Jill, Derick & the Kids: Moving On!!

[lascuba]

1 hour ago, DangerousMinds said:

Jill and Jessa don’t live together, where are their masks?

You know good and well that none of the Duggars wear masks unless they're filming (or the law requires it).

 

17 minutes ago, BigBingerBro said:

I wonder if Jessa's visit was genuine.  I feel bad for thinking IB sent her in to snoop and report back.

Jill was the one who posted the pictures, so I'm thinking it's genuine, and that Jessa wasn't one of the siblings who has a problem with the changes she's made. I wouldn't call Jessa non-judgmental, but I do think she doesn't particularly care much about a lot of the nitpicky aspects of her religion. She follows the rules because they don't bother her and she's not a curious person.

Seeing those pics made me think about something I heard once: Everyone grows up in a different family. Because of their personalities, Jill and Jessa's childhoods were very different in a lot of ways, with Jill being the perfect, happy golden child and Jessa being the headstrong kid who didn't listen and needed Jesus beat into her. It strikes me that--with regards to their relationships with the parents growing up, Jessa had a far rougher time of it and yet she's clung more to family and fundamentalism as she's gotten older, while Jill had it easier in a lot of ways because of her temperament, and yet she's drifted.

 

[emmawoodhouse]

Jessa is now suddenly also sucking up to Amy. Interesting developments, indeed.

[hathorlive]

9 hours ago, doodlebug said:

I also do not disagree with anyone questioning the wisdom of Jazz' parents, especially her mother, who has put her daughter into the spotlight for transgender kids since she was around 4 years old.  Her mother has used her to achieve some of her own goals and I am not sure that is such a good thing for Jazz who is pretty spoiled and demanding, if you've seen the show.  She seems like she is going to have a hard time as an adult as she is used to getting her own way all the time, every time.  If Derick wants to question a parent publicizing their child's transgender status as a means to gain attention for herself or even to use a minor to promote awareness of transgender issues; I have no argument.  Jazz really didn't have a choice and, if you watch the show, she seems to have some really big emotional issues that are perhaps best not shared with the world.

Jazz also received an implant to delay puberty to prevent her genitalia from growing and maturing when she was a preteen.  This was done at her mother's request and she actively sought out a physician who agreed with her to do it.  Jazz' mom says she was concerned her daughter would become depressed and suicidal had normal maturation of her genitals occurred, but it is a really fraught and controversial area and it is ultimately the child who faces consequences when they decide to proceed with surgery.  I think it is valid to question her parents' judgement on that issue, too.

What is not OK is to say that gender dysphoria does not exist, that the transgender person is a myth and that God said so.  Because no, no and no.

 

9 hours ago, GeeGolly said:

I think Derick should be entitled to question whatever he wants - respectfully. And when a minor is involved, privately.

You both managed to say what I was trying to say so much more eloquently than me.  I know so little about transgendered and I want to be an ally but when there are minors involved, you are always dealing with parents who may have agendas.  Either way, Derrick could have handled it better.   As for the rest of their beliefs, I sometimes feel that Jill and Derrick get caught up in the larger Duggar family hate.  It's hard to remember what Derrick has ranted about and separate that out from the anti-gay, anti-transgenedered because they are molesters (but not like the molester in our home) kind of things that Mechelle and JB have protested against.  I actually can't seem to recall Jill posting much along those lines.  But I do think she gets blamed for promoting hate and intolerance when I'm not sure she's done those things.  Forgive me, I've had a head injury and my short term memory is shot right now.   I think Jill and Derrick will always be conservative Christians.  And that's fine. I don't need them to agree with me or boycott Hobby Lobby because I hate that company.   I'm happy with the tiny steps that they are taking toward being normal.  And at least Derrick doesn't talk over Jill or tell her what she meant to say like JereME does.   I hope some of this made sense.

[emmawoodhouse]

@hathorlive, one small correction in your education into the trans community. The proper terminology is transgender. There is no ED. If in doubt, use trans. 😊

Edited September 25, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[Zella]

11 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I actually can't seem to recall Jill posting much along those lines. 

Others will have a better memory of this than me, but I personally don't remember that Jill has ever posted anything like what Derick did. I think she is like Jinger in that she's never openly posted about the things her husband has, but she also has never seemed to distance herself from it, so a lot of folks conclude (not unreasonably) that she agrees, but it's not based on anything she's directly said. I could be wrong, though! I've followed the Duggars fairly closely the past couple of years, but before that there were long periods in which I'd ignore them before diving back in, so I might have missed an outburst. 

