Jill, Derick & the Kids: Moving On!!

[Scarlett45]

3 hours ago, questionfear said:

Except let's say that Jill's quote was that she's fine with people of color, but she wouldn't be ok if Israel or Sam married a woman of color. Would she get a pass for being super racist because otherwise you're being the thought police? 

What she said is no different than if she said something horrifically racist. This isn't a gray area here-homophobia is bad, full stop, and if your opinion is that being gay is a sin, keep it to yourself. 

The thing is- people are allowed to be racist or homophobic. NO they arent allowed to threaten the lives/livelihoods/safety etc of people of color or gay people (or anyone), but they are allowed not to want gay people or people of color in their family, in their social group, in their private lives etc. As a black person, trust I want to know if you dont want me around- which is your prerogative, but that also means I am allowed to not associate with YOU because of your opinions.

like  @hathorlive stated,  People are allowed to have an opinion and a stance, but that also means they have to suffer the social consequences of making their opinions known. If you make it known that you don't want to associate with LGBT people, or people of color, or people with disabilities on a public platform, and people choose not to associate with you socially or hire you because of that stance, well you had a right to your opinion, but everyone else had a right to limit contact with you because of your opinion. 

 

Jill's stance doesnt surprise me at all.

[Zella]

39 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

The thing is- people are allowed to be racist or homophobic. NO they arent allowed to threaten the lives/livelihoods/safety etc of people of color or gay people (or anyone), but they are allowed not to want gay people or people of color in their family, in their social group, in their private lives etc. As a black person, trust I want to know if you dont want me around- which is your prerogative, but that also means I am allowed to not associate with YOU because of your opinions.

like  @hathorlive stated,  People are allowed to have an opinion and a stance, but that also means they have to suffer the social consequences of making their opinions known. If you make it known that you don't want to associate with LGBT people, or people of color, or people with disabilities on a public platform, and people choose not to associate with you socially or hire you because of that stance, well you had a right to your opinion, but everyone else had a right to limit contact with you because of your opinion. 

 

Jill's stance doesnt surprise me at all.

This has always been my thought on it. That was something that stood out to me when Derick and Jill had said something along the line of being at someone's house or having someone at their house and having a respectful dialogue. I get the impression they really think that as long as they are "polite and nice" that someone has to hear them out and otherwise their "right to free speech" is being violated.

But free speech doesn't work that way. They can think whatever they want, but that's a two-way street and nobody has to listen to them or hear them out or hire them, no matter how nice they think their dialogue is. (And of course Derick's dialogue on social media usually isn't very nice, but even if it was, the point still stands.) They want the "entitled to my opinions" part but not the "other people are entitled to boycott me or socially exclude me over my expressed opinions" part. 

[Zella]

As for whether or not they will change any more, I personally think that one can neither assume she will or that she won't. People are complex and can change, though of course many don't. My guess would be that she continues to make, for a lack of a better word, lifestyle changes that show a break from Gothard teaching and move more toward the mainstream on things like fashion, education for the kids, etc., and maintain some distance from her family, without a full-on estrangement, while still holding very conservative religious/social beliefs. 

I personally don't have a problem with applauding the changes she had made because I do think they're better for her kids and that she seems genuinely happier while also still thinking that other beliefs of theirs are awful and that Derick especially is a lying little shitbag whose story changes every few days. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Zella

[thehorseofpower]

As a few others have said, I am more hopeful that the changes Jill is making will benefit her children, as opposed to hoping she will eventually become a full-fledged liberal in regard to issues like the LGBTQIA+ community. I think the progress she seems to have made in extricating herself from the cultish beliefs she was raised with, regardless of how those changes may have come about, is significant, though. My husband was raised in a very strict Seventh Day Adventist family, and in the 13 years we've been together I have watched him move away from more and more of the strict ideas and rules he was raised to believe in (many of which I personally think are bigoted and harmful, both to the believer and to others) and have seen firsthand how hard it is to do and how conflicting it can be.

