ladle

I keep thinking, is there really no crime Jim Bob and Michelle can be charged with, here? They allowed a predator to live in the same house as their daughters and did not seem to take any precautions (other than prayer?), did not even put a lock on their daughters' door, and from what I am reading, the offenses then occurred again and again over a span of time. Does that not rise to the level of child endangerment, at the very least? Or has the statute of limitations passed for that as well?

Probably not, since everything in that statement was spelled correctly. :)

My mind keeps going back to that episode in which Ben and Jessa (and Jinger?) go to visit Josh in D.C., and Josh is weirdly competitive with Ben at the gym, and he's all "What are your intentions with my sister?" (paraphrasing) At the time I just took it as another hackneyed "big bro looking out for his younger sister" plotline, but in light of the fact that he's possibly her molester?? NAUSEATING.

I'm not ready to put that all on Bethenny. Maybe she did mention him, but he did not want to be on camera, and he didn't fit with the storyline Bravo was going for, so they edited it out? On a related point, I also think it's weird how little these women talk about their kids -- not that having kids means that they can't have other interests, and I get that they wouldn't want to exclude Carole, but I have a young child and it comes up organically in conversation all the time. Usually other people bring it up, asking how she is. Plus a few of them have young children, so you'd think it could be a point of bonding... But who knows? Maybe Bethenny and Kristin gabbed about diaper genies 'til the cows came home, but that never made it to air because that's, like, a Cindy Barshop level of dull.

You know that episode of "Frasier" where they have a focus group to evaluate Frasier's radio show, and one participant, played by Tony Shalhoub, can only contribute, "I just don't like him." No elaboration, no explanation. "I just don't like him." That's sort of how I feel about Heather. On paper, in principle, I feel like I should like her. But I just don't like her. And I can't really put my finger on why, except maybe it goes back to the mud run when she told Kristin she'd have her back, and then literally left her behind in the dust. That seems like quintessential Heather. I just don't like her.

I wonder if Dorinda's daughter Hannah is the real-life inspiration for the character Hannah on "Girls." I see some parallels... Maybe this could be the Countess's next song!

I think DC only had one season, didn't it? Ah, DC. The forgotten franchise. Someone needs to do a remake of the song "Forever Young" with these lyrics.

You could be right, but I think also the show in general has gotten more scripted and forced. I recognize that it was always forced to a degree, but it seemed more organic when Beth was last on. Now I see her and feel like she's trying very hard to be "Bethenny the Character (!!*jazz hands*!!)".

There are just too damn many of them.

I wonder if it's actually true that Kyle is in early menopause, and she told Brandi that while they were "friends" and now Brandi's throwing it back in her face. That would be 100% consistent with Brandi's personality. Even people in Ohio should be able to see that.

Admittedly, my entire knowledge of the uniform code of military justice is confined to viewings of "A Few Good Men," but how can Ian be charged with going AWOL if he enlisted under a fake identity and was too young to enlist at the time? (I mean, I'm sure using the false identity is *some* crime, but if you're too young to enlist, how can you be AWOL?) And wouldn't his (now well-documented) bipolar disorder be a good defense here? Also, how did they know his name was Ian? Did Sammi tell them? This whole season, whenever Lip was dealing with getting his grant money, I thought his name was going to ping as a military deserter ... but, with the federal government, I guess it's plausible the left hand doesn't know what the right is doing.

It irritates me the way Taffer always goes after bar owners for not treating their employees with respect, but then he refers to female employees as "girls."

This is one of my absolute favorite scenes from the show for that reason. Sam never hesitated, she immediately defended Charlotte and I loved it. See, I read this scene differently. I thought Samantha was just waiting for an excuse to unload on Lainey, and Charlotte gave it to her. I do agree that Sam typically had the other women's backs, though (and I also loved that line!). Unfortunately, I can relate to this. That was one plot arc on the show that always rang true, to me. I wasn't as stupid about it as Carrie (I hope...) and I didn't end up with the guy, but I and (I think?) many others can relate to the masochistic pull of an on-again/off-again relationship with a person you just can't seem to shake. I hate that everything was magically "fixed" and they ended up together -- but I did see myself in that relationship at times. Also, I LOAAAATHED Berger but I do have to say, I thought that was one of the most realistic relationships in the run of the series. His professional insecurity, the devolution of their relationship -- heck, even the post-it note -- it all rang very, very true to me. I used to live in New York, and I miss it. And I miss this show, you guys!