Edited September 25, 2020 by Zella

[Genevrier]

11 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

I know so little about transgendered

Begin by using the correct term, transgender, not transgendered. And that’s all you really need to do-just offer respect.

[emmawoodhouse]

@Zella, you remember correctly. Jill and Jinger don't post publicly about religion, politics, or social issues. They do express gratefulness to God and whatnot, but they don't preach doctrine.

Edited September 25, 2020 by emmawoodhouse

[Genevrier]

24 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

Jessa is now suddenly also sucking up to Amy. Interesting developments, indeed.

Oh, well, it must be because we Jill and Amy have been getting positive attention here on the forum recently. Jessa always wants to be one of the cool kids. 😁

[Genevrier]

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

Everyone grows up in a different family.

So true. Going by how we remember our childhood, it seems like my twin sister and I had completely different parents. I hadn’t really thought about this in relation to the Duggars, maybe because they’re so boring that I feel they barely have personalities. But they do, they have different individual natures at least. Hmm. 

[hathorlive]

9 hours ago, lascuba said:

Derick claiming that his critique was about Jazz's parents putting her on reality tv is bullshit revisionist history. His complaints were all about Jazz being a trans, and he only claimed to be concerned about exploitation of a minor long after he got heat about his bigotry. Hell, he continued to misgender her WHILE claiming he was concerned that she was being exploited.

 JFC. Derick and Jill are not good people. No amount of spin is going to make their past words and actions less bigoted.

Why does Jill get brushed with the same hatred you have for Derrick?  Did she tweet about how evil transgenders are?  Did she say they didn't exist or should be shot?  Has Jill EVER said anything on the subject?  I have an issue with lumping Jill in with every stupid thing her husband OR family has ever done.  Granted, I can't remember everything she's tweeted or Insta'd about but to my recollection it's mostly been heinous cream of crap recipes and pictures of her staring into the sun.  So unless she's tweeting things that I've missed, I'm not sure why you say Jill is not a good person.

[MichaelaRae]

2 hours ago, ouinason said:

If Derick had said she instead of he then there wouldn't be the big controversy about it.  And I agree with him (outside the gender).  And misgendering is a very common thing and not inherently a sign of evil.  It's stupid and ignorant, but hate takes a lot of energy and I'm not going to start hating every person who has stupid and ignorant beliefs, ideas and word vomit.

 

I'm saving my hate for Michelle and her robocalls and protests over bathroom privileges.  

No, it's not that Derick said she instead of he, it's that he CONTINUED to say he multiple times in the same post - after being corrected more than once - because DERICK MUST be correct because BIBLE JESUS. Derick used the he/his gender-specific words vs. using Jazz or HER preferred gender. In just ONE damn tweet. That's being an asshole not misgendering as a slip.

[hathorlive]

26 minutes ago, emmawoodhouse said:

@hathorlive, one small correction in your education into the trans community. The proper terminology is transgender. There is no ED. If in doubt, use trans. 😊

Thank you so much!  We can only learn when we are corrected.  I once gave the wrong pronoun to a check out person at Ikea.  She was clearly showing her femininity but was quite early in the process.  "He" slipped out and she gently corrected me.  I felt so badly that I started crying at the exit.  My room mate said If I was upset, go speak with her.  So I walked back to her line and told her that I'm older, this is new and I some times make mistakes but that It did not mean I wasn't an ally and that I didn't support her.  We hugged it out but It really left a huge impression on me. 

I want to be respectful of everyone's identity.   Now, the non-binary thing really confuses me. 

Edited September 25, 2020 by hathorlive

[Growsonwalls]

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

Seeing those pics made me think about something I heard once: Everyone grows up in a different family. Because of their personalities, Jill and Jessa's childhoods were very different in a lot of ways, with Jill being the perfect, happy golden child and Jessa being the headstrong kid who didn't listen and needed Jesus beat into her. It strikes me that--with regards to their relationships with the parents growing up, Jessa had a far rougher time of it and yet she's clung more to family and fundamentalism as she's gotten older, while Jill had it easier in a lot of ways because of her temperament, and yet she's drifted.

