The Duggars: In the Media and TLC

[awaken]

14 minutes ago, Zella said:

This is exactly the kind of meandering, contradictory shit that makes me think there is no TV show in their future. 

Or, they will have one and revert back to using the girls as Props.

[iwantcookies]

Which is worse 

Being married to Lawson Bates or Tim Rodrigues?

Asking for Jana 

[iwantcookies]

Scott Peterson family paid $1 million upfront to his lawyer Mark Geragos. I’m assuming Jim Bob had to pay upfront too. 
 

Amy Duggar also loves to use her name just as much as Jeremy and Dereck.

 

[3 is enough]

1 hour ago, iwantcookies said:

Which is worse 

Being married to Lawson Bates or Tim Rodrigues?

Asking for Jana 

Tim hands down.  First, isn’t he ten years younger than Jana?  But more importantly it’s the baggage (Jill) he brings with him. 

[Cinnabon]

18 hours ago, iwantcookies said:

Scott Peterson family paid $1 million upfront to his lawyer Mark Geragos. I’m assuming Jim Bob had to pay upfront too. 
 

Amy Duggar also loves to use her name just as much as Jeremy and Dereck.

 

She hasn’t used the Duggar name for years, IIRC.

18 hours ago, 3 is enough said:

Tim hands down.  First, isn’t he ten years younger than Jana?  But more importantly it’s the baggage (Jill) he brings with him. 

Idk, Lawson might actually be worse. He loves only himself and is a massive douche.

Edited July 2, 2021 by Cinnabon

[Lurk]

On 6/30/2021 at 7:24 AM, JoanArc said:

I’m so glad they became main characters again and the final episode. It took him five years to worm their way back into the spotlight.  Then, Bam, cancellation. Almost enough to make you believe in God.

Glory Hallelujah! Praise the Lord! God has spoken! It is his WILL! Glory to God! It is a blessing that the Lord has put it on the hearts of TPTB at TLC to cancel the show!

 

**couldn't think of all the exact fundie wordings they use

[Fosca]

15 hours ago, MzTori77 said:

J & J are going to be faced with quite the dilemma if they are offered their own spinoff. They’ve made the decision, for their privacy and protection, to no longer put any pictures of their daughters on SM. How shall they ever walk that back if given their own show?? Me thinks they’ll find some BS way to spin it! 

I'm sorry if I missed it, but did J&J actually say they stopped showing their children's faces because of security concerns?  Because I can see them doing that to make people want to watch their new spin-off show in order to actually see the girls.

[ginger90]

4 minutes ago, Fosca said:

I'm sorry if I missed it, but did J&J actually say they stopped showing their children's faces because of security concerns?  Because I can see them doing that to make people want to watch their new spin-off show in order to actually see the girls.

This is what Jinger said replying to a comment on it:

 

"The girls are doing great! Felicity is absolutely smitten with her little sister and Evy adores Felicity. You haven't seen much of them simply because we are wanting to give them a bit more privacy while they're so young." She also added, "We appreciate how you love and support our family. It means so much to us! Thanks for asking." 

 

[Ohiopirate02]

9 hours ago, 3 is enough said:

Tim hands down.  First, isn’t he ten years younger than Jana?  But more importantly it’s the baggage (Jill) he brings with him. 

Yes.  With any of the Rod boys, the wife will always be second to Jill.  

[BetyBee]

11 hours ago, iwantcookies said:

Which is worse 

Being married to Lawson Bates or Tim Rodrigues?

Asking for Jana 

Either way the poor woman would have a nightmare mother-in-law. I think TimBits shows the most promise in that dire either/or situation. A smart wife could lead him away from his narcissistic bitch of a mother and maybe even out of the fundie cult. No woman could get past Lawson's love of self. As for Jana, she's better off single!

[GeeGolly]

I wonder if any of the Duggar 19, and their spouses, realize that while Josh's dirty deeds were what caused TLC to rebrand the show the first time around, it was really Michelle's fault it happened. Who knows how long the secret would have been kept from the public if Michelle hadn't made her LGBT/homophobic robocall. 

The Ashley Madison scandal would likely just have been a small blip and Josh might have even been kept on the show.

This scandal now may have only lead to rebranding if the molestations weren't public knowledge. Karma can be a bitch and it cost Michelle millions of dollars.