Watching that scene, I felt a weird emotion I'd never felt before. I felt legitimately sorry for Meri. This is fantastic prose.

Why not see if Robin's ex will terminate his parental rights (which would seem to be the biggest hurdle here) first, and then if you're able to get him to do that, go through with the divorce/remarriage? This is a drastic step to take for potentially no payoff. I mean, I assume this is all bs anyway, but even their bs story makes no sense. Just make your bullshit logically consistent, Browns - that's all I ask! Also, I can't help it: I love Jenelle. "I'm not going to comment on this." HA!

They don't make the caramels. They buy them and pass them off as homemade. BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST SO WACKY!!!

Speaking of which, the Browns totally need to stop pissing on our legs and telling us it's raining.

An entire Meri-focused episode and not a single mention of the wetbar? What nonsense is this?!

Wait, doesn't that mean I should be sharing my chocolate with three other people? I'm so confused!

Who was that random (non-Caucasian?) child in the living room with the Browns at the beginning of the episode? Is it just me or are the show-runners allowing outsiders to be more critical of the Browns this season? In the past, whenever it looked like folks were about to tear into the Browns' lifestyle, it was typically a bait and switch .... Now we have people actively questioning them on difficult issues. Minor point, but I think it's telling of the power dynamics in these relationships: Kody mentioned that he "gathered Garrison, Gabriel, and Janelle," NOT "Janelle and I gathered Gabriel and Garrison," to discuss the fight. As a social scientist, I just want to say that's not accurate. The purpose of ethnography/participant observation is to integrate yourself within a community. Sometimes researchers are passive fly-on-the-wall observers but other times they choose to be more active participants, and that's fine too from a methodological standpoint. I could give you numerous examples of legitimate studies in which the researchers actively participated in the communities being studied. In fact, I once had a reviewer be critical of my work because he felt I had erred *too* much on the passive side in my approach. That said, there were multiple issues with what these "anthropologists" were doing, and I do wish someone at some point would have clarified that the purpose of ethnography is NOT to determine whether you, personally, "agree" with a lifestyle or about determining whether it's "good or bad." I mean, shit, that's one of the first things I tell my freshmen in our methods course. Social science is not a normative project. Meanwhile, my husband and I are going on a Valentine's date tonight. Maybe I'll feed him off my fork! Wouldn't that be zany?? What would the waiter think!? It'll be the craziest prank ever!

I sometimes wonder why, to keep things "fair," Kody doesn't just divorce one of his four wives and legally remarry another one, in sequence, every four years or something. I think I remember hearing that's what Tom Green did. I guess maybe that would get expensive with all of the divorces (like this family cares about what makes financial sense?) but it seems wildly unfair to me that one wife should always have all of the legal rights. I agree with this assessment as well. And didn't the fortune teller in that one episode even say something similar to Robyn, about how Robyn knows how to always land on her feet? I, too, don't think Robyn is evil or anything, but I do think she looks out for #1. And: Robyn may be a moron, but she's no moron, you know? As others have mentioned, assuming Jessop terminated his parental rights, Kody would not need to marry Robyn in order to adopt her kids. Maybe, as someone pointed out upthread, this has something to do with Mariah getting financial aid?

How am I just learning about this?! Stupid job, kid, and husband getting in the way of my reality TV enjoyment... Admittedly I know nothing about bankruptcy that I haven't gleaned from following Real Housewives of New Jersey, but I'm still confused about how this would be a bankruptcy move. Couldn't Kody and Robyn still have filed for bankruptcy separately?

I think Robyn said one thing this entire episode, and I was still like, "Shut UP, Robyn!" Seriously, you're going to sagely weigh in on Aspyn and Mykelti's childhood dynamics, like you're OG? Take a freaking seat. I so wish I had the time and ability to register the domain www.shutuprobyn.com. It would feature some of the highlights from Robyn's talking heads.

Call me an ivory tower elitist, but I'm not sure I'd accept addictions counseling from someone who pronounces the plural of "text" as "textses". Repeatedly.

This link gives me an error.