It makes sense. Jessa is tough as nails. She sees the Duggar religion as a meal ticket -- she's going to "keep sweet" and ride that TLC train until the end. She's not a true believer, she just feels as if this particular lifestyle has brought her a husband who is terrified of her and lots of money. 

Jill probably was more of a true believer. Which is why she fell apart when she was such the perfect child and yet all these crappy things happened to her. When you truly believe something and that faith seems to fail you -- that's Jill. 

[GeeGolly]

Unintentionally using the wrong pronoun is more common when someone knew the person before the transition or if they look like a stereotypical sex. Derick never knew Jazz as her assigned at birth sex nor does Jazz look masculine. IMO, Derick was being hateful using the wrong pronoun and he tagged Jazz, who was a minor, in his tweets.

If I'm remember correctly, Jill did come out with a "statement", possibly answering a poster's question. I believe it was general, maybe even a meme, saying children's best interest are important, or something like that.

I have two co-workers who work with the trans community, an LICSW and an MD. Being trans isn't easy. Being a parent of a trans kid is not easy. Its a balancing act of being totally supportive and not influencing your child in either direction. Anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation and attempts are higher among trans youth. Jazz was born some 20 years ago. I give her parents a lot of credit for listening to Jazz and supporting her needs, especially during a time when there was little information out there. 

From the outside looking in, I feel top and/or bottom surgery should happen in adulthood. But that's my opinion as a mom of cis gender children and as a human who can change my mind about a plethora of things over time, and sometimes in one day. Its confusing because being trans isn't about changing your mind, when you have the wrong parts, you know it, but kids also go through phases and aren't cognitively mature enough to make all decisions in life. So kudos to all those parents navigating life with gender fluid and trans kids.

[lascuba]

8 hours ago, hathorlive said:

Why does Jill get brushed with the same hatred you have for Derrick?  Did she tweet about how evil transgenders are?  Did she say they didn't exist or should be shot?  Has Jill EVER said anything on the subject?  I have an issue with lumping Jill in with every stupid thing her husband OR family has ever done.  Granted, I can't remember everything she's tweeted or Insta'd about but to my recollection it's mostly been heinous cream of crap recipes and pictures of her staring into the sun.  So unless she's tweeting things that I've missed, I'm not sure why you say Jill is not a good person.

I genuinely don't understand how this is a question. On this very forum we constantly discuss the Duggar belief system specifically and evangelical Christianity more broadly. We know what religion Jill practices. We know the beliefs she was indoctrinated with since childhood. We know what her husband has stated outright. We know she hasn't made any statement even vaguely denouncing her husband statements or the beliefs of conservative Christianity regarding LGBTQ or any other social issue. There is nothing about Jill's history that has earned her the benefit of the doubt in this, especially on the issue of trans rights when even some self-proclaimed liberals are stridently opposed. 

[lascuba]

8 hours ago, Growsonwalls said:

It makes sense. Jessa is tough as nails. She sees the Duggar religion as a meal ticket -- she's going to "keep sweet" and ride that TLC train until the end. She's not a true believer, she just feels as if this particular lifestyle has brought her a husband who is terrified of her and lots of money. 

Jill probably was more of a true believer. Which is why she fell apart when she was such the perfect child and yet all these crappy things happened to her. When you truly believe something and that faith seems to fail you -- that's Jill. 

I was thinking more along the lines of how growing up feeling relatively secure in your parents' approval and affection makes for a more secure adult who can deal with losing that approval. Jessa did not have that security during her formative years, so as an adult she clings to her parents ideals so she can get that approval.

[ginger90]

This post came to mind, but it has been deleted. I believe I, or someone else here, posted it at the time.

Thought to be in response to reactions on a post of Derick’s at the time,  about another show (not Jazz), on TLC, Jill responded, in a now deleted post:

 

 

To disagree doesn’t = hate, or judgement. Love doesn’t always = approval. Just because I disagree with my child on something doesn’t mean I hate him, and just because I love and forgive him doesn’t mean I approve of everything he does. You can be friends with, love and care for people you don’t agree with 100%.

 

There can be many interpretations of this, IMO.

Edited September 25, 2020 by ginger90

[Scarlett45]

2 minutes ago, lascuba said:

I was thinking more along the lines of how growing up feeling relatively secure in your parents' approval and affection makes for a more secure adult who can deal with losing that approval. Jessa did not have that security during her formative years, so as an adult she clings to her parents ideals so she can get that approval.

