Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

The Duggalos: Jinger and the Holy Goalie

frenchtoast

By frenchtoast
in Counting On

cm-soupsipper
Message added by cm-soupsipper,

Closure Notice: This Thread is now closed due to the name (and much of the posting within it). Please be mindful going forward by naming topics in a way that invites a healthy community conversation. If you name something for a cheap laugh, this thread may be closed later because it encourages discrimination and harm. 

  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
11 minutes ago, JoanArc said:

Dude is JUST NOT a good draw. His 'success' mystifies me - the same way he'll be mystified when he dumped for being no longer useful.

Amen. 

I guess we have to chalk it up to the million-plus-social-media-followers-and-a-tv-gig-make-you-a-good-draw-even-if-you're-a-terrible-draw thinking. ...

That's probably especially true in niches where most people don't have either of those things -- not even close. And Calvinist colleges and churches and ministers generally fall in that category, most likely. 

His buddy Michael Mahoney, sad sack 40-something of the year -- who's at a pretty damn big church. and in LA, no less -- has 1,321 followers!!!!!

The Master's Seminary instagram has 11.5 k followers. Reformation Bible College, where he was this weekend, has 4,711.  

So, you know, he may be in sort of desperate company. 

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Useful 2
  • Love 8
  • Replies 40.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Churchhoney

    2685

  • Sew Sumi

    1781

  • GeeGolly

    1721

  • Zella

    1576

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Spencer Hastings
Spencer Hastings

Tough crowd!  She's wearing modern shoes with closed toes, pants, and a shirt that literally calls back to her family's ridiculous rules and there are still 35 things wrong with what she's doing. 

Churchhoney
Churchhoney

That's okay. He's forgotten it a few times himself. 

GeeGolly
GeeGolly

My push presents after having my kids were my kids. 

Posted Images

BigBingerBro

BigBingerBro

59 minutes ago, OpieTaylor said:

I have some different speculation, because I just can’t believe that Jer and family would get an all-expenses-paid trip, including Universal, from The Masters Seminary.

Here’s my ideas: Jing learned some of her family would be at Universal and she really wanted to go. Jer used some connections to get a guest speaking gig at that place. He got TMS to OK time off from classes plus some “extra credit” in acknowledgment of his speaking gig. It was deemed an independent study project or something. The Vuolos paid their own way - perhaps John David flew them there?

This is exactly how i was thinking it went down and was about to post it but you beat me to it.  I just can't buy that anyone would pay him to speak.  

Meanwhile, Jinger's hair looks horrible.

  • Love 12
quarks

quarks

5 hours ago, Giant Misfit said:

So, according to this post, they rode the Incredible Hulk coaster at Islands of Adventure "many times over." The average wait time for that coaster is about an hour (depending on crowd size and it could be longer) so either they burned 2-3 (depends on what "many" means) hours waiting in line to ride it or someone donated an Express Pass to them to the tune of anywhere between $40 and $150 each. That, or they really did stay at Hard Rock or Portofino where the Express Passes come as a benefit of having a valid room key. 

Also, he looks like the third Property Brother. 

I'll give them a tiny bit of credit with Universal - it's September, one of the slowest times of the year at the Florida theme parks. When I was at Universal in September a couple years ago we had no lines. At all. Even for Harry Potter. Sure, it's a weekend, but I can easily buy that they were able to ride some of the rides more than once without paying for a special pass. 

It's equally possible that they got some sort of discount at the Portofino/Hard Rock Hotels, given the time of year and their status as a couple with a decent sized Instagram following.

Now, how all that fits in with grad school and supposedly learning Koine Greek, you got me, but since he hasn't let grad school and Greek interfere with his pretentious foodie stuff in L.A. so far, I guess there's no reason why he should let them interfere with slumming it with Florida tourists.

  • Useful 3
  • Love 10
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
5 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

My question is how you know you're a Christian if you don't know what you believe or why you believe this belief that you don't know what it is?

After figuring that out I'd be too tired to live it ir share it.

Because JB and M told you that you were, silly! 

"What have we told you about not trying to use your brain for things?!! That's not what brains are for! 

"Now share it."