I do think getting out into the world and interacting with people who are different from oneself is key to this process, but is not enough for everyone, either (like Derick and Cathy). My husband credits going to a public college and working with people who were gay or atheist as the catalysts that first made him question his religious upbringing...but then he also fell in love with me, a liberal, non-religious feminist. If he had fallen in love with another conservative Christian, a la Jill and Derick, I don't know if he would have gotten as far as he has in moving away from the intense disdain for homosexuality, liberals, and atheists that he was raised to have. On one of our first dates, we ended up in a debate on how he felt it was wrong for a public school to read a book to children called "Heather Has Two Mommies" or something like that, and I challenged him on that and explained why I thought the opposite. After that conversation, I thought I was going to have to end things with him because of the political differences between us, but he called me soon after and told me that he had thought over what I'd said, and felt he may have been wrong, and thanked me for making him think differently about it. I feel like to make a dramatic shift in religious or political ideas, it often takes contact outside one's insular group to start sowing seeds of doubt, support from a like-minded spouse or family member whom you trust and respect to give one the confidence to follow through in letting huge shifts in values truly change the way you think and act, and the person's own personality and ability to think critically and examine long-term beliefs. If my husband didn't have the ability to admit he could be wrong and consider another perspective, we wouldn't have ended up married. It's frightening to look at things you were taught all your life that your family has built their lives around and admit that you don't believe all of it and maybe even think your family is wrong, all while still loving them and wanting a relationship with them. I can see why some people are just not capable of making that leap and have to stay, to some extent, in the fold of the core beliefs they were raised with in order to hold onto some semblance of security and happiness. I can't say what kind of personality type Jill may have, but having Derrick as her partner does make it more unlikely to me that she will stray from some of her more conservative ideas unless it is a process they go through together.

If Izzy and Sam get to go to public school, that's an outlet to others who are not like them that they will have starting in childhood, and they now have parents who, while very conservative, are not part of cult beliefs any longer. If one of them forges a connection with a liberal atheist feminist years down the road...maybe enough seeds will have been planted to move the needle on the family beliefs even further. I hold out hope for more surprises from Jill's branch of the family tree.

[questionfear]

56 minutes ago, Zella said:

This has always been my thought on it. That was something that stood out to me when Derick and Jill had said something along the line of being at someone's house or having someone at their house and having a respectful dialogue. I get the impression they really think that as long as they are "polite and nice" that someone has to hear them out and otherwise their "right to free speech" is being violated.

But free speech doesn't work that way. They can think whatever they want, but that's a two-way street and nobody has to listen to them or hear them out or hire them, no matter how nice they think their dialogue is. (And of course Derick's dialogue on social media usually isn't very nice, but even if it was, the point still stands.) They want the "entitled to my opinions" part but not the "other people are entitled to boycott me or socially exclude me over my expressed opinions" part. 

Exactly. And the thing is, at the end of the day it's not about their opinion. What Jill Dillard thinks of the LGBTQ community has no bearing on my life. The problem is that they see it as part of their ministry to bring their view to everyone else and have their view be seen as equal. But their view cannot be given equal weighting and still allow for equality and protection of LGBTQ folks, so by saying their opinion is equal to my rights, they're effectively arguing that I'm a 2nd class citizen and their free speech trumps my right to live in society unharassed. 

[DangerousMinds]

2 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

The thing is- people are allowed to be racist or homophobic. NO they arent allowed to threaten the lives/livelihoods/safety etc of people of color or gay people (or anyone), but they are allowed not to want gay people or people of color in their family, in their social group, in their private lives etc. As a black person, trust I want to know if you dont want me around- which is your prerogative, but that also means I am allowed to not associate with YOU because of your opinions.

like  @hathorlive stated,  People are allowed to have an opinion and a stance, but that also means they have to suffer the social consequences of making their opinions known. If you make it known that you don't want to associate with LGBT people, or people of color, or people with disabilities on a public platform, and people choose not to associate with you socially or hire you because of that stance, well you had a right to your opinion, but everyone else had a right to limit contact with you because of your opinion. 

 

Jill's stance doesnt surprise me at all.

To me some things are simply a difference in opinion, such as liking beets or not, but being racist or homophobic is a difference in morality.

[Scarlett45]

3 minutes ago, DangerousMinds said:

To me some things are simply a difference in opinion, such as liking beets or not, but being racist or homophobic is a difference in morality.