[3 is enough]

11 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

 

Idk, Lawson might actually be worse. He loves only himself is a massive douche.

Totally agree that Lawson is insufferable, but having Jill as a mother-in-law is the absolute worst case scenario, at least in my opinion.  Having Kelly as a MIL would be no picnic to be sure, but Jill is in a league of her own.

Edited July 2, 2021 by 3 is enough

[Zella]

1 hour ago, 3 is enough said:

having Jill as a mother-in-law is the absolute worst case scenario, at least in my opinion. 

Agreed.

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Zella

[BigBingerBro]

The Duggars Are Scrambling To Find New Income Sources After 'Counting On' Cancellation

[Jynnan tonnix]

On 7/2/2021 at 9:03 AM, BetyBee said:

Either way the poor woman would have a nightmare mother-in-law. I think TimBits shows the most promise in that dire either/or situation. A smart wife could lead him away from his narcissistic bitch of a mother and maybe even out of the fundie cult. No woman could get past Lawson's love of self. As for Jana, she's better off single!

I tend to agree...While Jill is indubitably the worst case as mothers-in-law go, there is always some hope that someone as malleable as Timbits might be led away if he was finding greener pastures. At least Jill would be a secondary influence, whereas Lawson's ego would always be a primary force.

Edited July 6, 2021 by Jynnan tonnix

[JoanArc]

Father is bleeding...cash...

Quote

Now, an insider has exclusively told The Sun the family were being paid a massive sum of money for each season and the cancelation is a financial blow.

The source said: "The family were roughly paid $80k for each chunk of filming, and some seasons were longer than others, but they were picking up on average $850k a series.

 

[BigBingerBro]

Wow, I had no idea they were raking in 840K per season.  I hope they saved and/or invested wisely.

[scriggle]

I don't believe it. No effing way were they getting 80k an epic for Counting On. iirc it came out during their divorce that J&K plus 8 were getting around 20k per ep at the height of their fame/popularity. That's what i expect the Duggars were getting for CO.

Edited July 7, 2021 by scriggle
were not we're

[BitterApple]

That does seem awfully high. I thought the Duggars were getting around 40k/epi in the pre-scandal 19K&C days. 

[GeeGolly]

I tend to believe the figure. How else are all the families living so comfortably? JB is too cheap to dole out his own money.

[Churchhoney]

I can't see how the TLC money would not count as self-employment income. So no matter what they're paid per show, the Duggs are obligated to pay self-employment taxes on them.....

If $80,000 is the per-show number, the self-employment taxes bring that down to $68,000. ... And of course they owe income tax on the money, too, although I'm sure JB's accountants (and his buddy talks with Kent Hovind and no doubt other tax haters?) have found ways to minimize those as much as possible .... 

I'm really curious about their tax-for-work situation. I don't know of a way you can get away with eternally dodging the self-employment tax (and of course it'd be damned short-sighted to do it, since that's where your Social Security and Medicare will come from). I'm pretty sure LLCs won't do it since the money does have to be reported as pay to contractors for work done by the network.

But I suppose if there's a way to avoid even those taxes, JB is doing it....even if it involves evading the law...

 

 

[GeeGolly]

I know I'm oversimplifying it, but say that Jessa pays quarterly income taxes on a projected income of $50,000, but actually makes $80,000 that year. If she has an LLC or two that show a loss $30,000, that offsets her total income. So when in comes time to file, she'd show a total income  of $80,000 minus $30,000 equaling $50,000. I don't think the Duggars don't pay taxes, I think they use legal loopholes to pay less.

Like I said, I know I'm over simplifying it, and I'm guessing the credit for the loss would be less than the $30,000, so maybe the taxes paid out are on $65,000 rather than $80,000. But anyway, this is how I think they're using the LLCs.

[Churchhoney]

7 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I know I'm oversimplifying it, but say that Jessa pays quarterly income taxes on a projected income of $50,000, but actually makes $80,000 that year. If she has an LLC or two that show a loss $30,000, that offsets her total income. So when in comes time to file, she'd show a total income  of $80,000 minus $30,000 equaling $50,000. I don't think the Duggars don't pay taxes, I think they use legal loopholes to pay less.