Edited by Churchhoney
  • LOL 8
PikaScrewChu

PikaScrewChu

On 9/20/2019 at 1:54 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

I wonder if they will check out the Harry Potter part.  I have yet to make it there,  and of course these fools probably got discounted tickets to something they have no reference for.  I'm just here working full time wishing I could take a vacation that somehow falls into these grifters' laps.

They did. There is a picture of Jinger, Jana, and Prop together. Jinger cropped it but you can tell they were there. 

  • Useful 1
  • Love 2
Minivanessa

Minivanessa

(edited)
10 hours ago, madpsych78 said:

No, Jeremy looks way more like Maks Chmerkovskiy from Dancing with the Stars than he does like any Property Brother.

image.png.13df73133a210f92b8eadfb1a5ed64ed.png

Jeremy is not quite a chinless wonder, but he has a weak (receding) chin and in several photos I've seen since his debut as a Duggar adjacent, IMO he looks squirrelly. I think the beard helps, and he's upped his social media game by learning his best camera angles. 

Edited by Jeeves
coherence. It's a goal.
  • Love 8
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
51 minutes ago, leighdear said:

That's what Jana does.  If she wants her own props, she'll have to get them herself.  And I don't think they stock them at Home Depot, or the Magnolia gift shop. 

They could have asked their good friends the Ligonier crowd to recommend a sitter they could hire to come along for the day and help watch Felicity. Maybe one of the Ligonier gang's kids or a super-responsible college student, for example.

Or, if that was too pricey for them -- although seems like they were having a vacation where price was no object -- Jingle and Jer could have taken turns going on the rides while the other one hung out with the kid.

Seems to me everybody has a responsibility to arrange and pay for care for their own kid (to the extent that's economically feasible -- and if you're skipping the line at Universal, then it's economically feasible). And no right to shove it off on other people who didn't commit the procreation. .That's the way we've always thought of it at my house. But then we're not super-Christians, so we obviously have the wrong slant on it. 

Plus, Jana just did rescue work in the Bahamas (according to them anyway).  So why isn't she entitled to a full fun vacation after that, since the guys who did it seem to get that right. But, no, let's use the very Duggar assumption that, because some adult woman is unmarried, she isn't entitled to even the non-sex-related privileges married adults and men -- whatever their marital status -- are entitled to.

There's a lot of talk about how Jingle and Jer have moved past the antediluvian ideas and are now this free, terrific, fun modern, forward-thinking couple.

Looks to me like they may only move past it when moving past it benefits them personally.

If they did stick Jana with the kid while they rode the Hulk more than once -- although I'd like to think they didn't -- then they're obviously quite happy to remain medieval when somebody else gets to bear the brunt of the medievalness. 

Not that that's surprising for someone in this supremely selfish gang. 

But I think it is evidence that a pretty, modern image does not necessarily pretty, modern behavior make.

I'm going to hope that they didn't keep sticking Jana with the child. Because if they did, then they're exactly on a moral par with Meeeechelle, who did that to her daughters (especially Jana). And I hate to put anybody else in that low a category (except for Jim Bob). 

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Love 14
crazy8s

crazy8s

26 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

I'm going to hope that they didn't keep sticking Jana with the child. Because if they did, then they're exactly on a moral par with Meeeechelle, who did that to her daughters (especially Jana). And I hate to put anybody else in that low a category (except for Jim Bob). 

I will say if Jana had Felicity while Jer/Jin rode the rides, we don't have any idea what Jana's expectations for this trip were. Did she know going into the Universal thing she would have Felicity most of the time? Does she even like rides? maybe Jana is fine with it all, we just don't have any way to know.

My thinking on that is that we went to disney last year with son, DIL and 3 grands under 7. We were clear our role was to wrangle kids as needed. 2yr old couldn't do a lot. we were quite happy to be with him in the Nemo fish exhibit, sit by the stroller while he napped etc.

what bothers me is duggars always feel need to hide the fact Jana is there on such trips watching the kids

  • Love 22
Mojitogirl

Mojitogirl

Another thought - this was a TLC paíd trip.  We saw that they were going to feature the Jinger move to LA so this could be a fun trip to visit with family. Show them all being young, cute, carefree just like everyone else. I mentioned around the time of Jinjers wedding that I thought TLC and the magazines along with their publicists were setting up Jinger to be aspirational fundies and I’ve even nothing to indicate that this isn’t exactly what we are seeing. I think it’s got another angle now because I agree with absolutely everything Churchoney surmises but I don’t think we can forget that there is also a TLC agenda that exists outside of Jers ministry agenda. The TLC agenda, to me, is just as dangerous as the ministry one because it gets them viewers and fans that would never be touched by the ministry agenda. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 19
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
43 minutes ago, crazy8s said:

I will say if Jana had Felicity while Jer/Jin rode the rides, we don't have any idea what Jana's expectations for this trip were. Did she know going into the Universal thing she would have Felicity most of the time? Does she even like rides? maybe Jana is fine with it all, we just don't have any way to know.

My thinking on that is that we went to disney last year with son, DIL and 3 grands under 7. We were clear our role was to wrangle kids as needed. 2yr old couldn't do a lot. we were quite happy to be with him in the Nemo fish exhibit, sit by the stroller while he napped etc.

what bothers me is duggars always feel need to hide the fact Jana is there on such trips watching the kids

Agreed. Mostly!

That they deny it and hide it definitely is maybe the biggest thing that bugs me, too. 

But it also bugs me that they may not ever ask her what she'd like to do;

that it may not ever cross their minds that guys don't get stuck with equivalent responsibilities -- and maybe it would be good for everyone if they did;

and that it may not ever cross their minds that parents have the primary responsibility for taking care of their own kids -- they're our blessings, after all -- and we have no right to just shove the responsibility on others without finding out whether they fully consent to it and without compensating them in any way. ..........

I mean, Meeechelle never gave a thought to any of those things, right? So unless I see evidence to the contrary, I'll keep wondering whether this gang of people who've been molded to avoid critical thought aren't mostly just going along with Meeechelle's principles of behavior, any time those principles stand to benefit them! 

If Jana really does hate the rides and truly wants to attend to Felicity instead....then that's perfectly fine. But if she doesn't -- or if nobody ever bothers to find out....and I do think this may be the most likely scenario....then I think it's crap. 

She's a human being, an individual just like everybody else. So if they're going on an assumption based on the category she's in, then that's wrong. 

And one reason I think they may do that is because they still pretty much entirely categorize and restrict women based on the categorization.

Jer, after all, deliberately chose to attend one of the very few remaining seminaries that won't let a woman into a class or into a teaching position.....Because women aren't suitable for those, in their view.....Read: women aren't good enough to tell people much about Jesus. ....

So if they're willing to categorize women overall in this way, it wouldn't really surprise me if they also simply stereotype unmarried women in some demeaning way as well, without giving it any thought at all. (Just following the Duggar family tradition, you see -- which in this case has a benefit for them....unlike the ban  on wearing shorts...)

(And, of course, when the unmarried woman in question has been put into this position for so long, with her consent never required, then it doesn't even cross her mind to ask if it's what she really wants.....

The fact that the question may not cross her mind, however, is no excuse for others declining to think about it, in my opinion. Thinking about it would constitute empathy and real care for others, Duggars and Duggar adjacents. And contrary to what you seem to believe, empathy and care for others are super-important.....Perhaps even to Jesus.)

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Love 12
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

20 minutes ago, ehall1052 said:

I know many of you have felt that Jeremy wears his suit pants too short .  However, I was just looking through the pictures on Yahoo Entertainment of the Emmy fashions and nearly every male actor’s tux pants just cover the ankle. Their entire shoe is showing. Maybe this is the California style?

I have a feeling pretty much everything people wonder about when Jer wears it or does it to his appearance is part of some burgeoning trend that he's seen somewhere.....

The thing about burgeoning trends is that a lot of them just turn out to be bad or very unpopular ideas and even after a bunch of trendsetters pick them up they fizzle....But his "following" lists seem to show that he's scouring the web for fashion ideas all the time.....so he probably sees most of the fledgling trends before they take hold at all -- so some of them may never take hold and some will take quite a while to do it. .... 

  • Love 3
Oldernowiser

Oldernowiser

The undersized suit trend really only works on undersized men...fashion models and sixteen-year-olds...that’s pretty much it. It makes most even normal weight men look like they shopped in the wrong department. I’m kind of surprised it’s still around...it looks quite uncomfortable and it’s at least five years old? I remember an old episode of Modern Family where Phill is showing off his new suit...that he can’t move his arms in.