I agree. But people are allowed to be immoral assholes. We don’t have to like it or enable it, or encourage it, but they still have the right to be immoral assholes up and until they actively hurt others (like threats, violence, theft etc). 

[DangerousMinds]

33 minutes ago, questionfear said:

Exactly. And the thing is, at the end of the day it's not about their opinion. What Jill Dillard thinks of the LGBTQ community has no bearing on my life. The problem is that they see it as part of their ministry to bring their view to everyone else and have their view be seen as equal. But their view cannot be given equal weighting and still allow for equality and protection of LGBTQ folks, so by saying their opinion is equal to my rights, they're effectively arguing that I'm a 2nd class citizen and their free speech trumps my right to live in society unharassed. 

And more than that, they want to legislate their beliefs and force others to accept and abide by them. 

2 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

I agree. But people are allowed to be immoral assholes. We don’t have to like it or enable it, or encourage it, but they still have the right to be immoral assholes up and until they actively hurt others (like threats, violence, theft etc). 

Or try to make their views the law for everyone.

[GeeGolly]

1 minute ago, Scarlett45 said:

I agree. But people are allowed to be immoral assholes. We don’t have to like it or enable it, or encourage it, but they still have the right to be immoral assholes up and until they actively hurt others (like threats, violence, theft etc). 

I would include picketing, voting, restricting services and restricting opportunities...

Great minds think alike @DangerousMinds.

[Suzn]

48 minutes ago, questionfear said:

Exactly. And the thing is, at the end of the day it's not about their opinion. What Jill Dillard thinks of the LGBTQ community has no bearing on my life. The problem is that they see it as part of their ministry to bring their view to everyone else and have their view be seen as equal. But their view cannot be given equal weighting and still allow for equality and protection of LGBTQ folks, so by saying their opinion is equal to my rights, they're effectively arguing that I'm a 2nd class citizen and their free speech trumps my right to live in society unharassed. 

 

21 minutes ago, DangerousMinds said:

To me some things are simply a difference in opinion, such as liking beets or not, but being racist or homophobic is a difference in morality.

 

15 minutes ago, DangerousMinds said:

And more than that, they want to legislate their beliefs and force others to accept and abide by them. 

Or try to make their views the law for everyone.

Yes, it is far more than merely about Jill's and Derick's thoughts and opinions!  They would like to legislate against the rights of other people and they have a platform to promote their views.

[GeeGolly]

Didn't Derick say the field of law he is interested in is helping folks who aren't heard, be heard? I'm guessing that isn't the LGBT+ and BIPOC communities.

[BigBingerBro]

[Zella]

IIRC a lot of the criticism leveled at Derick was lack of transparency about what he was doing with those donations, not that he had another income source in addition to them. I think people stopped donating because they didn't trust him to use the money in the way it was intended, not because they thought he was rolling on a bed of TLC money.

[GeeGolly]

4 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

It seems to me that message is a day late and a dollar short.

[GeeGolly]

I don't remember reading a People article about this, but most magazine articles about the Duggars are picked up from posts and comments, so I think Derick has it backwards.

Derick needs to get off his, its everyone else's fault, kick.

[Zella]

3 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Derick needs to get off his, its everyone else's fault, kick.

He seems to share with both Jeremy and Jessa the same trait of spectacularly taking the wrong lesson from things. 

[Tikichick]

5 hours ago, Zella said:

This is a good point. I have not watched the recent stuff on NXIVM but a few years ago I fell down the cult research rabbithole, especially with Jim Jones and Scientology. It was really eye-opening, especially with Jones, how many people who were intelligent and educated were recruited and stayed for years--and even died with him at Jonestown. 

It took several episodes and information from several former participants before I finally could grasp how it was possible for people to get sucked in and have no idea.   The commonality was they were all looking to be a better person and do good in the world.  Monsters exploited that intent and once they gained control used it for their own purposes.   I think it probably started out similarly for some people who followed Bill Gotherd, they were just looking for a means to fully embrace their faith and live it.   Outside of it it's easy to see why much of what he outlined suited his own desires and in fact has nothing to do with faithfulness or spirituality.   I think for many inside it probably looks much different and they either have no idea what the purpose is behind many of the ideas they're following, or they don't believe it when those ideas are challenged.

