Rhondinella

Let's try to keep this thread as a place to post media mentions of the subject and discussions about things like TLC and what they knew and how they're going to proceed with the show. To discuss the actual events that went down in detail, please go to the Josh and Anna thread. I've moved a bunch of posts to that thread. Just makes sense to consolidate it in one place since it's basically the same conversation. Thanks.

Because several very brave people have mentioned their own experiences with sexual abuse as part of this discussion, and as I'm sure there are many other survivors who have not felt comfortable sharing in a public forum (which is perfectly understandable), I thought it would be a good time to post this again. The RAINN (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network) website can be found here and has lots of resources for people who have been or are currently victims of sexual abuse of any kind. If you are one of those, please seek help. Talking to a counselor about what happened to me as a child more than 30 years after the fact was one of the hardest things I've ever done, but also one of the best. It truly can make things better. Remember: It's not your fault. It's not your shame. Also please PM me if there's anything I can do to help. Or even if you just want to talk.

I now CANNOT LIVE until I see Oliver's scathing takedown of this situation. Please, please, please TV gods!!

I don't know how many of you read Blind Gossip regularly like I do (shut up), but I just saw that their latest post is obviously about this situation and specifically about the fact that (they claim) the network was informed of the issue months ago and did nothing. http://blindgossip.com/?p=71479 However it seems to indicate that the Oprah Show (assuming that is Show #2 that is referred to here) found out about the accusations a few MONTHS ago and turned them over to the network. I thought the evidence was that Harpo knew about it in 2006---YEARS ago, not MONTHS. So, that seems interesting. Wonder if something new did happen recently that brought this all to the forefront again. Unless Show #2 is referring to another show that I don't know about. Were there other shows that the Duggars were trying to get on recently and were turned down for? Yeah, you should go to the SW boards to discuss this at length, but the short version is that they have been investigated for bigamy, and a pending prosecution was what prompted their move from Salt Lake to Vegas a few years ago.

Let's not get into a discussion of Obamacare or American health care in general in here please. It's everything the mods can do today to keep up with this forum as it is. Thanks.

Alright, the consensus is that this conversation can continue, but I can't stop myself from saying I think it's pretty icky. (That's personal opinion, not official mod policy).

Have been told this is fine. Link away.

Hey, for the moment could we cease and desist with the attempts to determine exactly what names were redacted? I want to get some guidance from on high about this before continuing (or not). I'll get back to you. Just sit tight on that subject for the moment. Thanks.

I think it's OK, but let me check with my fellow mods and get back to you.

As I said a few pages ago, I myself am an adult survivor of sexual abuse as a child, so I completely resonate with what you're saying about the emotional consequences that never really leave you, as well as the negative ways this treatment ends up affecting and changing (literally) your brain. However, I do have to stand up and say that I don't think we should say that something like this "ruins your life." I know I've had a very full and happy life in the years after my abuse, especially once I got out of the house and got married to a wonderful, understanding and supportive man (who I told about the abuse very early in our relationship). Were there consequences to what happened to me that I still sometimes struggle with? Yes, of course. But it didn't ruin my life. I wouldn't let it. If it had, my abuser would win. I sometimes worry that in our culture in our perfectly understandable and laudable attempt to vehemently express how damaging sexual abuse can be that we end up painting every victim as forever emotionally crippled. Are some? Yes. Does every victim reap some negative consequences as a result? Absolutely. But I wish we would focus more on the fact that most of these brave women manage to go on with their lives and overcome these obstacles to become successful, happy people with fulfilling and productive lives. They are not forever defined by what happened to them. In a misguided attempt to defend and support them I fear we end up perpetually victimizing them. I'm hoping these girls will know happy lives outside of that house and away from those awful people who raised them, although they are in a very different situation and environment than I was, and don't have as many options in terms of getting away from it. I think if anything "ruins" their lives it will more likely be because of the consequences of the way they were raised rather than the abuse itself. (Note: Not critiquing you or anything you said, smalltownmom . And I'm so sorry to hear that it took so long for you to feel able to talk to anyone about it. I completely understand that. It was the hardest thing I've ever done. But just remember, as my counselor said to me, it's not YOUR shame.)

