The Duggalos: Jinger and the Holy Goalie

[BigBingerBro]

[JoanArc]

5 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

$1 by Memorial Day.

They’ll pay you $16 to take it by the 4th of July.

 

[CalicoKitty]

32 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

Didn't their fans who preordered have to pay full price?

[emmawoodhouse]

13 minutes ago, CalicoKitty said:

Didn't their fans who preordered have to pay full price?

Yup. 

[Temperance]

1 hour ago, BigBingerBro said:

Am I just out of it? Who is this guy pointing at? Who is the pointing guy?

Edited May 10, 2021 by Temperance

[Zella]

Just now, Temperance said:

Am I just out of it? Who is this guy pointing at it?

I think he's pointing at "Buy Now with 1-Click," but he really just looks like he's pointing at his armpit. 🤣

[lascuba]

32 minutes ago, CalicoKitty said:

Didn't their fans who preordered have to pay full price?

Yeah, but in their *gag* defense, it's really common for publishers to do this.

[FizzyPuff]

2 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

Damn that’s expensive let me know when it’s free then I might read it. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by FizzyPuff

[Ohiopirate02]

15 minutes ago, lascuba said:

Yeah, but in their *gag* defense, it's really common for publishers to do this.

This is a standard practice now with publishers.  I see the ebook is still full price.  If you wait another week, it'll be on sale as well.  Publishing is weird now.  Authors are told to promote preorders, but almost all books are being discounted within a month.  I only preorder books from my auto buy  authors.  

The USA Today bestseller list comes out on Thursday and it includes today's sales.   The publisher may have discounted the book today to ensure getting on that list.

[BigBingerBro]

Jinger Vuolo: Duggar family fled Arkansas in dead of night when scandal broke

[ginger90]

20 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

Jinger Vuolo: Duggar family fled Arkansas in dead of night when scandal broke

She made a comment,  which appears in the book, that made me stop reading the article. The actual gall of such a thing. 😡

Edited May 11, 2021 by ginger90

[emmawoodhouse]

24 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

Jinger Vuolo: Duggar family fled Arkansas in dead of night when scandal broke

Wanna bet they fled to the Forsyth ranch?

[galaxygirl76]

2 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

That's still $16 more than I'm willing to pay for this.

[awaken]

7 hours ago, Temperance said:

Apparently one of the highlights of the book is that Jeremy was a party boy in college. He was arrested for some drunken behavior and that made what to change his life around. We already knew that. 

He says that he realized he "wasn't living for Christ."  So he sent his entire college an email to tell people he is a Christian.

Lol, I’m dying to know what kind of responses he got to this grand announcement!  😂

[iwantcookies]

26 minutes ago, awaken said:

Lol, I’m dying to know what kind of responses he got to this grand announcement!  😂

Who dis? 

Edited May 11, 2021 by iwantcookies

[emmawoodhouse]

[satrunrose]

Jinger, sugar pie, honey bunch, the following things are sinful choices that I have made in the last 48 hours:

1- Being too slothful to finish putting away the laundry

2- coveting some married celebrities

3- Skipping Church so I can sleep in (more sloth, I'm good at that one). 

What Josh did? Sooooooo not that. 

Look, the Duggar girls are free to feel and to cope with their abuse how ever keeps them sane, but for the love of all that's holy, could theystop justifying and downplaying the horror that is Josh?

3 hours ago, ginger90 said:

She made a comment,  which appears in the book, that made me stop reading the article. The actual gall of such a thing. 😡

 

[emmawoodhouse]

In their belief system, all sin is equal. Sick and sad. 

[Nysha]

10 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

In their belief system, all sin is equal. Sick and sad. 

Sort of, being LGBTQ and/or having an abortion are unforgivable sins, while sexually abusing your sisters and watching child sexual assault videos featuring toddlers is fine as long as you follow the right Jesus.

[humbleopinion]

Why flee?

JimBlob too cheap to hire Security could reach out to local Friends willing and eager to sit in an ATV with legal carry holstered weapons to secure the road up to the house.