Like I said, I know I'm over simplifying it, and I'm guessing the credit for the loss would be less than the $30,000, so maybe the taxes paid out are on $65,000 rather than $80,000. But anyway, this is how I think they're using the LLCs.

I agree. I think that tax avoidance is a major factor in their incomes and lifestyles. 

Quite possibly some tax evasion. too, though, in my opinion....since we know JB is a huge Kent Hovind fan.....(Nobody else except Hovind's son went to the prison to drive home with Kent after his release. And I don't think JB talked to him about why Darwin stinks.)

However that may be though, tax tinkering is surely one reason JB desperately wants them to remain one big connected family. So their accountant can direct the use of the LLCs (and whatever else) to lower the overall tax bill as much as possible. 

If they're ultimately cheating the kids out of Social Security income by these methods, though -- and I think they might be by their schemes -- that's likely to come back to bite them one day. That's why I'm curious about the self-employment tax. 

Edited July 8, 2021 by Churchhoney

[quarks]

13 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I tend to believe the figure. How else are all the families living so comfortably? JB is too cheap to dole out his own money.

I'm skeptical about an $80,000 per episode figure for Counting On for several reasons:

1. I don't have access to streaming data, but although the Duggars do manage to get into the national news more than other TLC families (for all the wrong reasons), their ratings are generally about the same or lower than the ratings for other TLC shows. This doesn't seem to be a case of younger viewers choosing to stream specific shows instead of watching live (aka, the main reason why ratings/live view numbers over on the CW are so terrible), so I think it's safe to say that Counting On is also getting about the same number of streaming views as other TLC shows. Perhaps fewer.

2. Unlike most of the TLC shows, Counting On faces regular advertising boycotts/threats of advertising boycotts. It's unclear just how successful these have been or how much this is impacting the show's profitability right now (like many networks, Discovery appears to be more interested in revenue from streaming subscriptions than ads), but this can't be encouraging TLC to pay large amounts to the Duggars.

3. And speaking of payment, if industry rumors are correct, TLC families are generally getting about $40,000 to $50,000 before taxes/agency fees.  This appears to be what the Busbys of Outdaughtered are getting, for instance, along with the comped vacations - which has allowed them to upgrade their house and invest in various luxuries. Of course, the Busbys also don't have to share that money with as many people, and they also appear to have several other sources of income and are doing a better job monetizing their YouTube channel. 

To partly answer the tax issue above, it also depends upon how Discovery/TLC is reporting that income to the IRS. To vastly, vastly oversimplify the tax situation, most talent is paid on contract, with payments usually subject to self-employment and income tax. HOWEVER, residuals and royalties are reported on schedule E and are usually subject only to income tax, not to self-employment tax. It's possible that Discovery is reporting their payments as advances on royalty income and thus not subject to self-employment tax. 

4. Speaking of the Busbys, the huge contrast between their lifestyle and that of pretty much all the Duggars/Duggarlings.  With the exception of Jeremy and Jinger, the kids all seem to be in tiny houses and apartments and trailers. Most of the adults, including Jeremy and Jinger, are shilling on Instagram, and Jeremy appears to be job-hunting at the moment - or at least trying to convince MacArthur and pals that continuing to support him is worth it. This isn't stuff you do if you are feeling financially comfortable. 

And I don't think this is just JB being cheap. That's probably not helping, but back in the 19 Kids and Counting days, he did provide Jill and Derrick with a nice house, and he bought private planes for his family/sons. He also invested a significant amount in real estate, some of which has been signed over to the some of the adult kids. He's also almost certainly shelling out at least six figures in legal fees for Josh. So he's willing to spend at least some money. 

And cheap or not, it's also in his best interest to show - or try to show - that sure, yes, you can have umpteen children and still live quite nicely. He's even stated that encouraging families to have numerous children is one of his goals - and seeing large families enjoying luxuries like international trips, private planes and nice houses is certainly more encouraging than seeing large families head to Aldi and still manage to look underfed.

So I think that rumors were correct - the Duggars/Duggarlings were so desperate to get back on TV back in 2015 that they agreed to a very significant pay cut for Counting On - assuming that if the show was successful, that fee would go up. And that fee didn't go up as much as they were hoping.  My guess is that this $80,000 per episode figure is an estimate of average production costs per episode (including filming crew and so on), which got misreported as the amount paid to the Duggars.