I see what you’re saying but I tend to agree more with @Growsonwalls.

Ive noticed lots of people who didn’t get their emotional needs met as children are total attention whores, emotionally immature and lack normal socially appropriate “boundaries” with other people. They are “love hungry”. I don’t think that’s Jessa. I think Jessa very much likes her life and is playing along to get what she wants. If Jessa didn’t didn’t want to be fundie or quiverfull any more, I don’t think she would be. I also think that’s why the molestations didn’t effect her as much as Jill (in a good way)- she never internalized it, she always knew Josh was a fucking creep and none of it was her fault. 
 

Jill I think is genuinely a kinder more empathetic individual, and growing up in a world where she was always taught to put others before herself came very naturally to her. She genuinely believed everything she was taught and was broken hearted when things fell a part. But I think because her spirit is more sensitive her rebuilding will take a big longer but she will stay true to herself and her ideals in the end. 
 

[GeeGolly]

50 minutes ago, ginger90 said:

This post came to mind, but it has been deleted. I believe I, or someone else here, posted it at the time.

Thought to be in response to reactions on a post of Derick’s at the time,  about another show (not Jazz), on TLC, Jill responded, in a now deleted post:

 

 

To disagree doesn’t = hate, or judgement. Love doesn’t always = approval. Just because I disagree with my child on something doesn’t mean I hate him, and just because I love and forgive him doesn’t mean I approve of everything he does. You can be friends with, love and care for people you don’t agree with 100%.

 

There can be many interpretations of this, IMO.

Thank-you! This is the quote I was trying to recall. Your sleuth skills and memory are amazing!

[lascuba]

52 minutes ago, Scarlett45 said:

I see what you’re saying but I tend to agree more with @Growsonwalls.

Ive noticed lots of people who didn’t get their emotional needs met as children are total attention whores, emotionally immature and lack normal socially appropriate “boundaries” with other people. They are “love hungry”. I don’t think that’s Jessa. I think Jessa very much likes her life and is playing along to get what she wants. If Jessa didn’t didn’t want to be fundie or quiverfull any more, I don’t think she would be. I also think that’s why the molestations didn’t effect her as much as Jill (in a good way)- she never internalized it, she always knew Josh was a fucking creep and none of it was her fault. 
 

Jill I think is genuinely a kinder more empathetic individual, and growing up in a world where she was always taught to put others before herself came very naturally to her. She genuinely believed everything she was taught and was broken hearted when things fell a part. But I think because her spirit is more sensitive her rebuilding will take a big longer but she will stay true to herself and her ideals in the end. 
 

I mostly agree with all of this. I'm not trying to paint Jessa as some completely starved for love victim. I do think that the show is a significant incentive for her, but I also think that her parents fucked her up emotionally in ways that her headstrong bitchiness often conceals, and that their approval of her now is a large factor in why she stays. She's stuck in an infinite loop--if it weren't for the show, she wouldn't have felt the need to play up her faith as much, thereby gaining the parental approval she never got as a child. She got the approval and likes it, and the show gives her extra incentive. I don't think Jessa is a true believer, but I don't think she's faking anything (other than cheerfulness during talking heads) either. It's more that she just doesn't let herself think too much about the absurdity of it all because she'd comfortable and feels good about her life most of the time. It would take something massive to make her analyze and break away, and I think she would go scorched earth if that were to happen. And while I don't wish anything catastrophic to happen, I'd be lying if I said that Jessa's would be the only tell-all I'd be interested in reading. That one wouldn't try to be kind and understanding to anyone.

[Tikichick]

19 hours ago, frenchtoast said:

Firstly, it's not a lifestyle and phrasing it that way diminishes a person's humanity. Secondly, I find the whole love the sinner hate the sin incredibly degrading and toxic. It erases a person and makes the relationship conditional on denying their true selves. I find it cruel and damaging not accepting and loving. If Jill D is like that and hides the bigotry and hatred, then I prefer the out and loud bigotry of Jill R. Don't hide that light, let everyone see you for who you are. The soft bigotry of Jill D just encourages and gives permission for the obnoxious bigotry of Jill R.

I was in no way attempting to dehumanize anyone, nor would I.  Nor did I say anything about loving a sinner or hating the sin, because that's not at all representative of the relationships I was discussing in any way, shape or form.   As I said, it's simply like people with different political beliefs choosing to never discuss the fact they disagree.  I didn't say people who hid their differing political beliefs.  I said people who don't discuss their different beliefs.