Who needs the burden, the room, the amount of food of hosting this crowd.. easier to just stay put.

[lascuba]

11 hours ago, satrunrose said:

Jinger, sugar pie, honey bunch, the following things are sinful choices that I have made in the last 48 hours:

1- Being too slothful to finish putting away the laundry

2- coveting some married celebrities

3- Skipping Church so I can sleep in (more sloth, I'm good at that one). 

What Josh did? Sooooooo not that. 

Look, the Duggar girls are free to feel and to cope with their abuse how ever keeps them sane, but for the love of all that's holy, could theystop justifying and downplaying the horror that is Josh?

 

This has always been my problem with them. Yes, they have the absolute right to feel what they feel about what Josh did to them, but there's a line between that and downplaying, justifying, and enabling abuse. Where exactly that line is seems complicated as hell  to me, but it's pretty obvious that the Duggar victims are so over that line that they cannot be given a pass.

[Tuxcat]

45 minutes ago, lascuba said:

This has always been my problem with them. Yes, they have the absolute right to feel what they feel about what Josh did to them, but there's a line between that and downplaying, justifying, and enabling abuse. Where exactly that line is seems complicated as hell  to me, but it's pretty obvious that the Duggar victims are so over that line that they cannot be given a pass.

I don't know. I go back and forth. As of today, I don't really see them outwardly justifying or enabling anything. I have not seen any of them defend Josh's latest actions. Most are trying to distance from the situation which seems perfectly fine to me.

With regards to when they were teens, I rewatched the episode in which they talk about their feelings. The girls seem to each have different ways of coping.

Jinger seemed most upset that people knew. She had processed it and tried to move on and so it was difficult that it was public. This correlates to what she says in the book. For Jinger it was about being re-traumatized because she had already tried to put the first trauma away. That is very common. Who wants to relive their trauma again and again?

Jessa handled things by disassociating which is a common coping strategy.

Jill was raw and clear. Those times were difficult and then she stated, "but he's still my brother. He's my brother you know?"  I think she was still trying to process even all those years later.

And Joy seemed personally wounded and confused.

All of them had to go through these moments multiple times. First, when it happened. Second, in front of their public church (and it came up again with the head shaving, silent labor camp stuff). Third, the public release. Fourth, the show.  Fifth, again now.

They are essentially repeatedly re-victimized by their past.  So for that - they can say whatever they want.

 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Tuxcat

[lascuba]

1 minute ago, Tuxcat said:

I don't know. I go back and forth. As of today, I don't really see them outwardly justifying or enabling anything. I have not seen any of them defend Josh's latest actions. Most are trying to distance from the situation which seems perfectly fine to me.

With regards to when they were teens, I rewatched the episode in which they talk about their feelings. The girls seems each have different ways of coping.

Jinger seemed most upset that people knew. She had processed it and tried to move on and so it was difficult that it was public. This correlates to what she says in the book. For Jinger it was about being re-traumatized because she had already tried to put the first trauma away. That is very common. Who wants to relive their trauma again and again?

Jessa handled things by disassociating which is a common coping strategy.

Jill was raw and clear. Those times were difficult and then she stated, "but he's still my brother. He's my brother you know?"  I think she was still trying to process even all those years later.

And Joy seemed personally wounded and confused.

All of them had to go through these moments multiple times. First, when it happened. Second, in front of their public church (and it came up again with the head shaving, silent labor camp stuff). Third, the public release. Fourth, the show.  Fifth, again now.

They are essentially repeatedly re-victimized by their past.  So for that - they can say whatever they want.

 

It's the "sinful choices" wording that's the issue for me. I know that Jinger was raised to believe that every sin (except being gay or women having premarital sex, of course) is equal, but she's been out in the world for a while now, in addition to remembering the public reaction to the molestation story. She is fully aware that a teenaged boy molesting his sisters is not viewed in the same light as consenting adults having sex. Her choosing to describe it that way in her book, 5 years later, is her doubling down on the issue.

[Tikichick]

Overall in general I find myself frequently frustrated that they seemingly cannot see the farce of the entire IBLP system and denounce it.