Friday, which, as we all learned from The West Wing, is "Take Out the Trash Day." And the Friday before a 3-day weekend is the equivalent to what we in my neighborhood call "Big Trash Day" when they come and take any large junk items, lawn detritus, etc. you need to get rid of. I don't want to go into great detail, but as someone who was abused by a close family member (fondling, not rape--not that the distinction necessarily ameliorated the emotional consequences) from a much earlier age than these girls, let me say that girls in this kind of situation usually don't have any other choice. I mean, I had to continually interact with my abuser for many, many years afterwards, because it was a family member who I couldn't avoid completely (I didn't tell my mother, or anyone, until I was in college). So, yes, I was alone with him many times after the events. What choice did I have? As my counselor has said to me, any option available to me was a bad one. Report a close family member to the police and have to deal with the traumatic public, practical and emotional fallout? Would that be any better? I guess in the sense of possibly not being molested any more, but it's not an alternative anyone would look forward to. So I guess I'm saying I completely understand that these girls really had no choice but to find a way to live with their abuser for years after the fact. Many abused women do. You cope. You have to. You use certain mechanisms that get you through, but permanently alter your psyche. Now as to JB and Michelle's part in all this . . . . THEY ARE OFFICIALLY THE WORST PEOPLE EVER AND DEAD TO ME.

I don't know if this is where you read it, but RS had that info in one of his recent columns.

I've moved the discussion of Britt's behavior last season to the Past Season thread. It isn't relevant here.

You're welcome. I realize in re-reading that I should probably go through and edit some mistakes but . . . eh, it's summer. Gotta turn the academic side of me off occasionally :-)

This convo isn't strict about religion, but I can't figure out another place for it to go so I'll let it stand for now, as long as it continues focusing on the idea of breaking away from a religious cult or strong religious upbringing. Let's not get into the details of Scientology since it's not directly relevant.

Yes, to add to that . . . there is a huge difference between "Bible Schools" and Christian universities. A short taxonomy of Christian institutions of higher learning (the field I have spent my career in). At the top you have a regionally accredited Christian college or university, of which there are thousands in the country (I have worked at several) are usually very legitimate educational/academic institutions. You can earn degrees in a variety of fields. The thing that differentiates a "college" from a "university" is that universities have to offer at least one graduate degree (master's degree or above). Colleges only offer undergraduate degrees. These Christian colleges and universities have to meet the same accrediting criteria as state and regional schools do. In fact, in many places Christian colleges are known for giving better educations in certain fields than state or public universities. The program in Biological Sciences/Pre-Med at the former Christian institution I worked for is considered the best in the state with a 100% acceptance rate to med schools, and those grads are also in high demand from state universities for grad programs. Of course, not all Christian schools are necessarily this high quality, but there are many that are. They may not have the facilities that state universities do, but they often make up for that in allowing for a much smaller faculty/student ratio which allows for more one-on-one mentoring. Comparatively, Bible Colleges award 2 and 4-year college degrees (AA, BA, BS, etc) but usually only in fields related to theology, ministry and Bible. You couldn't go there to do, say, a degree in Accounting. Many are accredited, but some are not. Then you have the much more nebulous category of "Bible School", for which there doesn't seem to be a formal definition or any guidelines about who can and can't use that title. These are usually non-degree granting institutions where you only earn a "certificate" or "diploma" or some other kind of qualification to go into ministry in a particular group or denomination. There is often little if any regulation of such institutions, or if there is it is regulation from within the group or denomination in charge, not outside objective critics (like you get in the regional accreditation process). Generally if the school is unaccredited and only offers certificates, diplomas or qualifications, not actual degrees, then I wouldn't take the training there very seriously in terms of academics. It can be confusing because people not familiar with the system sometimes use the terms interchangeably, as in calling any school that is associated with Christianity a "Bible college" when in reality that is a specific kind of institution, and because there isn't a lot of clarity about what constitutes a "Bible School." Edited to add, because no one asked: There are also Seminaries, which people sometimes confuse the schools above. Seminaries are graduate schools--for students who have already completed a bachelor's degree--and they offer master's and doctorate degrees in fields related to theology and ministry. In some denominations a Seminary degree is required to become an ordained minister (more common in the "high church" traditions than in the more congregational/evangelical ones).