RFP can’t pull that look off and he also looks like he’s put on some weight...or it’s just doing that middle-aged re-distribution thing that most bodies do.

  • Love 20
libgirl2

libgirl2

1 minute ago, Oldernowiser said:

The undersized suit trend really only works on undersized men...fashion models and sixteen-year-olds...that’s pretty much it. It makes most even normal weight men look like they shopped in the wrong department. I’m kind of surprised it’s still around...it looks quite uncomfortable and it’s at least five years old? I remember an old episode of Modern Family where Phill is showing off his new suit...that he can’t move his arms in.

RFP can’t pull that look off and he also looks like he’s put on some weight...or it’s just doing that middle-aged re-distribution thing that most bodies do.

I remember that! 

  • Love 4
PradaKitty

PradaKitty

I just had a thought. When I was in law school we used (weren’t supposed to, but people have lives, you know) “canned briefs” which were cases that were already briefed (outlined). I wonder if somewhere they have “canned sermons” the Jeremys of the world can pull out when asked to present a sermon. 

  • Useful 2
  • Love 15
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

3 minutes ago, PradaKitty said:

I just had a thought. When I was in law school we used (weren’t supposed to, but people have lives, you know) “canned briefs” which were cases that were already briefed (outlined). I wonder if somewhere they have “canned sermons” the Jeremys of the world can pull out when asked to present a sermon. 

I hope so. Because it'd almost certainly be better than the ones he's "written." ....(on the other hand, we saw that Ligonier slogan yesterday......

The whole MacArthur thing does make a big issue out of a true pastor having to have a direct open line to God that he's created through his hard, ceaseless work at understanding the scripture and so on. So when he writes his sermons and delivers them, he's channeling a specific truth that God handed out to him via their special relationship and this is why the congregation must attend to it....And so the preacher thing becomes an elite sort of enterprise, I guess,

So if the MacArthur gang does have canned sermons -- then I expect they'd be like Jana-the-babysitter-on-a-Duggar-trip......well hidden and denied. 

  • Love 7
  • Popular Post
Oldernowiser

Oldernowiser

  • Popular Post
8 minutes ago, PradaKitty said:

I just had a thought. When I was in law school we used (weren’t supposed to, but people have lives, you know) “canned briefs” which were cases that were already briefed (outlined). I wonder if somewhere they have “canned sermons” the Jeremys of the world can pull out when asked to present a sermon. 

So, IOW, cheating. Wouldn’t surprise me at all.

Is it wrong that I looked at that photo of Prop and Pop surrounded by the opulent excess paid for by thousands of poor people tithing and fiercely wished that Prop had had a massive diaper blowout just then?

(I also looked at that whale painting and thought “oh look, Moby Dick and another dick,” but I’m cranky this morning...)

  • LOL 28
  • Love 2
xwordfanatik

xwordfanatik

43 minutes ago, Sew Sumi said:

Churchie, saw this and thought of you. 😂

Gawd, what a sanctimonious poser.  🤮

36 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

The undersized suit trend really only works on undersized men...fashion models and sixteen-year-olds...that’s pretty much it. It makes most even normal weight men look like they shopped in the wrong department. I’m kind of surprised it’s still around...it looks quite uncomfortable and it’s at least five years old? I remember an old episode of Modern Family where Phill is showing off his new suit...that he can’t move his arms in.

RFP can’t pull that look off and he also looks like he’s put on some weight...or it’s just doing that middle-aged re-distribution thing that most bodies do.

We used to call them high-water pants.  Hey, RFP, where's the flood?

  • LOL 10
  • Love 8
xwordfanatik

xwordfanatik

22 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

So, IOW, cheating. Wouldn’t surprise me at all.

Is it wrong that I looked at that photo of Prop and Pop surrounded by the opulent excess paid for by thousands of poor people tithing and fiercely wished that Prop had had a massive diaper blowout just then?

(I also looked at that whale painting and thought “oh look, Moby Dick and another dick,” but I’m cranky this morning...)

I don't know how old you are, and I won't ask...Over on the Sister Wives forum we call that a COL (clueless old lady.)  I'm a proud member!  One doesn't have to actually BE old.  COL is a state of mind, as another member points out!  🙂

  • LOL 2
  • Love 4
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

38 minutes ago, Oldernowiser said:

So, IOW, cheating. Wouldn’t surprise me at all.