Then I remember that I'm comfortably saying that from the safe distance of my keyboard, never having been subjected to that horror of being born in and growing to adulthood under the stifling belief system and lifestyle.   That doesn't even take into consideration the good fortune I have of never going through such a horrible experience such as they did -- let alone having to repeatedly relive it under the glare of the press and social media.  

I've seen some other victims who can absolutely give voice to loving their children and having a determination to keep their children safe and protected at all costs end up absolutely putting their children in harm's way and wind up excusing it.   In one case I had a professional explain to me how and why it worked that way, what their report on the situation meant and what they were going to explain to the judge on the stand.   I remember sitting there talking to the doctor and just opening and closing my mouth over and over again, unable to even make one word come out to ask the 210 million questions and disbelieving comments that were whizzing through my skull.   There was plenty of room up there to move around, because my brain was completely blown trying to make sense out of what was explained to me.

Bottom line, it's complex and the mind handles this kind of trauma on multiple levels to make every effort at self preservation.   The logic of what I assume I would think and do as a non victim doesn't translate to what the brain of someone who has suffered abuse will actually do.   Someone else who has also suffered trauma may equally be unable to suggest what another victim will or should do because of the differences in age and maturity when traumatized, the circumstances of each trauma, the differences between personality types and the support network and treatment a victim may or may not have had.      

[Churchhoney]

2 hours ago, Nysha said:

Sort of, being LGBTQ and/or having an abortion are unforgivable sins, while sexually abusing your sisters and watching child sexual assault videos featuring toddlers is fine as long as you follow the right Jesus.

Yeah. One of the things that makes it so clear that all their "religion," "morals" and "philosophy/belief system" amount to is a patriarchy constructed for the patriarchs to get what they want (often at others' expense) is that the sins of heterosexual men -- especially heterosexual adult white conservative married men since that's what most of them are -- , are always pretty easily excusable no matter what they consist of ...while the sins (or "sins") of any other category of person....not so much. 

 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Churchhoney

[GeeGolly]

Over the years I've worked with many survivors of abuse. Their responses to the abuse vary wildly. Thankfully, not every survivor has long term issues. Its easy to assume that the common traits mentioned in many stories of abuse are shared by everyone, but that's just not true. As I've said before, out of respect to all survivors, I will always take the Duggar sisters at their word. 

[Zella]

As a general rule, I believe in taking people at their word, too, but when the people in question have been raised in a cult that stigmatizes abuse victims and actively tries to dissuade people from having emotions and encourages automatic forgiveness, I do wonder whether the girls actually willingly forgave Josh of their own free will or just were basically told to do so and did out of obedience.

By this point, I'm sure it might be a moot point since I do think they think they forgave him willingly, even if it's more a matter of brainwashing than anything, but even if they did willingly forgive him (which is their right and their choice), I really have a problem with them spreading misinformation about abuse, like the idea that this is somehow normal or that what he did wasn't a big deal.

Even according to the warped tenets of their religion, what he did was a big deal. He did things to them that would not be permissible between two members of the opposite sex. So, I do see some real underlying hypocrisy (and dishonesty in how they have fudged details) in the narrative the family has chosen, if nothing else.  

I blame their parents and their cult for that, not the girls who were victimized, but I do find it very problematic, all the same. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Zella

[GeeGolly]

To me, Jessa minimizing the abuse on TV is separate and different than what Jessa and Jill said about how the abuse affected them. To me, factoring in how and why they got to where there at, invalidates what they're saying and feeling. This is how I, as an outsider looking in, chooses to see it. If they came to me for trauma therapy, my thoughts about this would be very different.

I agree, minimizing abuse is never good, and doing it on national TV is worse.

[queenanne]

18 hours ago, Temperance said:

Am I just out of it? Who is this guy pointing at? Who is the pointing guy?

I suspect this is probably some kind of self-promotion auto-thingy graphic that you as an author can get back/generate by visiting a website and inputting your item's ISBN/SKU/ASIN. (Source: I get a lot of emails on author self-promotion. Not familiar with this particular tactic, but it's something that would fit right in.)