[ozziemom]

1 hour ago, Churchhoney said:

I agree. I think that tax avoidance is a major factor in their incomes and lifestyles. 

Quite possibly tax evasion. too....since we know JB is a Kent Hovind fan.....

That's one reason JB desperately wants them to remain one big connected family. So their accountant can direct the use of the LLCs (and whatever else) to lower the overall tax bill as much as possible. 

If they're ultimately cheating the kids out of Social Security income by these methods, though -- and I think they might be by their schemes -- that's likely to come back to bite them one day. That's why I'm curious about the self-employment tax. 

Self employment income can be offset by other types of income for tax purposes but unless the LLC’s are also considered self employment, they would still owe SE tax. And in the case of a married couple, they would each owe it since they are both “working”. I do think JB and his accountant fiddle with all of this. I could imagine the Duggar empire doling out just enough self employment income to each adult to pay minimal SE tax but also just enough income/loss so that no income tax is paid. Jessa and Bin would have more child care credits than say Josiah so they could have more income and still pay no income taxes. I’m sure there is a good deal of number manipulation that only JB and his accountant are privy to. Another reason for them to keep the education level low at SOTDRT.

[Rootbeer]

4 hours ago, quarks said:

To partly answer the tax issue above, it also depends upon how Discovery/TLC is reporting that income to the IRS. To vastly, vastly oversimplify the tax situation, most talent is paid on contract, with payments usually subject to self-employment and income tax. HOWEVER, residuals and royalties are reported on schedule E and are usually subject only to income tax, not to self-employment tax. It's possible that Discovery is reporting their payments as advances on royalty income and thus not subject to self-employment tax.  

Reality shows don't pay residuals or royalties to participants the way that regular TV shows pay professional actors.  That's why TLC reruns their reality shows umpteen times apiece.

Otherwise, I agree, JB doesn't want to pay taxes, probably agrees with Kent Hovind that they are unconstitutional, and has like-minded accountants who help him shift things around and minimize the burden.  I also agree that JB would have no problem cheating on his taxes to avoid paying like the rest of us suckers.

As for Social Security and Medicare; I would presume that JB and Meesh have paid enough over the years that their payments are secure when the time comes.  As for the others, JB doesn't really give a cr** what happens with the kids in the long run.  He and Michelle have been very single minded in their pursuit of what they want at the expense of the kids, that won't change.  He probably rails against those ebil gubmint handouts from Social Security and Medicare and tells the kids they are fortunate that they won't have to take money from Satan's hand when the time comes and they have their dear parents to thank for it.

[Churchhoney]

2 hours ago, Rootbeer said:

 

As for Social Security and Medicare; I would presume that JB and Meesh have paid enough over the years that their payments are secure when the time comes.  As for the others, JB doesn't really give a cr** what happens with the kids in the long run.  He and Michelle have been very single minded in their pursuit of what they want at the expense of the kids, that won't change.  

I expect you're right about this. It's always bugged me. But for some reason their tacky "goodbye to TLC" note with all the preachy gushing about the vital importance of children just raised my hackles about it again.....When I hear about JB potentially raking in substantial amounts of money from the show.....but also potentially taking no care over what the kids' and grandkids' lives will look like long term....yeesh. 

Hard to see how they' won't leave behind numerous descendants who are uneducated, near-unemployable people who'll enter old age with minimal resources. .... There could be dozens of those. And there'll almost certainly be at least several..

But JB and M couldn't care less because they "know" that at the time they'll be sitting on their golden thrones getting tongue baths from the correct Jesus. 

 

Edited July 8, 2021 by Churchhoney

[quarks]

4 hours ago, Rootbeer said:

Reality shows don't pay residuals or royalties to participants the way that regular TV shows pay professional actors.  That's why TLC reruns their reality shows umpteen times apiece.

 

That's correct.

However, certain media conglomerates have been claiming on tax forms that some payments to talent that would not normally be classified as residuals/royalties ARE advances on residuals/royalty payments and should be reported on schedule E, not schedule C. In other cases, certain media conglomerates have been "accidentally" combining schedule E and schedule C payments under schedule E. 

Hollywood accounting shenanigans aside, TLC is presumably not writing checks directly to any member of the Duggar family. Those checks should be going through a talent management company or agency. It's at least possible that the talent management company is directly handled/owned by Jim Bob, who can then report any earnings paid out to the Duggarlings as schedule E earnings.