[Zella]

2 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

It took several episodes and information from several former participants before I finally could grasp how it was possible for people to get sucked in and have no idea.   The commonality was they were all looking to be a better person and do good in the world.  Monsters exploited that intent and once they gained control used it for their own purposes.   I think it probably started out similarly for some people who followed Bill Gotherd, they were just looking for a means to fully embrace their faith and live it.   Outside of it it's easy to see why much of what he outlined suited his own desires and in fact has nothing to do with faithfulness or spirituality.   I think for many inside it probably looks much different and they either have no idea what the purpose is behind many of the ideas they're following, or they don't believe it when those ideas are challenged.

Yes, and I think it is also very hard for people to admit they were wrong. One of the books I read about Jonestown had extensive interviews with the survivors. By the time a lot of people realized things had taken a very dark turn, they were already stuck, and at the time, they thought it was easier to just stay or they couldn't admit to themselves that a group of people they had come to think of as family were that fucked up. I can definitely see how a lot of the Gothard acolytes either choose to stay because it is what they know and/or just actively disbelieve anything that would cause them to admit that they were deceived by a really creepy con artist, one many of them enabled. 

[Zella]

Actually Derick is a pretty good example of refusing to accept he's been wrong. He can't admit his own decision-making and role in the debacle that was his time on reality TV, so instead he blames JB and TLC for it all. I doubt they're wholly innocent parties, but I also don't believe that Derick is either. 

[Tikichick]

4 minutes ago, Zella said:

Yes, and I think it is also very hard for people to admit they were wrong. One of the books I read about Jonestown had extensive interviews with the survivors. By the time a lot of people realized things had taken a very dark turn, they were already stuck, and at the time, they thought it was easier to just stay or they couldn't admit to themselves that a group of people they had come to think of as family were that fucked up. I can definitely see how a lot of the Gothard acolytes either choose to stay because it is what they know and/or just actively disbelieve anything that would cause them to admit that they were deceived by a really creepy con artist, one many of them enabled. 

I honestly cannot understand how he sold anybody his line of nonsense in the first place either.   Once again I think I would have to hear from several thinking people who once participated in his circus before becoming aware and breaking away.   Even though it's rather meaningless, one thing I would really like to hear from a former participant, one with actual intellectual capabilities, is how anybody swallowed the necessity of long, curly hair for women being so integral to faith?    The same God created the women of all races, with all hair types -- yet he only found favor in one specific niche styled one specific way?   I just cannot credit swallowing that idea, no way, no how.   

[ginger90]

7 minutes ago, Zella said:

Actually Derick is a pretty good example of refusing to accept he's been wrong. He can't admit his own decision-making and role in the debacle that was his time on reality TV, so instead he blames JB and TLC for it all. I doubt they're wholly innocent parties, but I also don't believe that Derick is either. 

Considering just about every decision Jill and Derick have made and shared, has been prefaced with, the Lord has lead us........was he lying?

[Zella]

2 minutes ago, ginger90 said:

Considering just about every decision Jill and Derick have made and shared, has been prefaced with, the Lord has lead us........was he lying?

I don't believe a word he says because his story keeps changing. I'm sure there is a kernel of truth in one of the stories, but I don't think someone who consistently contradicts themselves is being truthful. It cannot be true that he both had a contract and didn't have a contract, but he has claimed both. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Zella

[Tikichick]

5 minutes ago, Zella said:

Actually Derick is a pretty good example of refusing to accept he's been wrong. He can't admit his own decision-making and role in the debacle that was his time on reality TV, so instead he blames JB and TLC for it all. I doubt they're wholly innocent parties, but I also don't believe that Derick is either. 

I think back to what brought Derrick to the Duggars and TLC -- he sought out a spiritual mentorship with JB.   I don't think that's insignificant or to be forgotten for a moment when taking a look at Derrick's fury.   For JB it was no doubt just another way he could trumpet his superiority as a man of faith and something else for his gluttonous ego to stuff down his gullet.   I genuinely do think that was a deep emotional and spiritual relationship for Derrick, and especially significant for someone who's probably still mourning the loss of his father.   

