragged about their cult beliefs and the brilliant results for them and for the world that those cult beliefs produced (hell, they still do it). And they hardly ever showed or discussed anything that was not an integral part of their ideologies. What did Jim Bob say to everyone he met in a foreign country? I have 19 kids! And it's because I'm a Christian. Bingo. That's Quiverfull. He just never named it. Meanwhile, in addition to glossing over the names of their connections and ideologies, they also glossed over anything that they or the network thought might look bad -- such as the facts that education is despised and neglected in their home and cult, that the supposedly cherished women are actually treated as doormats and clown cars; that the supposedly debt-free life their way of thinking recommends and brags about has in fact always been subsidized by neighbors' "love offerings" and tv cash; that while they write supposedly glowing birthday messages about how each of their children is speshul cuz he/she wubs Jeezus and has a servants' heart, they in fact know and care nothing about their children individually and, in fact, that in every way possible they discourage those kids from developing as individuals. So, yeah, they claim that this is not about any of their beliefs. But, in truth, they are wildly committed to their ideologies and the show never ever stopped preaching the goodness of those ideologies and completely hiding their many negative sides. And it added to the deception by never using names such as Gothard, because the names might tip people off to the fact that maybe there are downsides after all. And guess what? Those are the tactics often used to entice people into admiring and following horrible ideologies of all kinds. So, yep, I totally 10,000 percent disagree with the proposition that the show was not about their cult beliefs!

We'll have to enroll in RealityTV Unanimous.

Yeah, I think that could have been the four-year time frame. There has been a pretty continual, if gradual, improvement in U.S. education attainment rates over the past several decades, though, I think. Except in the Duggar family, of course.

Binjermin had better get serious. The competition's doing better these days: "The 2013 6-year graduation rate for first-time, full-time undergraduate students who began their pursuit of a bachelor's degree at a 4-year degree-granting institution in fall 2007 was 59 percent. That is, 59 percent of first-time, full-time students who began seeking a bachelor's degree at a 4-year institution in fall 2007 completed the degree at that institution by 2013. Among first-time, full-time undergraduate students who began seeking a bachelor's degree at a 4-year degree- granting institution in fall 2007, the 6-year graduation rate was 58 percent at public institutions, 65 percent at private nonprofit institutions, and 32 percent at private for-profit institutions." So, since we know that some people do go back and finish after the six-year window and some people begin part-time and so on, we've now got a 60-plus percent completion rate, for people who start at a four-year school at any rate (which I guess signals your intention to get a bachelor's degree -- if you start at a two-year school, you might be intending an associates' degree as your terminal degree. ... not if it's in poli sci, though!) https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

That sounds like a good assessment to me. I essentially did this, although I got past it fairly young. Not a lot of thoughtful kids are going to immediately assume they're right -- and capable of standing alone -- and the family and culture they're in are entirely wrong. Only the more impulsive and heedless can do that really easily, I think. Plus, in a situation like this, the controlling parties do their best to instill fears of all kinds, obviously. So if you take a kid who's already a fairly cautious or nervous type and pump her full of extra fears, you've got pretty good insurance against her bolting. Awful way to live indeed.

Not so sure about that. I don't think Gothard wrote any poems, did he?

To be fair, she didn't tell us what kind of "morals and standards" she has. The word "low" may have been implied.

At heart, JB and M are grifters, I think. And the idea of learning a trade or a skill or a profession and then building something on that? Never crosses a grifter's mind. I'm sure some of the kids aren't grifters by nature. But in this family they're out of luck.

Oh, geez. This poor guy. I can see JB wanting to do this -- hand off all the responsibilities he irresponsibly insisted on creating to somebody else. And I'd like a nice husband for Jana, too. But I still hope that this hypothetical guy runs like crazy as soon as he realizes that his decency could be taken advantage of and he could end up being the lifeline for Boob's horde of uneducated, barely employable consumers. Surely he could find a nice girl without the cargo ship of family baggage that Jana might drag with her, courtesy of Boob. (sorry, Jana -- although I'd applaud if you would flee with him)

Yeah, she does look darned cute in the picture. However, given that, to me, perhaps the most obvious Duggar-daughter characteristic is that they behave pretty much as Stepford wives toward their incredibly stupid and mega-control-freaky father, I have a feeling that that "certain kind of guy" you mention would strike me as awfully creepy (unless he's just too entranced by Jana to notice her horrible pops eternally lurking just over her shoulder, I suppose -- I can sort of see that happening). ; - ) ETA: Unfortunately, I fear that the guy who was so entranced by Jana that he overlooked lurking Lego-head might well regret his choice when he realized how much time he, his wife and kids would spend bored to tears on the TTH waiting-room couches over the next several decades.

And when your parents sell your life to a cable channel before you're old enough to have a chance in hell of figuring out how stupid and cruel that is. Jessa grew up being told that it was not only normal, but godly and the source of all good things in life.