It's also possible that TLC and the talent management company are making payments through LLCs, which again might allow the Duggars/Duggarlings to avoid self-employment tax. 

But without seeing any of these tax documents, I think it's impossible to know if the Duggars/Duggarlings are paying self-employment tax or not.  

 

[SunnyBeBe]

Has anyone posted a link for a recent photo online of Jill and kids with Jessa and kids along with two of the TLC crew?  I can’t seem to find it around here.  

[dargosmydaddy]

6 minutes ago, SunnyBeBe said:

Has anyone posted a link for a recent photo online of Jill and kids with Jessa and kids along with two of the TLC crew?  I can’t seem to find it around here.  

It's a few pages back on the Jill thread: 

 

[farmgal4]

On 7/1/2021 at 8:47 PM, iwantcookies said:

Which is worse 

Being married to Lawson Bates or Tim Rodrigues?

Asking for Jana 

Tim R, for sure, because Best Mama. 🤪

[Cinnabon]

I’m not quite sure what thread to put this in, but the members of this group are my new heroes!

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — The activist group INDECLINE has made another art protest in Arkansas after they made headlines last week for hanging a "God Bless Abortions" banner on the 67-foot tall Christ of the Ozarks monument.

This time the group vandalized a billboard near the Roosevelt Road exit off Interstate 30 in Little Rock.

 

Originally, the billboard read, "Stressed out? iblp.com" but was changed to say, "Stressed out? Masturbate."

In an Instagram post, INDECLINE said part of the reason they painted over the sign was because the billboard company donated the space to The Institute in Basic Life Principles and "decided we shouldn't have to pay for it either."

The Institute in Basic Life Principles is a Christian organization which was started with "the purpose of introducing people to the Lord Jesus Christ" and giving people "training on how to find success by following God's principles."

"In a culture that celebrates violence, misogyny, individual achievement, we don't understand why the sudden taboo on self-work, once that work becomes a little saucy," INDECLINE said. "But if you can't get permission from the priest, consider this a hall pass from us."

The activist group said they completed the repainting of the billboard overnight to "write a new message" for morning commutes in Little Rock.

 

https://www.thv11.com/article/news/local/activist-groups-little-rock-arkansas-billboard/91-55d272ec-1f0f-4e9a-bec7-eb11e70165c2?fbclid=IwAR1_NNHT7cpMo-UhNQXTn6lhQ_PFbCrD58MLp8z6QsiWJKLuer0K9-cCbYo

 

[JoanArc]

 I was wondering how IBLP had the money to rent a billboard. Turns out it was a grift.  Big surprise. 

I wholeheartedly agree with the billboard’s message!

[Cinnabon]

5 hours ago, JoanArc said:

 I was wondering how IBLP had the money to rent a billboard. Turns out it was a grift.  Big surprise. 

I wholeheartedly agree with the billboard’s message!

IBLP was grifting, or someone else?

[JoanArc]

26 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

IBLP was grifting, or someone else?

 Based on the article it looks like the billboard company donated the board space to a IBLP.

Edited July 15, 2021 by JoanArc

[Cinnabon]

1 minute ago, JoanArc said:

 Based on the article it looks like the billboard company donated the fourth space to a IBLP.

Ok. I just wish this billboard was closer to Anna and the Rods, so their heads would explode.

[graybrown bird]

Today's Washington Post has a fairly even-handed article about the Duggars.    Not sure if the article is behind a paywall, but here is the link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/07/30/duggars-canceled-tlc/

[crazy8s]

2 minutes ago, graybrown bird said:

Today's Washington Post has a fairly even-handed article about the Duggars.    Not sure if the article is behind a paywall, but here is the link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/07/30/duggars-canceled-tlc/

I was just going to post that when you posted

one paragraph i found interesting - i bolded one sentence because yep there's Jessa...

"Although it’s hard to believe, the most obvious parallel for the Duggars’ fame (and infamy) may be the Kardashians. First, the sheer number of relatives means that if someone is in the news for negative reasons, there are plenty of other family members who can distract the attention back to the brand. And fans watch the shows for the same reasons: While they live wildly different lives than most viewers, the family aspect puts the show in a relatable context."