One of the African-American guys (sorry, I don't remember any of their names--but I don't remember most of the white guys' names either) from some angles is a pretty close substitute for LL Cool J. RS pointed this out but I didn't really see it until tonight.

A Ph.D. cannot be granted honorarily. There are honorary doctorates, but they are called something else. The most common are Doctor of Letters (D.Litt.), Doctor of Humane Letters (D.H.L.), and Doctor of Divinity (D.D.) I'm sure there are others but these are the ones I encounter the most. The D.D. is the most common doctorate received honorarily by those in Christian ministry. Many famous pastors of large churches, or leaders of Christian organizations who call themselves "Dr" are actually D.D.s. That's not necessarily a bad thing: as stated above an honorary doctorate can sometimes be very well-warranted when granted in recognition of a lifetime of significant achievement and experience. The problem is when those with honorary doctorates take it (and themselves) too seriously and consider themselves academically on the same level with Ph.D when (generally speaking, of course) they are not. That's assuming this guy actually HAS a Ph.D. I was going based on what I read elsewhere. But it's certainly not impossible to go around saying you have a Ph.D when you don't.

Heh. Yeah, Reality Steve had some fun with this scenario in his episode spoiler post. I admit that it would be very satisfying to see him dumped on national TV annually. If it hadn't come out organically you can BET that one of Fleiss' minions would have whispered it into some guy's ear. No way they were going to let that go quietly. Plus: smex. Heh.

C'mon guys. I'm tired, so let's play nice please. I've hidden some "sour grapes" posts by people who aren't happy with the choice and therefore feel it necessary to question and/or bash those who support Kaitlyn. I've also edited other posts which quoted/responded to these. Stop it. Some of you have been around here a long time and know better. I will be handing out suspensions if it happens again.

For some reason I have a feeling people will be wanting to discuss that preview. I'm a mind reader. So, just a reminder that on this forum it is OK to talk (briefly) about previews for the next episode in the current episode thread. But don't go on at length. If you want to discuss upcoming events (or surprise returnees) more deeply, please go to the spoiler thread. Thanks.

So, we're all going to call Ben H "Peter Brady" all season, right? Helps cut down on the name confusion.

I'm only now getting to watch last night's episode, and OMG I hate both these women. If you'd asked me at the end of last season which I'd want to be Bachelorette I would have said Kaitlyn because, even though her duck lips grated on me from the beginning, Britt bugged the hell out of me with her emotional neediness. But so far in this ep? I honestly think I'd enjoy watching Britt more than Kaitlyn, in a death is not an option kinda way. At least Britt would be entertaining I think. Not sure Kaitlyn would. Having said that, I wouldn't say I've "liked" any of the Bachelorettes in the past either (maybe Jillian), but I don't remember actively disliking any. I really, really dislike both of these.

I assume that he crossed the line with not only the ass-slap, but more importantly the comment about sexually assaulting someone. Even if it was in jest (which . . . no), the producers might have realized he was a law-suit waiting to happen. is my new band name.

Louisiana Baptist University, where Gothard got his "Ph.D." (from wikipedia): So, yeah, his Ph.D. means almost nothing to me. He may have practical experience in ministry, but a Ph.D is an ACADEMIC degree, not a practical one (that would be the Doctor of Ministry--D.Min), and it seems unlikely to me that one could earn a high-quality academic degree from such an institution. I've spent my career as a professor at Christian universities, but all of them were accredited by the same organizations that accredit state and regional public institutions and have to live up to the same standards. This is not one of those schools.