Could be. On the other hand, it might also be that guys who try to go through Jim Bob to get to a very very very sheltered girl (and doormat) that they've seen on television are actually creeps in the more, uh, traditional sense. ... Because how likely is it, really, that a secular guy with a high school diploma or college degree and a real-world job, who listens to music and enjoys a beer with friends on Friday night, would actually call Lego-headed idiot control freak Jim Bob wanting to marry one of his super-sheltered, old-lady-dressing, unemployed, uneducated, boring, non-dancing, literally untouchable daughters? Seems pretty unlikely to me. I'm betting the ones that Jana characterizes as creeps would probably look pretty creepy to us real-world types as well.

"Proven record of being easily manipulated by management" "Long experience at stating the party line and only the party line" "No task too menial or demeaning" "Will work for food"

"I am the best mother ever and it'll be a crying shame if I don't get a mother of the millennium award. (Fill in the blank with number) precious blessings, and I delivered every one of them!" Or "Damn that Jim Bob Duggar forcing me to have those umpteen horrible kids. I'll show him. I will never ever do a lick of work around that stupid steel house ever again." Or both.

Probably the same reason that people need to take accountability partners to the Piggly Wiggly? They seem to be fixated on the idea that nobody can be trusted, no matter what, so to be sure sure sure sure sure that no one will sin, you have to hedge everybody about with all sorts of formal cumbersome legal-and-otherwise barbed wire. And also so that they can say they're better than everybody else because they have this super-speshul bulletproof form of marriage. Because they are super speshul and their marriages are bulletproof. (But they also can't be trusted.) They really make me tired.

Great idea. Jessa's using real babies, though.

Definitely. I was just being unclear. I didn't mean it was to no avail in keeping Jessa on leash. I meant that Boob's attempts to keep Jessa on leash, as well as all other stuff he's doing at the moment, are to no avail in winning the Duggs back their tv show -- because with Jessa on leash or off, and Josh in rehab or not, Anna standing by her man or not, they're not getting a tv show again. So flail on in your search for total control, Boob. From now on, you're just a control freak without media cash or fame. You won't enjoy that, Boob. But I will.

The great thing about this is -- Guess what, Boob? It's all to no avail!

I knew a guy from college who I'd say was like this. Grumpy old man at age 20, and very outspoken and activist about his grumpiness. As far as I know, he remained a grumpy old man henceforward. He certainly did for a number of years afterward, because we continued to run in the same circles. And during his 20s, early 30s, at least, he didn't actually change his targets much. Don't know whether that's still true -- haven't heard much about him in the past few years. He was actually quite successful in life the last I knew of him although, like Jessa, he never struck me as being very smart. (he was educated, though) One person does not evidence make, of course. But I agree that it seems quite unusual. And the one case I know of certainly suggests that it's possible to remain this way for a long long time. It upsets me that Jessa's probably going to be like this when she's a brand-new mom. I'm leery of a rage-filled mom who seems very set in her ways. Even if she doesn't take any rage out on her kid, she'll be an odd model and not a particularly healthy one for a child, I think. But maybe she won't be like my old college acquaintance. I would think that lightening up is possible, too, with more maturity. Don't know what would be likely to make her do it, though, given where the Duggar family is at present.

Interesting Libby Anne piece on the many faces of Quiverfull. She says that not everybody who is in line with the Quiverfull idea rejects birth control entirely. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2015/09/a-quiverfull-of-definitions.html

Thanks. That's what I understood, too. And that's certainly where the law leaves it. But then we have that TMZ thing up above, which quotes TLC sources as saying that all their reality-show kids get the money put into their own bank accounts. ... I mean, I can see this happening after the Kate Plus Eight mess -- that TLC might have instituted something like this on their own just to keep from further similar problems. But I never heard before that they did. And if they did do it, what the Roloff kid said couldn't be right unless the TLC policy were riddled with loopholes in favor of parental control of the money (which wouldn't be surprising)...or didn't grandfather in kids who were already on a show when the policy took effect (also possible). ....Anyway, I guess it remains a mystery. Too bad, since it's one of the most interesting questions about the fortunes of the Duggar kids.

Oh, yeah. Normal, quiet tone of voice. Calm always. One of the creepiest things about it is to do all this beating while never ever raising your voice or showing emotion of any kind. .... So she's right in line with it. I'm sure she got it there.

So that puts Jim Bob's respect for the personhood of children and teenagers right where it puts his respect for the personhood of women -- at zero. Predictable, I suppose. What the hell did he do on that show that was different from what he ordinarily did? Oh, that's right. After hours of scriptwriting, reshooting and editing by the crew, he sounded almost like a sentient being.

I'm confused, though. If he had money being deposited in his own bank account for nine years, how could he be getting screwed out of it now? I'm missing something here. ....