[JoanArc]

2 hours ago, crazy8s said:

I was just going to post that when you posted

one paragraph i found interesting - i bolded one sentence because yep there's Jessa...

"Although it’s hard to believe, the most obvious parallel for the Duggars’ fame (and infamy) may be the Kardashians. First, the sheer number of relatives means that if someone is in the news for negative reasons, there are plenty of other family members who can distract the attention back to the brand. And fans watch the shows for the same reasons: While they live wildly different lives than most viewers, the family aspect puts the show in a relatable context."

Until an idiot like Jessa equates CP to adult porn and its back on.

The article failed to discuss the incoming poverty and how no one can support their overindulgent (at lest with breeding) lifestyles. Instagram and Youtube don't pay THAT well, and their controversial history precludes any real sponsorship deals. Its no so much distraction as it is '19 Gladiators in the arena' all competing against each other.

[Cinnabon]

I didn’t know which thread to put this in. Someone on Reddit did a face swap! 😂

 

[awaken]

James and Justin look great as girls!  Josie is horrifying as a boy. And Jed looks smarmy either way. 

[zenme]

Oh I always love those! I always find it interesting how much better they look as the opposite sex.

[dargosmydaddy]

Jason (orange shirt) is a total babe! Weird, considering he's on the homely end of the Duggar boy spectrum.

[BitterApple]

34 minutes ago, dargosmydaddy said:

Jason (orange shirt) is a total babe! Weird, considering he's on the homely end of the Duggar boy spectrum.

Lmfao, right? How is it the Duggar sons are "meh" as boys but cute as girls? Jason and Si are downright gorgeous. We've officially crossed over into Bizarro World 

1 hour ago, awaken said:

James and Justin look great as girls!  Josie is horrifying as a boy. And Jed looks smarmy either way. 

James in girl form looks exactly like Grandma Mary. 

[Cinnabon]

Jinger looks like Austin.

[madpsych78]

3 hours ago, Cinnabon said:

I didn’t know which thread to put this in. Someone on Reddit did a face swap! 😂

 

I feel like Jana resembles someone familiar, but I can't figure out the male celebrity that resembles her. Maybe Jonathan Taylor Thomas? And LOL, Joy looks like Zachary Ty Bryan. I guess I have Home Improvement on the brain! I find it interesting that in this switch, Jana really looks different from Jill, Jessa, and Jinger.

Jessa doesn't look like Jessa, but Josie doesn't really look very different. It may be harder with younger kids to really generate something "different" if they haven't gone through puberty yet.

Hannie and Jenni look good as boys. 

Female Jed! totally looks like she would be the leader of the Mean Girls in school. 

JD resembles Amy when she was in her 20s.

Most of those boys look better as girls (except for Jeremiah).

 

[emmawoodhouse]

Poor Joe. Still not attractive. 

[zenme]

Jinger is "meh" as a woman, and definitely not attractive as a man.  Justin looks like his wife.  Josh as a woman looks like Hannie, but somehow Hannie as a man does not look like Josh. I think Josiah looks best as a woman, and looks better than any of his sisters IRL.  Jessa should thank God she's a female, because as a male--yikes!

[Scarlett45]

I think Josiah is pretty as a woman and Joy is handsome as a man. Justin makes a pretty girl as well. 
 

Jessa as a guy kinda looks like Derrick and oddly like a guy I went to high school with. 
 

But Jana is older than John David so their photos should be switched. 

[GeeGolly]

12 hours ago, madpsych78 said:

I feel like Jana resembles someone familiar, but I can't figure out the male celebrity that resembles her. Maybe Jonathan Taylor Thomas? And LOL, Joy looks like Zachary Ty Bryan. I guess I have Home Improvement on the brain! I find it interesting that in this switch, Jana really looks different from Jill, Jessa, and Jinger.

Jessa doesn't look like Jessa, but Josie doesn't really look very different. It may be harder with younger kids to really generate something "different" if they haven't gone through puberty yet.

Hannie and Jenni look good as boys. 

Female Jed! totally looks like she would be the leader of the Mean Girls in school. 

JD resembles Amy when she was in her 20s.

Most of those boys look better as girls (except for Jeremiah).

 

I think Jana looks a little like the guy who played Xander on Buffy and Joy looks a little like Kirk Cameron. Jill looks a little like Phoebe's brother on Friends.