The relationships I'm talking about are warm, loving and accepting.   They don't get together in some faux imitation where people change who they are in order to spend the holidays, or go out to dinner or vacation together.   Everyone participates as themselves, freely, openly, with their families and spouses all together.  For them disagreeing doesn't equate to disapproval, shunning, attempting to change others, hatred -- or dehumanizing.   It's simply having a different thought than someone else and not considering that as important in the scheme of their relationship with the person.   A simple flip through several of their wedding albums would probably tell you much more than I ever could. 

[rue721]

10 hours ago, Zella said:

I think she is like Jinger in that she's never openly posted about the things her husband has, but she also has never seemed to distance herself from it

Unlike Jinger, Jill has made posts that are explicitly political and/or socially conscious -- if I remember right, she posted something in support of BLM and she posted a tribute to RBG?

I think Jill's views are evolving, and hell, maybe Derick's are, too. And just because Derick or Ma & Pa Duggar believe something doesn't mean that Jill does. When she speaks for herself (which she does sometimes do) she hasn't been speaking hate.

I don't think we know enough about Jill's political or social beliefs to really say anything much about them, but I think her posts do show she thinks about this stuff for herself and isn't just Stepford Wifing it like Jinger or thoughtlessly parroting her parents. For whatever that's worth.

[GeeGolly]

7 minutes ago, lascuba said:

I mostly agree with all of this. I'm not trying to paint Jessa as some completely starved for love victim. I do think that the show is a significant incentive for her, but I also think that her parents fucked her up emotionally in ways that her headstrong bitchiness often conceals, and that their approval of her now is a large factor in why she stays. She's stuck in an infinite loop--if it weren't for the show, she wouldn't have felt the need to play up her faith as much, thereby gaining the parental approval she never got as a child. She got the approval and likes it, and the show gives her extra incentive. I don't think Jessa is a true believer, but I don't think she's faking anything (other than cheerfulness during talking heads) either. It's more that she just doesn't let herself think too much about the absurdity of it all because she'd comfortable and feels good about her life most of the time. It would take something massive to make her analyze and break away, and I think she would go scorched earth if that were to happen. And while I don't wish anything catastrophic to happen, I'd be lying if I said that Jessa's would be the only tell-all I'd be interested in reading. That one wouldn't try to be kind and understanding to anyone.

I also think Jessa is stuck in an infinite loop, but I think her pride leads the loop and parental approval is secondary. Jessa needs to believe and needs the world to believe, her childhood was good and her spiritual beliefs are great. She needs this for her ego and she needs it because that's the way she and Ben are raising their kids. Her way (and her parents' way) is the right way, because that is only only way she knows how to be.

I think both she and Jill are blind follows of Christianity and neither thinks deeply about what it all means or how it feels. Now that Jill is venturing into some critical thinking she may end up doubling down and start to believe deeply, because Christianity is still front and center in her family.

 

[Marshmallow Mollie]

I grew up in a dysfunctional household. My other brother was constantly getting in trouble, so he got lots of parental attention. Everything revolves around older brother. So, in an attempt to get attention, I went the other way and tried to be perfect all the time. “If I only I made a higher A, then they would notice me.” 
 

I think of that will the Jill v. Jessa debate. Jessa was more headstrong and likely got in trouble more, but that was also one way to get precious parental attention. She probably even got some one on one time with the parents. Negative attention is still attention. 
 

Whereas Jill may have tried to pull some attention from Josh, Jessa, the baby du jour, by being more and more perfect.

[hathorlive]

4 hours ago, lascuba said:

I genuinely don't understand how this is a question. On this very forum we constantly discuss the Duggar belief system specifically and evangelical Christianity more broadly. We know what religion Jill practices. We know the beliefs she was indoctrinated with since childhood. We know what her husband has stated outright. We know she hasn't made any statement even vaguely denouncing her husband statements or the beliefs of conservative Christianity regarding LGBTQ or any other social issue. There is nothing about Jill's history that has earned her the benefit of the doubt in this, especially on the issue of trans rights when even some self-proclaimed liberals are stridently opposed. 