[Tikichick]

2 hours ago, Zella said:

As a general rule, I believe in taking people at their word, too, but when the people in question have been raised in a cult that stigmatizes abuse victims and actively tries to dissuade people from having emotions and encourages automatic forgiveness, I do wonder whether the girls actually willingly forgave Josh of their own free will or just were basically told to do so and did out of obedience.

By this point, I'm sure it might be a moot point since I do think they think they forgave him willingly, even if it's more a matter of brainwashing than anything, but even if they did willingly forgive him (which is their right and their choice), I really have a problem with them spreading misinformation about abuse, like the idea that this is somehow normal or that what he did wasn't a big deal.

Even according to the warped tenets of their religion, what he did was a big deal. He did things to them that would not be permissible between two members of the opposite sex. So, I do see some real underlying hypocrisy (and dishonesty in how they have fudged details) in the narrative the family has chosen, if nothing else.  

I blame their parents and their cult for that, not the girls who were victimized, but I do find it very problematic, all the same. 

Can it be considered willingly doing anything if the reason you did it is because you were brainwashed?  I mean they convicted Patty Hearst, but IDK if that proves the point for me.

According to what I'm understanding the tenets of their beliefs to be, yes, what Josh did as a teenager was a big deal -- but under those same tenets the girls are considered to have instigated or caused the behavior and also a big deal.   If they accept those beliefs or have been brainwashed into doing so isn't it understandable they would have reason to fudge the details of the narrative?   IMO most people shy away from publicly accepting the full weight of what they've done, they're ashamed.   Not that I'm saying they did anything or should feel ashamed of anything or have anything to feel ashamed of, merely following the theory that they either believe what IBLP says about this type of thing or they have been brainwashed to believe what IBLP says about this type of thing. 

If we've heard Michelle's tale of breaking up her neighbor's marriage by mowing the lawn in her bikini, I'm pretty sure her daughters can recite it as well.   That pounds home the idea of where responsibility lies.     It's just occurred to me to wonder when it is that Michelle began sharing that little anecdote publicly?

[Churchhoney]

1 hour ago, Tikichick said:

Can it be considered willingly doing anything if the reason you did it is because you were brainwashed?  I mean they convicted Patty Hearst, but IDK if that proves the point for me.

According to what I'm understanding the tenets of their beliefs to be, yes, what Josh did as a teenager was a big deal -- but under those same tenets the girls are considered to have instigated or caused the behavior and also a big deal.   If they accept those beliefs or have been brainwashed into doing so isn't it understandable they would have reason to fudge the details of the narrative?   IMO most people shy away from publicly accepting the full weight of what they've done, they're ashamed.   Not that I'm saying they did anything or should feel ashamed of anything or have anything to feel ashamed of, merely following the theory that they either believe what IBLP says about this type of thing or they have been brainwashed to believe what IBLP says about this type of thing. 

If we've heard Michelle's tale of breaking up her neighbor's marriage by mowing the lawn in her bikini, I'm pretty sure her daughters can recite it as well.   That pounds home the idea of where responsibility lies.     It's just occurred to me to wonder when it is that Michelle began sharing that little anecdote publicly?

I agree with pretty much your whole statement here.

In the case of Michelle and the bikini, though, I have a very strong suspicion that every time she and Jim Bob have told that story, they've actually been bragging. I haven't seen either one of them be interested in talking about their own deficiencies in much detail except for this story, which they seem to have repeated many many times. 

 And what does the story actually prove? That Michelle -- Jim Bob;s woman! -- is so hot that a man who'd never even met her dissolved his marriage and crept away in misery because he was so turned on by watching her walk around on suburban grass with her legs and midriff hanging out. 

 

[GeeGolly]

2 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

I agree with pretty much your whole statement here.

In the case of Michelle and the bikini, though, I have a very strong suspicion that every time she and Jim Bob have told that story, they've actually been bragging. I haven't seen either one of them be interested in talking about their own deficiencies in much detail except for this story, which they seem to have repeated many many times. 