Finding out who JB really is was a bitter pill for Derrick to swallow.   Essentially in his mind it's probably as if he fell headfirst in love, thought it was absolutely reciprocated 100-percent, then found out he'd been catfished, she'd run off with everything he owned and his best friend too.  I think some of what Derrick has said was literally howls of rage and pain -- and the wound is still sensitive and opens now and again.     

[emmawoodhouse]

I don't remember him claiming to have a contract, but I do remember him asking TLC to pay Izzy's hospital bill.

2 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I think back to what brought Derrick to the Duggars and TLC -- he sought out a spiritual mentorship with JB.   I don't think that's insignificant or to be forgotten for a moment when taking a look at Derrick's fury.   For JB it was no doubt just another way he could trumpet his superiority as a man of faith and something else for his gluttonous ego to stuff down his gullet.   I genuinely do think that was a deep emotional and spiritual relationship for Derrick, and especially significant for someone who's probably still mourning the loss of his father.   

Finding out who JB really is was a bitter pill for Derrick to swallow.   Essentially in his mind it's probably as if he fell headfirst in love, thought it was absolutely reciprocated 100-percent, then found out he'd been catfished, she'd run off with everything he owned and his best friend too.  I think some of what Derrick has said was literally howls of rage and pain -- and the wound is still sensitive and opens now and again.     

Derelict definitely had it in for Boob before he dragged Jill into it. I imagine this was the first time someone he admired turned out to be a charlatan.

[Zella]

3 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

I don't remember him claiming to have a contract, but I do remember him asking TLC to pay Izzy's hospital bill.

Derelict definitely had it in for Boob before he dragged Jill into it. I imagine this was the first time someone he admired turned out to be a charlatan.

He initially claimed his contract with TLC made him in violation of his missionary contract, ignoring the fact he filmed for years and multiple seasons while with both organizations. I remember it because I was like "Boo fucking hoo, who's fault is that, plus it makes no sense." Then he started claiming he never had a contract. 

6 minutes ago, Tikichick said:

I think back to what brought Derrick to the Duggars and TLC -- he sought out a spiritual mentorship with JB.   I don't think that's insignificant or to be forgotten for a moment when taking a look at Derrick's fury.   For JB it was no doubt just another way he could trumpet his superiority as a man of faith and something else for his gluttonous ego to stuff down his gullet.   I genuinely do think that was a deep emotional and spiritual relationship for Derrick, and especially significant for someone who's probably still mourning the loss of his father.   

Finding out who JB really is was a bitter pill for Derrick to swallow.   Essentially in his mind it's probably as if he fell headfirst in love, thought it was absolutely reciprocated 100-percent, then found out he'd been catfished, she'd run off with everything he owned and his best friend too.  I think some of what Derrick has said was literally howls of rage and pain -- and the wound is still sensitive and opens now and again.     

I think you are correct. Incidentally, I'd have a lot more sympathy for Derick if he'd just admit that he reached out to JB during a really vulnerable time and his judgment was clouded and he now feels betrayed and used. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Zella

[emmawoodhouse]

2 minutes ago, Zella said:

He initially claimed his contract with TLC made him in violation of his missionary contract, ignoring the fact he filmed for years and multiple seasons while with both organizations. 

Wow, I didn't realize he tried to pull that. I guess he really thought his leghumpers were just that gullible. Because hey Derelict, TLC filmed you plenty in Danger America. And SOS continued to pay you, otherwise you would have left long before you did.

Edited October 26, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[Zella]

3 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Wow, I didn't realize he tried to pull that. I guess he really thought his leghumpers were just that gullible. Because hey Derelict, TLC filmed you plenty in Danger America. And SOS continued to pay you, otherwise you would have left long before you did.

Yeah I remember when he said that, I thought there was absolutely no way that either organization's attorneys would have let that slide. I don't think for a minute he would have ever been in Danger America if either organization had had a contract issue, and he would have been beholden to TLC because that was the first contract.

I guess it could mean he was lying then about having a contract to sound more sophisticated at the time. Or he's lying now because he realizes it actually sounds quite flexible of TLC to let him go outside the alleged bounds of his contract and partner with another organization he allegedly wanted to work with. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Zella

[GeeGolly]

16 minutes ago, Zella said:

Yeah I remember when he said that, I thought there was absolutely no way that either organization's attorneys would have let that slide. I don't think for a minute he would have ever been in Danger America if either organization had had a contract issue, and he would have been beholden to TLC because that was the first contract.