Is it wrong that I looked at that photo of Prop and Pop surrounded by the opulent excess paid for by thousands of poor people tithing and fiercely wished that Prop had had a massive diaper blowout just then?

(I also looked at that whale painting and thought “oh look, Moby Dick and another dick,” but I’m cranky this morning...)

I thought the exact same thing! 😊

And I'm actually in a pretty good mood this morning....!

  • LOL 9
  • Love 2
crazy8s

crazy8s

(edited)
1 hour ago, PradaKitty said:

I just had a thought. When I was in law school we used (weren’t supposed to, but people have lives, you know) “canned briefs” which were cases that were already briefed (outlined). I wonder if somewhere they have “canned sermons” the Jeremys of the world can pull out when asked to present a sermon. 

my experience with the evangelical church i worked for - yes there are "canned sermons" per say. in this particular church they picked a "sermon series/topic" because pastor had bought a book that came with sermon "outlines" they were basically an entire sermon with some blanks where you could fill in and personalize for your particular geographic location and congregation. pastor saved every sermon, both audio recorded and hand written, in case he could use it again.

His Admin listened to the recorded sunday sermon and transcribed and saved it every monday first thing.

Edited by crazy8s
added about the admin
  • Useful 3
  • Love 3
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

Not defending the Duggars/Vuolos, but ...

My sister and I, and our husbands have always been very close. Vacations together, fairs, dinners out, etc. More than half the time my kids were with us. My sister and BIL were by no means travelling babysitters. And they did babysit our kids a lot, when we were elsewhere.

We enjoyed having fun together and my kids enjoyed their aunt and uncle as they enjoyed them.

Maybe Jana was having fun and helping with Prop-Bow? There were certainly enough hands to share watching one baby. But then again, I don't really believe Jana has shouldered as much as the childcare that she's given credit(?) for, at home either.

Jana's probably more bothered by Lawson being there and the tabloids re-starting courting rumors, than she is about sitting on a bench watching her niece nap.

  • Useful 1
  • Love 8
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
41 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Not defending the Duggars/Vuolos, but ...

My sister and I, and our husbands have always been very close. Vacations together, fairs, dinners out, etc. More than half the time my kids were with us. My sister and BIL were by no means travelling babysitters. And they did babysit our kids a lot, when we were elsewhere.

We enjoyed having fun together and my kids enjoyed their aunt and uncle as they enjoyed them.

Maybe Jana was having fun and helping with Prop-Bow? There were certainly enough hands to share watching one baby. But then again, I don't really believe Jana has shouldered as much as the childcare that she's given credit(?) for, at home either.

Jana's probably more bothered by Lawson being there and the tabloids re-starting courting rumors, than she is about sitting on a bench watching her niece nap.

Of course. But that's completely beside the point. 

The question in the Duggar case is always -- Was this person (woman, especially an unmarried one) ever asked about what she wanted to do or did everybody (perhaps including the woman herself) just assume that she would do what their stupid and cruel "rules" require her to do, as the lesser being that the traditional Duggar/Gothard/MacArthur/etc system declares that she is? 

This is not a situation happening among the typical people you're describing. It's nothing like that. And to treat it like it is that kind of a situation -- a situation in which everybody's preferences are considered -- is just plain wrong. That's the hideous tragedy of normalizing these fucking people on TeeVee and instagram etc. It tempts viewers to imagine that this is way way way more like their own lives than it is. 

I know this for a fact. I grew up in one of these situations. And I've seen the complete incomprehension of people who simply assume that you have choices that you don't have. No matter what they hear or what they see, they can't get their minds around the facts of just how different and repressive it is. Even when they say they realize you don't get certain choices, they actually think that you do get them. And that you're just doing what makes you happy when you are held back from doing things -- that you chose when you never were offered a choice. 

I'm one of those who noticed.....and who could see the misjudgments people were making about my family because they assumed i was similar to their own. ..... But just because I was a lucky one who saw the differences -- and therefore got out-- doesn't make it right that my family members who didn't realize how suppressed they were or who were too timid to do anything drastic about it were barred from so much by their background....and nobody outside the situation realized that it's because they were trapped. 