 And what does the story actually prove? That Michelle -- Jim Bob;s woman! -- is so hot that a man who'd never even met her dissolved his marriage and crept away in misery because he was so turned on by watching her walk around on suburban grass with her legs and midriff hanging out. 

 

I agree, the bikini story always was, and continues to be, a humble brag.

[Tikichick]

1 minute ago, Churchhoney said:

I agree with pretty much your whole statement here.

In the case of Michelle and the bikini, though, I have a very strong suspicion that every time she and Jim Bob have told that story, they've actually been bragging. I haven't seen either one of them be interested in talking about their own deficiencies in much detail except for this story, which they seem to have repeated many many times. 

 And what does the story actually prove? That Michelle -- Jim Bob;s woman! -- is so hot that a man who'd never even met her dissolved his marriage and crept away in misery because he was so turned on by watching her walk around on suburban grass with her legs and midriff hanging out. 

 

That's exactly how I have always received the story myself, the Duggar version of a humble brag.  Until I was typing my reply above.   If this little anecdote began to be trotted out publicly after what took place in their home in the early aughts I wonder if it means something else.   Could this be a very stealth way to normalize the idea of who's responsible when "defrauding" is alleged?   

Wasn't there an alleged victim who was not part of the family?   The normal defense against this type of crime is to discredit the accuser.   That can easily backfire.   But if you wrap it in an "accusation" against yourself you're doing it from a whole different level where theoretically it's harder to push back against the motive.

[emmawoodhouse]

We get it. 🙄

https://www.instagram.com/p/COwZBUrFNC1/?igshid=6tdru22ta21e

[BitterApple]

6 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

We get it. 🙄

https://www.instagram.com/p/COwZBUrFNC1/?igshid=6tdru22ta21e

Jinger needs deep conditioner and scissors, asap. Her hair is on life support. 

[Tdoc72]

I read their book at Barnes and Noble today. Quick read...about 65 mins. I enjoyed my Frappuccino.  The book not so much. It was boring.  I hold no hope that I learned one new thing about either of them. They are so vanilla. 

Edited May 12, 2021 by Tdoc72

[emmawoodhouse]

40 minutes ago, Tdoc72 said:

I read their book at Barnes and Noble today. Quick read...about 65 mins. I enjoyed my Frappuccino.  The book not so much. It was boring.  I hold no hope that I learned one new thing about either of them. They are so vanilla. 

Was it preachy, and if so, how?

[Tdoc72]

2 hours ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Was it preachy, and if so, how?

       Actually it wasn’t IMO.  I expected it to be much more Jesus-y.   For example, Jeremy complains about JimBob taking his sweet time deciding if Jeremy can talk to Jinge. He says JimBob had some concerns over the differences in their theology but he doesn’t explain what those differences are when he clearly could’ve written all about them (and why his ideas are right LOL).   JimBob at one point says he can’t get past the differences (so no Jing 😢) but Jeremy wins him over. He also gushes over that MacArther guy a lot. The preachiest part was probably when he decides to give up partying and announces he’s a Christian but luckily that chapter didn’t go on too long.
        I would be mad if I paid full price for this book. It wasn’t very long and it was a quick read. If I was a Christian looking for advice, it would be very lacking. It was just a boring biography of their lives, but nothing even in depth. “Here’s our basic childhood story, then we met, decided to marry, had a honeymoon, decided to have a kid (no talk of birth control, but one of them said they wanted to be married awhile and then one day Jinger said she was ready to have a baby), had Felicity, move to Cali, then miscarriage” and then it just kind of ends.  

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by Tdoc72

[BigBingerBro]

[BigBingerBro]

[lascuba]

44 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

I'm sure they'll hate the 3 stars but that is a remarkably kind review. It's the sort of 3-star review that would convince me to read a book. Not this one, because fuck that evangelizing noise, but in general.

[Gigi43]

Weren't they supposed to make an announcement yesterday? Was it the book signing? Was Jeremy supposed to show off more obnoxious jackets? 