I guess it could mean he was lying then about having a contract to sound more sophisticated at the time. Or he's lying now because he realizes it actually sounds quite flexible of TLC to let him go outside the alleged bounds of his contract and partner with another organization he allegedly wanted to work with. 

Or maybe he lied because it doesn't look good to call out a child on social media because he didn't get his way.

If I'm remembering correctly, using Jazz to slam TLC was Derick's first public reaction to TLC refusing to pay medical bills.

[Zella]

2 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Or maybe he lied because it doesn't look good to call out a child on social media because he didn't get his way.

If I'm remembering correctly, using Jazz to slam TLC was Derick's first public reaction to TLC refusing to pay medical bills.

Yes, and he's also lied about that. Early on, he sort of admitted he'd been fired before he started claiming he left on his own. 

At the very least, he has done this enough that I really don't believe anything he says without some independent confirmation. If he told me the sky was blue, I'd still look outside to check. 

[emmawoodhouse]

4 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Or maybe he lied because it doesn't look good to call out a child on social media because he didn't get his way.

If I'm remembering correctly, using Jazz to slam TLC was Derick's first public reaction to TLC refusing to pay medical bills.

Right. And now we learn that he was already no longer in TLC's employ when he said those horrible things. At the time, we didn't know that they had quit/been fired because there was a lag between Sam's birth (when they actually left) and the Jazz statements. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[Zella]

Just now, emmawoodhouse said:

Right. And now we learn that he was already no longer in TLC's employ when he said those horrible things. At the time, we didn't know that they had quit/been fired because there was a lag between Sam's birth (when they actually left) and the Jazz statements. 

But do we know if they actually left after Sam's birth or is that a later story he told to make himself look less bad? I could have sworn a few months after the Jazz incident, he admitted it got him fired. But with him, who knows. 

[emmawoodhouse]

Didn't they refuse to have Sam's birth filmed? I thought that was the tipping point.

[Zella]

3 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Didn't they refuse to have Sam's birth filmed? I thought that was the tipping point.

As with most things, I think Derick has told multiple stories. At one point, I thought he was angry about them not being reimbursed for the costs of the birth and that it was filmed but never shown. But again I don't know. 

I could also see him being pissed about whatever went down with Sam's birth and then intentionally trying to get himself fired with the Jazz comments or even just going after Jazz because he felt he was being slighted by TLC and Jazz wasn't. Or being pissed about being fired/quitting because of the birth and taking it out on poor Jazz for having the perceived audacity to still be on TV when he wasn't. 

This reminds me of another one of Derick's personal blindspots. He calls out the Duggars for exploiting Jill, which is fair enough, but he doesn't seem to have had a problem with doing the same with his own children. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Zella

[emmawoodhouse]

I wonder when the Dillards started trying to get reimbursed for Izzy's birth? That was over 2 years before TLC filmed/didn't air or just didn't film Sam's birth, which does appear to be the Dillards' Last Stand w/r/t appearing on Counting On. Did it just occur to Derelict when Sam was born that they should pay up for the Izzy birth bonanza?

Edited October 26, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[GeeGolly]

6 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

I wonder when the Dillards started trying to get reimbursed for Izzy's birth? That was over 2 years before TLC filmed/didn't air or just didn't film Sam's birth, which does appear to be the Dillards' Last Stand w/r/t appearing on Counting On. Did it just occur to Derelict when Sam was born that they should pay up for the Izzy birth bonanza?

Actually, I'm guessing it did. I'm thinking at some point during Jill's pregnancy with Sam, Derick realized they may be facing more medical bills and held Sam's birth hostage until TLC paid for Izzy's birth.

I guess it didn't work.

[ginger90]

Video:

 

 

[Future Cat Lady]

2 hours ago, BigBingerBro said:

Is he unintentionally admitting that the funds were used for his living expenses and not the mission?

[QuinnInND]

I'd still like to know what exactly happened with Sam's birth. Because something went wrong. It didn't go as planned somehow. I'm surprised the story hasn't come out somehow. They had a lot of medical bills it seemed that they wanted TLC to pay for. Or JimBlob. Someone. Because they didn't have insurance then, did they? 