That's what drives me absolutely nuts about most discussions regarding the Duggars. "But maybe Jana wanted to??!" In repressive situations like this, the wants of some people are never considered....because they're in a category that doesn't get to have wants. Their category does a, b, and c.....and never even wonders whether it might possibly do something else. And when I say "never considered" I mean -- never considered by Jana herself either....because her family has made even asking about such options unthinkable.

Suppose one of JB's and M's little Duggar girls truly wants to be a medical doctor. Suppose one of the little Duggar girls is a lesbian. Suppose one of the little Duggar girls even wants to go to high school so she can actually learn calculus and chemistry. Will anyone in this clan ever ever give any of those impulses the tiniest chance even to emerge and be spoken about -- let alone acted upon? I think we all know the answer. And it's all of a piece with Jana babysitting when nobody, even Jana, has actually ever inquired into whether or not she wants to. 

This is a fucking Handmaid's-Tale-in-real-life that's being normalized by the way it's seen on TeeVee and social media and the idiot gossip rags. And it's being perpetrated by a bunch of people who would like to put every one of us in the same position their women, married and unmarried, and their children are in. ....And, in fact, those people are getting stronger and stronger in this country at the current moment. So perhaps we normalize them very much at our own risk, as @Mojitogirl noted earlier to day. 

So to act as if "I chose to look after the kids" is in any way similar to the system of discrimination these people thoughtlessly but relentlessly practice every day of the week is just blind blind blind and wrong wrong wrong, in my opinion. 

In just about every piece i've written here today, I've noted that if looking after Felicity actually is Jana's choice, then of course that's perfectly fine. What I'm pointing to -- and, damn it, I'm going to say it here again -- is that there's a very very very real possibility that nobody (including Jana, because of her programming) has ever for one second considered the possibility that she'd rather not. And that -- by contrast -- is utterly wrong. 

Do you think MacArthur, Jer and their other buddies have ever consulted a woman on the question of whether she would like to be a student at their seminary? When you make these repressive boxes, the people stuck in the box have no voice. That's every bit as discriminatory and harmful in a family or a religion as it is in a society and its government.  It's not sweet and harmless just because it's a family or a "Christian" thing. 

What if they openly made such discriminations on the basis of race, rather than sex? Would it look normal then? Darker-haired Duggars always look after the babies -- while the others ride the Hulk multiple times!! Would it look so normal and harmless then? Would we think it was just a choice dark-haired Duggars were making for themselves? 

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Love 24
crazy8s

crazy8s

9 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

if looking after Felicity actually is Jana's choice, then of course that's perfectly fine. What I'm pointing to -- and, damn it, I'm going to say it here again -- is that there's a very very very real possibility that nobody (including Jana, because of her programming) has ever for one second considered the possibility that she'd rather not. And that -- by contrast -- is utterly wrong. 

yes agree -I ended my earlier post of maybe Jana liked caring for the kids with that it bothered me how they hide she is doing so.

we all can see Jana has no problem being photographed for her silly staged/filtered instagram photo ops. also shown with the fake mediccorps, at magnolia farms and all.

so why always the cover up? is it to make a TLC story line work or a JB story work?

  • Love 5
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

(edited)
10 minutes ago, crazy8s said:

yes agree -I ended my earlier post of maybe Jana liked caring for the kids with that it bothered me how they hide she is doing so.

we all can see Jana has no problem being photographed for her silly staged/filtered instagram photo ops. also shown with the fake mediccorps, at magnolia farms and all.

so why always the cover up? is it to make a TLC story line work or a JB story work?

Seems like a lot of them are always little puppets illustrating some myth somebody else wants to put out there, doesn't it....🤤

Edited by Churchhoney
  • Love 4
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

5 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

Of course. But that's completely beside the point. 

The question in the Duggar case is always -- Was this person (woman, especially an unmarried one) ever asked about what she wanted to do or did everybody (perhaps including the woman herself) just assume that she would do what their stupid and cruel "rules" require her to do, as the lesser being that the traditional Duggar/Gothard/MacArthur/etc system declares that she is? 