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by Gigi43

[laurakaye]

First of all, "get in my belly" is overdone.  Just stop.  And Jere - stop posting for Jinger, we all know that's you who took that pizza photo and we also know you ate it.

Also, I just found a podcast called "Side Hugs."  The hosts are two women who snark on the Duggars (and drop a lot of F-bombs in the process) and they did a book review of The Hope We Hold.  They mention the strong possibility that Jeremy was initially interested in Jana but that she wasn't interested in him, so Jere finally noticed that Jinger existed and settled for her.  Is that commonly known?  I can't see Jana with Jeremy - he needed someone far more meek and malleable.

[lascuba]

2 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

First of all, "get in my belly" is overdone.  Just stop.  And Jere - stop posting for Jinger, we all know that's you who took that pizza photo and we also know you ate it.

Also, I just found a podcast called "Side Hugs."  The hosts are two women who snark on the Duggars (and drop a lot of F-bombs in the process) and they did a book review of The Hope We Hold.  They mention the strong possibility that Jeremy was initially interested in Jana but that she wasn't interested in him, so Jere finally noticed that Jinger existed and settled for her.  Is that commonly known?  I can't see Jana with Jeremy - he needed someone far more meek and malleable.

Every time a younger sister gets married, the focus is always on Jana and why she was bypassed. When Jinger and Jeremy first started courting and got married, a lot of people thought that Jessa was a bitch who clearly hated Jana and that's why she led Jeremy to Jinger instead of the poor, sweet spinster. I think that's where that rumor comes from, though it wouldn't surprise me if he were more attracted to Jana initially (just based on my own opinion on their looks). But you're right, those two would have been an awful match.

[iwantcookies]

Jinger can cut off her hair to make Jeremy a nice toupee 

 

 

[Normades]

10 minutes ago, iwantcookies said:

Jinger can cut off her hair to make Jeremy a nice toupee 

 

 

How sweet, it would be like "Gift of the Magi" except Jer actually would need it. 

[Churchhoney]

17 hours ago, Tikichick said:

That's exactly how I have always received the story myself, the Duggar version of a humble brag.  Until I was typing my reply above.   If this little anecdote began to be trotted out publicly after what took place in their home in the early aughts I wonder if it means something else.   Could this be a very stealth way to normalize the idea of who's responsible when "defrauding" is alleged?   

Wasn't there an alleged victim who was not part of the family?   The normal defense against this type of crime is to discredit the accuser.   That can easily backfire.   But if you wrap it in an "accusation" against yourself you're doing it from a whole different level where theoretically it's harder to push back against the motive.

Very interesting thought! I have no idea what the history of this tale telling was -- 

I guess one thing for me that goes a bit against this possibility is the fact that they very heavily used Gothard's materials and went to all the conferences and such -- and he's got of a bunch of stuff that just flat out says that victims of sex abuse are always partly responsible for the crimes (even if they're very young children) and must take on that responsibility.

The Gothard stuff cites biblical stories about sexual abuse and rape and real-life stories (anonymized....as far as they can be in an insular group like this, I guess) that are then explicated in detail as examples of why and how the victims must bear responsibility and grant forgiveness and such. And all the Gothardites who've left seem to have been very well acquainted with these stories as kids.

So with all that stuff going on at events and, I kind of think, at the dining room table going over the Gothard materials, I'm not sure why the Duggars'd pick this non-sexual-abuse story as their lesson about what happened and the responsibility.

But....JB and M aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed, so maybe they would! 

Edited May 12, 2021 by Churchhoney

[FizzyPuff]

11 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

Wheres the eye roll smiley reaction when you need one 🙄 

[Jeanne222]

All of them are in some way grifting from the Dugger dynasty!  Those checks are supporting many families!

Nobody wants to cross the line and no longer be a part of whatever serves them best!

Jill left and sets the pace for any that chose to follow her but with that said Jill also has a husband with an accounting and law degree!

[drafan]

On 5/11/2021 at 6:12 PM, GeeGolly said:

I agree, the bikini story always was, and continues to be, a humble brag.

And I think it was a bikini top and cut-off jean shorts.