[Churchhoney]

47 minutes ago, Future Cat Lady said:

Is he unintentionally admitting that the funds were used for his living expenses and not the mission?

Well, that wouldn't be much of an admission from the point of view of his world, I don't think.

Tons of missionaries get their living expenses from donations. A lot of people who give to missionaries just accept that supporting the mission means supporting the missionaries, because otherwise the missionary would have to come to the job independently wealthy or work a day job and do the missionary work in their spare time. To a lot of donors, the missionary is the mission. 

Some missionaries get salaries from an organization they're working with or from a church denomination, but many don't. Or they get a small salary but not enough to actually support themselves. Some people claim that most missionaries don't get a wage or at least a living wage and depend primarily on donations for food and clothes and so on.

Der and Jill weren't official SBC missionaries (Jill, at least, couldn't have met the qualifications), so they didn't get any money from their church. And maybe the faux missionary group/travel agency JB hooked them up with gave them their house and nothing else. The guy who runs that is a Gothardite and they're notoriously chintzy, so it'd be no surprise if he expected people to pay their own way to a large extent via donations. 

Edited October 27, 2020 by Churchhoney

[Jeeves]

2 hours ago, Churchhoney said:

Der and Jill weren't official SBC missionaries (Jill, at least, couldn't have met the qualifications), so they didn't get any money from their church. And maybe the faux missionary group/travel agency JB hooked them up with gave them their house and nothing else. The guy who runs that is a Gothardite and they're notoriously chintzy, so it'd be no surprise if he expected people to pay their own way to a large extent via donations. 

I think you're spot on about SOS Ministries.  I have never thought that SOS paid Derick much money, plus I've always assumed that in good fundie misogynistic fashion they didn't pay Jill ("the wife and helpmeet") at all. SOS did I assume provide their round trip airfare and transportation and gave them that place to live. But I figured that they were pretty much just getting by on what they got from SOS.

[SMama]

I thought Derick admitted using donations for their many trips back home.

I could be very wrong but I think we have a tendency that conflate Israel’s and Samuel’s births. Derick complained about TLC not paying for Israel’s birth. He was still at Walmart so I don’t understand how much out of pocket it was. 

If he was telling the truth it took them a year to pay their share for Izzy’s birth. Derick justified his bitterness by stating TLC made bank out his son’s birthday special.

I have no recollection of any whining about the cost of Samuel’s birth. Odd since the Dillards were most likely uninsured at the time. Also, Sam spent time in the NICU. The little fella seems to be doing well and that’s what matters.
 

 

Edited October 27, 2020 by SMama

[rue721]

Derick needs to take responsibility for his choices. And I also don’t know why he thinks the world owes him a favor 🙄

[emmawoodhouse]

22 minutes ago, rue721 said:

Derick needs to take responsibility for his choices. And I also don’t know why he thinks the world owes him a favor 🙄

He needs to get that huge chip off his shoulder. 🙄

[GeeGolly]

I was rereading Derick's explanation of why they're doing the People articles now. I found myself thinking maybe TLC/JB asked them not to mention pay back then, or maybe they're thinking of doing another mission and want to clear things up now. Then I thought to myself, fool me once...

Derick is right, he lost all credibility back then. It has nothing to do with TLC, JB or any magazine articles. Its all about the ways he did and didn't answer the legit questions asked of him. He answers were either empty, condescending, sarcastic or down right lies. Even his latest post attacks the questioner by saying, "don't assume". Derick forgets - the internet is forever.

And now Derick and Jill are doing the same thing all over again. They're still providing vague answers except when they can place blame elsewhere. And while it may be working somewhat now, it won't stick because they're not taking any accountability. 

In the end it doesn't really matter. No matter what TLC/JB did or didn't do, Derick dragged an innocent child into something that had absolutely nothing to do with her. That showed Derick's true character.

[Absolom]

14 hours ago, SMama said:

If he was telling the truth it took them a year to pay their share for Izzy’s birth. Derick justified his bitterness by stating TLC made bank out his son’s birthday special.

