Jinger and Jeremy Vuolo

[AstridM]

1 hour ago, andromeda331 said:

I don't either. I can't see her ever saying no Jeremy on anything. 

Same. Her health and eating issues might also be making it difficult to conceive again. 

[Snow Fairy]

To me, her answer goes a bit towards "having problem conceiving another one". 

Like she is saying they would like 3, but remain happy even with 2 - because 3 isn't happening as planned

[Meow Mix]

From reading Jill's book, it seems as though JB had a lot of problems with people who had "only" two kids.  He even disparagingly referred to Cross Church as a "two kid church".  I think Jill was really bothered by the fact she may not have been able to have any more after Sam.  So, Jinger may feel the same way - being fine with two, but having a nagging feeling that she is letting God down by not having any more.

[Salacious Kitty]

I think Jinger has deconstructed enough from IBLP think to realize she isn't letting God down if she "only" has 2. 

[andromeda331]

5 hours ago, Salacious Kitty said:

I think Jinger has deconstructed enough from IBLP think to realize she isn't letting God down if she "only" has 2. 

I hope so.

[GeeGolly]

I think all the sisters' husbands leave the number of kids up to the wives. Well maybe not Austin. I do believe Jeremy influenced when they had their first child and Derick wanted to wait until he finished school before having more, but other than that, IMO, its the wives decisions. 

As for the wives of the Duggar brothers, I'm not sure this is true.

[Mod-Tigerkatze]

Hi everyone,

I wanted to drop you a note acknowledging the respectful way in which you've discussed Jinger's answer on Instagram regarding having more children as well as how much her faith/husband might influence her decisions.
There's just one thing I have to bring up: While the manner in which you addressed the issue wasn't inconsiderate, please remember that pregnancy related issues can be very hard if not traumatic on women and speculation on infertility can be triggering regardless of how respectful the discussion is. 

Overall though, it’s a constructive conversation about sensitive subjects.

Thank you.

[dargosmydaddy]

On 4/26/2024 at 6:44 PM, Mod-Tigerkatze said:

While the manner in which you addressed the issue wasn't inconsiderate, please remember that pregnancy related issues can be very hard if not traumatic on women and speculation on infertility can be triggering regardless of how respectful the discussion is. 

Question-- are we meant to avoid any respectful discussion of potentially triggering topics? Or just pregnancy-related issues? Or just topics that a moderator posts a directive about? Or are we welcome to continue respectfully discussing potentially triggering topics, but only if we include trigger warnings on our post? (If so, is there a site-wide list of what is considered potentially triggering?)

In case it doesn't come across, I am not trying to be combative, just genuinely curious/ don't want to run afoul in future.

[Salacious Kitty]

Maybe we could say something like:

Trigger Warning (infertility) at the beginning of a post? That should be enough warning for someone for whom that issue could be a trigger. 

Is that sufficient?

[Absolom]

Infertility is definitely triggering for many people.  I think at least part of the problem was potentially imputing infertility to Jinger for only having two children and tying it to potentially body shame of being too thin.  

We have no evidence of Jinger ever having trouble conceiving when she planned.  IMO any discussion of infertility and Jinger was not really needed.  

Edited Monday at 03:22 AM by Absolom

[Notabug]

1 hour ago, Salacious Kitty said:

Maybe we could say something like:

Trigger Warning (infertility) at the beginning of a post? That should be enough warning for someone for whom that issue could be a trigger. 

Is that sufficient?

Aren't we perhaps heading to a slippery slope where virtually everything will be potentially triggering?  As we delve deeper and deeper into what might be difficult for another reader on the site, I think we could come to the point where we acknowledge that someone somewhere will have personal experience and emotions involving virtually all the topics at hand.  If the speculation is respectful and considerate, I don't think discussing that one of the reasons Jinger might be reticent to discuss their intentions regarding future kids might be because they're having trouble getting pregnant at present is out of line.

Edited Monday at 02:42 AM by Notabug

[MaryAnneSpier]

There's a lot of potentially triggering stuff that's involved with the Duggars. When we involve religious trauma along with the Josh mess, there's not a way to handle discussion under the new guidelines other than avoid them altogether.