This is not a situation happening among the typical people you're describing. It's nothing like that. And to treat it like it is that kind of a situation -- a situation in which everybody's preferences are considered -- is just plain wrong. That's the hideous tragedy of normalizing these fucking people on TeeVee and instagram etc. It tempts viewers to imagine that this is way way way more like their own lives than it is. 

I know this for a fact. I grew up in one of these situations. And I've seen the complete incomprehension of people who simply assume that you have choices that you don't have. No matter what they hear or what they see, they can't get their minds around the facts of just how different and repressive it is. Even when they say they realize you don't get certain choices, they actually think that you do get that. And that you're just happy when you are held back from doing things -- that you chose when you never were offered a choice. 

I'm one of those who noticed.....and who could see the misjudgments people were making about my family because they assumed i was similar to their own. ..... But just because I was a lucky one who saw the differences -- and therefore got out-- doesn't make it right that my family members who didn't realize how suppressed they were or who were too timid to do anything drastic about it didn't deserve to have thei 

That's what drives me absolutely nuts about most discussions regarding the Duggars. "But maybe Jana wanted to??!" In repressive situations like this, the wants of some people are never considered....because they're in a category that doesn't get to have wants. Their category does a, b, and c.....and never even wonders whether it might possibly do something else. And when I say "never considered" I mean -- never considered by Jana herself either....because her family has made even asking about such options unthinkable.

Suppose one of the little Duggar girls truly wants to be a medical doctor. Suppose one of the little Duggar girls is a lesbian. Suppose one of the little Duggar girls even wants to go to high school so she can actually learn calculus and chemistry. Will anyone in this clan ever ever give any of those impulses the tiniest chance even to emerge and be spoken about -- let alone acted upon? I think we all know the answer. And it's all of a piece with Jana babysitting when nobody, even Jana, has actually ever inquired into whether or not she wants to. 

This is a fucking Handmaid's-Tale-in-real-life that's being normalized by the way it's seen on TeeVee and social media and the idiot gossip rags. And it's being perpetrated by a bunch of people who would like to put every one of us in the same position their women, married and unmarried, and their children are in. ....And, in fact, those people are getting stronger and stronger in this country at the current moment. So perhaps we normalize them very much at our own risk, as @Mojitogirl noted earlier to day. 

So to act as if "I chose to look after the kids" is in any way similar to the system of discrimination these people thoughtlessly but relentlessly practice every day of the week is just blind blind blind and wrong wrong wrong, in my opinion. 

In just about every piece i've written here today, I've noted that if looking after Felicity actually is Jana's choice, then of course that's perfectly fine. What I'm pointing to -- and, damn it, I'm going to say it here again -- is that there's a very very very real possibility that nobody (including Jana, because of her programming) has ever for one second considered the possibility that she'd rather not. And that -- by contrast -- is utterly wrong. 

I hear you Churchie.

We make a lot of assumptions on sound bites and posts. I 100% agree that the Duggar woman (and men) are being sold a bunch of bullshit. I also believe the Duggar women are oppressed. But to what degree?

I also believe that the world at large has not had an ideal childhood. I'm guessing many have had a mixture of both. So what is normal is very broad. The Duggar childhoods are unique to them and only them. No one on here has firsthand knowledge of what they're thinking or how they're managing in life.

Part of why I tend to normalize some behaviors is because I believe they are normal and not always a reflection of their uber-Fundy beliefs. Also, I'm trying to allow Jana to reflect any agency she might actually have.

So yes, I believe Jana has a brain, some independent thoughts and the ability to say no to going to Orlando. I'm guessing she might wrestle with some amplified guilt, more than the average person when saying no, but I believe the Duggar children have a little more physical and emotional freedom then we sometimes think.

I draw this conclusion from my own life lense, in addition to providing therapy to a very wide range of folks over many, many years. Also through my experience as a therapist I know it's often hard to figure a person out who sits in front of you, sharing their thoughts, experiences and opinions, week after week. So I know for sure there is more about the Duggars we don't know, than we do know. And I'm sure not all of it is bad.

  • Useful 2
  • Love 11
cm-soupsipper
Message added by cm-soupsipper,

Closure Notice: This Thread is now closed due to the name (and much of the posting within it). Please be mindful going forward by naming topics in a way that invites a healthy community conversation. If you name something for a cheap laugh, this thread may be closed later because it encourages discrimination and harm. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...