I have no recollection of any whining about the cost of Samuel’s birth. Odd since the Dillards were most likely uninsured at the time. Also, Sam spent time in the NICU. The little fella seems to be doing well and that’s what matters.

I was wondering if not paying for Israel's birth is what lead to the you can't film or show Samuel's birth.  If TLC wouldn't cover the co-pays/co-insurance, then why let them have the greater drama that seemed to happen with Samuel?  I don't disagree with that either.

8 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

And now Derick and Jill are doing the same thing all over again. They're still providing vague answers except when they can place blame elsewhere. And while it may be working somewhat now, it won't stick because they're not taking any accountability. 

Right.  He's told so many versions of things and slanted things to suit his view at the moment that his credibility is gone.  Playing the victim always gets old for the viewers or listeners and eventually most people wise up that the common denominator is the whiner.  That applies on reality shows, forums, and really across the board.

[QuinnInND]

https://www.instagram.com/p/CG1O4iSAn-u/?igshid=1k5snhtddkpdy

Just now, QuinnInND said:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CG1O4iSAn-u/?igshid=1k5snhtddkpdy

Another Instagram error. Grr. This looks delicious actually. 

[skatelady]

On 10/26/2020 at 6:38 PM, Tikichick said:

I think back to what brought Derrick to the Duggars and TLC -- he sought out a spiritual mentorship with JB.   I don't think that's insignificant or to be forgotten for a moment when taking a look at Derrick's fury.   For JB it was no doubt just another way he could trumpet his superiority as a man of faith and something else for his gluttonous ego to stuff down his gullet.   I genuinely do think that was a deep emotional and spiritual relationship for Derrick, and especially significant for someone who's probably still mourning the loss of his father.   

Finding out who JB really is was a bitter pill for Derrick to swallow.   Essentially in his mind it's probably as if he fell headfirst in love, thought it was absolutely reciprocated 100-percent, then found out he'd been catfished, she'd run off with everything he owned and his best friend too.  I think some of what Derrick has said was literally howls of rage and pain -- and the wound is still sensitive and opens now and again.     

THAT'S what a prayer partner is? Seriously - I thought that "prayer partner" was a Christian-y euphemism for "person who donates money to me".

[emmawoodhouse]

3 minutes ago, skatelady said:

THAT'S what a prayer partner is? Seriously - I thought that "prayer partner" was a Christian-y euphemism for "person who donates money to me".

Pretty sure it's both. 

[Zella]

I'm sure there were ulterior motives all around with the Jim Bob and Derick partnership, but I've had friends/classmates who did something sort of like missionary work and, just based on that, prayer partners can be a thing in which literally all it involves is prayer. I will admit that I've never heard it in quite those terms. 

Most of the missionaries I knew were English majors who went to countries like China, Laos, Cambodia, or Vietnam to teach English for a Christian organization for a year or two after they graduated from college and then went through some sort of TESOL training. They were not allowed to proselytize but they also saw themselves as missionaries, and shared Christian prayer and worship was a big part of the team member identities. And they also had to raise money for their support.

I never gave a damn dime to any of them--the whole thing kind of made me uncomfortable for several reasons, though I liked most of these people and am sure they meant well--but I still ended up on the receiving end of a fair share of newsletters that greatly emphasized prayer requests they had. A lot of them ended up having some pretty crippling depression and homesickness after the novelty of living in a new country wore off and others developed pretty close ties to their students and would send prayer requests about them. 

For that reason, I don't necessarily find it odd for a young missionary to seek out a prayer circle in addition to (or as part of) his donation base.

I find it weirder to zero in on Jim Bob Duggar as your sole prayer partner. Or I assume he was the only prayer partner. I could be wrong, but in the variations I've heard, it seems like Derick only had eyes for Jim Bob. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Zella

[Growsonwalls]

I think Jill had two extremely difficult births that really broke her spirit. She was raised to believe that labor was this magical, wonderful thing that Michelle could go through 19 times. But obviously that wasn't in god's plan. Jill was doing everything right but both births were treacherous and difficult. 

I think that's when she realized:

1) she couldn't have 19 kids. Probably not even 6 or 7.

and

2) after awhile, she decided that it wasn't so bad to have a small, manageable family

Joy and Jessa also have had some difficult births but neither of them seemed as shaken to the core as Jill was.