The quality of discussions and insights here has dwindled because of the new mods, and the latest directive from the mod is the final straw for me. 

[AstridM]

22 minutes ago, MaryAnneSpier said:

There's a lot of potentially triggering stuff that's involved with the Duggars. When we involve religious trauma along with the Josh mess, there's not a way to handle discussion under the new guidelines other than avoid them altogether.

The quality of discussions and insights here has dwindled because of the new mods, and the latest directive from the mod is the final straw for me. 

I’m completely over it also 🥲.

[jschoolgirl]

There is far less discussion across all the forums I use on this site.

It is too bad, because the quality of discussion used to be so high.

[precious pupp]

52 minutes ago, jschoolgirl said:

There is far less discussion across all the forums I use on this site.

It is too bad, because the quality of discussion used to be so high.

It's getting very weird around here.  I've heard members say they will quit posting.  That's not good.  

[Natalie68]

On 4/29/2024 at 4:51 PM, AstridM said:

I’m completely over it also 🥲.

I have been posting less.  It is hard to have a full throttle discussion.

ETA:  I have been wondering about the lack of new posts among all of my regular groups.  Are people just lurking?

Edited Wednesday at 08:13 PM by Natalie68

[Suzn]

4 hours ago, Natalie68 said:

I have been posting less.  It is hard to have a full throttle discussion.

ETA:  I have been wondering about the lack of new posts among all of my regular groups.  Are people just lurking?

I seldom post but always read here and I see a major difference.  The atmosphere is so constrained that it feels chilled. People seem afraid to express completely harmless things.  It used to be possible to discuss tough topics, topics that don't lend themselves to only saying "nice" things.

It's sad that the new regime wants this.

[Natalie68]

Just now, Suzn said:

I seldom post but always read here and I see a major difference.  The atmosphere is so constrained that it feels chilled. People seem afraid to express completely harmless things.  It used to be possible to discuss tough topics, topics that don't lend themselves to only saying "nice" things.

It's sad that the new regime wants this.

That makes me sad.  Gonna look around for other options.

[GeeGolly]

IMO, the Counting On threads had an unwarranted bad reputation. There are other sub forums on PT that have far worse thread titles and highly critical posts and they go unnoticed.

Also in my opinion I think Jeremy would actually like being called a Holy Goalie. Whether he's as good as he thinks he is of either, is up for debate. 😁🙏🏽🏒

[Salacious Kitty]

Well, there was that time when Jer thought he was hot stuff. 😂

[precious pupp]

3 hours ago, Natalie68 said:

That makes me sad.  Gonna look around for other options.

If you find any, I'd love it if you would PM me.  Thanks :)

[andromeda331]

5 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

IMO, the Counting On threads had an unwarranted bad reputation. There are other sub forums on PT that have far worse thread titles and highly critical posts and they go unnoticed.

Also in my opinion I think Jeremy would actually like being called a Holy Goalie. Whether he's as good as he thinks he is of either, is up for debate. 😁🙏🏽🏒

He probably would since he thinks he's the best at both.

[Natalie68]

14 hours ago, precious pupp said:

If you find any, I'd love it if you would PM me.  Thanks :)

will do!!!!

[Dehumidifier]

18 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

IMO, the Counting On threads had an unwarranted bad reputation. There are other sub forums on PT that have far worse thread titles and highly critical posts and they go unnoticed.

Also in my opinion I think Jeremy would actually like being called a Holy Goalie. Whether he's as good as he thinks he is of either, is up for debate. 😁🙏🏽🏒

Would you feel the same if he was a religion other than Christian?

[GeeGolly]

10 minutes ago, Dehumidifier said:

Would you feel the same if he was a religion other than Christian?

I'm totally not understanding this question. Could you please clarify?

[Dehumidifier]

3 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

I'm totally not understanding this question. Could you please clarify?

I think it is pretty clear.

[GeeGolly]

8 minutes ago, Dehumidifier said:

I think it is pretty clear.

I'm so sorry, but it is not clear to me.

Are you asking if I would feel Jeremy would like being called a Holy Goalie is he was a different religion? 

[Dehumidifier]

5 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

I'm so sorry, but it is not clear to me.

Are you asking if I would feel Jeremy would like being called a Holy Goalie is he was a different religion? 

A) Would you consider the thread title bad if he was being mocked for being a religiously inclined goalie of another belief  than Christianity?

B) Do you think that title would even have been under consideration if he was of a religion other than Christian?

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 06:54 PM by Dehumidifier

[GeeGolly]

11 minutes ago, Dehumidifier said:

A) Would you consider the thread title bad if he was being mocked for being a religiously inclined goalie of another belief  than Christianity?

B) Do you think that title would even have been under consideration if he was of a religion other than Christian?

A) I don't see the title as mocking.

B) I don't believe the word holy applies only to Christianity. I've always seen it as an all encompassing religious word.

[Dehumidifier]

Holey Goalie -- a great opportunity somehow missed.

[GeeGolly]

Jin & Jer just golfed in some religious tournament in AZ.

[CalicoKitty]

Seeing Jinger doing "normal" activities and wearing new "appropriate for the task" clothing of her own makes me very happy.  No matter what some think of Jeremy, he has provided a life for her that is so different from her childhood, and they seem to be a very happy family.  It may not be the lifestyle or belief that we might  personally choose, but she seems very happy, and I am happy for her and their family.

Edited Thursday at 09:36 PM by CalicoKitty
extra word

[emma675]

1 hour ago, GeeGolly said:

Jin & Jer just golfed in some religious tournament in AZ.

Jinger looks super cute in her shorts and sleeveless top. I think back to when she was dressed in a prairie style gown, with a crunchy perm and awful brown foundation, talking about being terrified of messing up in front of God, and I wonder if she could have ever dreamed of herself like this. I'm not Jeremy's biggest fan, but I do think he's given her the opportunity to break away from a lot of the crap her family put her through. I hope she's happy and hasn't just traded one headship and his beliefs for another.

[Mod-Tigerkatze]

On 4/28/2024 at 9:03 PM, dargosmydaddy said:

Question-- are we meant to avoid any respectful discussion of potentially triggering topics? Or just pregnancy-related issues? Or just topics that a moderator posts a directive about? Or are we welcome to continue respectfully discussing potentially triggering topics, but only if we include trigger warnings on our post? (If so, is there a site-wide list of what is considered potentially triggering?)

In case it doesn't come across, I am not trying to be combative, just genuinely curious/ don't want to run afoul in future.

Thanks for asking. 

To answer your question about avoiding potentially triggering topics, no, you're not meant to do that. There would be little left to talk about if that were the goal. 

You're welcome to continue respectfully discussing triggering topics - as you did with the pregnancy discussion. A trigger-warning would certainly be very mindful, thank you for suggesting it. However, it isn't necessary and posters wouldn't get reprimanded if they didn't include one. 

Please note that a mod directive doesn't always mean that a discussion wasn't acceptable or that it was a moderator who noticed something of concern. Sometimes, it's used to acknowledge concerns that may have been raised without reprimanding the posters involved in the discussion.

I noticed that there still seems to be a bit of uncertainty with regards to what is allowed. I'm sorry about that. 

Maybe the following questions will provide some clearer guidance: 

When you post, it can be helpful to consider if:

- you would say it to a person's face
- you would be comfortable if the person you're talking about read the comment 
- how you would feel if you were the person you're talking about and you read the comment
- how would you feel if you were sympathizing with the person you're talking about and you read the comment

These are questions every poster would have to answer for themselves but as you answer them, keep in mind that the person you're talking about likely doesn't know you, so they don't know what you sound like or how a comment is meant.

Generally, it's not so much about what it discussed, as it is about how it's discussed. 

 

[awaken]

5 hours ago, Dehumidifier said:

Holey Goalie -- a great opportunity somehow missed.

Too mocking. Probably not an option. 

[AstridM]

8 hours ago, Dehumidifier said:

 

3 hours ago, Mod-Tigerkatze said:

Please note that a mod directive doesn't always mean that a discussion wasn't acceptable or that it was a moderator who noticed something of concern. Sometimes, it's used to acknowledge concerns that may have been raised without reprimanding the posters involved in the discussion.

What? Raised by whom?

[pinkandsparkly13]

Oh Holy Goalie, Good Lord!