So Jill is guilty by association? That's like saying America issued a travel ban against 7 countries that contain Muslim people, therefore all Americans are anti-Muslim.  Jill belongs to the SBC, per her latest video.  Do we know that SBC hates transgender people?  She may have been indoctrinated since birth by a cult, but that doesn't mean she holds those beliefs.  She's been told since birth that women can't cut their hair or wear pants, yet she's doing both of those things.  While Jill has not denounced her husband's statements, we also don't have any social media posts supporting them either.  The last two "current events" that Jill has posted on has been RBG's death and supporting BLM.  I think its a disservice that denies autonomy and self actualization to a woman to say that someone's family is anti xxx so this person must be anti-xxx.  I personally don't know what Jill's beliefs are but I prefer to find out before I tar and feather someone.

[ouinason]

And, even if the SBC has issues with transgender/nonbinary/LGBT+ people, that doesn't mean that all members of the church agree with it.  I am very proudly Southern Baptist, but I think hating people of any kind, or treating anyone differently for any reason is horse shit.  

[Churchhoney]

The SBC position was a big part of what drove Der to do his rants because their position is all about what they know God's law to be....It was approved overwhelmingly at the 2014 annual meeting and as far as I know still holds. 

"The resolution was passed overwhelmingly Tuesday (June 10) as some 5,000 people attended the annual meeting of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination and elected as president the Rev. Ronnie Floyd, pastor of a northwest Arkansas megachurch.

"The delegates, known as “messengers,” affirmed "God’s good design that gender identity is determined by biological sex and not by one’s self-perception.”

https://www.glaad.org/blog/southern-baptist-convention-officially-condemns-transgender-people

They also came down on biblical gender roles and called loudly for lawmakers and courts to "resist and oppose the efforts to treat gender identity as a protected class." 

“[We] affirm God’s good design that gender identity should be determined by biological sex and not by one’s self-perception — a perception which is often influenced by fallen human nature in ways contrary to God’s design,” a portion of the resolution reads.

“[We] affirm God’s original design to create two distinct and complementary sexes, male and female,” the resolution continues. “We affirm that male and female designate the fundamental distinction that God has embedded in the very biology of the human race.”

The convention’s adopted language also urges all people, whether they be transgender or cisgender, to embrace gender “roles as ordained by God as part of the created order.” Citing First Corinthians 11:7-9, the resolution offers a biblical justification for the rigid enforcement of stereotypical gender roles: “For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.”

Additionally, the resolution reaffirms a belief in the literal interpretation of Ephesians 5:22-33, which famously tells women to “submit yourself to your own husbands” and “as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”

The document goes on to urge church members to "pray for and support legislative and legal efforts to oppose the Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” asking legislators and judges to “resist and oppose the efforts to treat gender identity as a protected class” and calling on members to “oppose all efforts by the media and entertainment outlets and public schools to mainstream transgender identity in the eyes of our children,” and to further instill biblical-era gender roles of womanly subservience to men.

https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/06/12/southern-baptists-vote-are-trans-people-part-gods-design

This is the exact basis of Der's beefs with Jazz and family (and Jer's as well, although he was referring to different religious leaders, primarily), and they were clearly following the precise directions of the SBC  to "oppose all efforts by the media and entertainment outlets and public schools to mainstream transgender identity in the eyes of our children." 

When lots of us here call out Der and Jer for hate and prejudice on the basis of the very strident things they said about Jazz, we should probably give more thought to the fact that they were, in fact, following the direction of the largest Protestant denomination in the country (among other big-time religious leaders).

And on top of the "church leaders" thing, for Der there was the added influence of the fact that the SBC president elected at that same meeting was Ronnie Floyd, the head pastor of the church/churches Der's attended all his life, too. And Floyd has come down hard on this stuff. 

It seems ridiculous to me that people are so sure of themselves about things like this and are willing to extend their interpretations of ancient texts in the ways they do, and in ways that hurt people and that may well be contradicted by science and facts (intersex, among other things).... And I think there's a meanness in their saying the stuff they did, pastoral injunctions or not. But I also think that people's fear of difference is probably why ideas and crusades like this are carried out. And that calling out individuals for meanness probably doesn't address the big problem -- which is having very mainstream institutions making institution-level statements of this kind. 

The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the country (by far), with about 14.5 million people, at last count, or around 5 percent of the population. And that means a couple of things to me --

One -- When you're somebody who's part of a group that big and you're following the group's strongly stated rules (claimed to have God behind them, too), you're unlikely to think that criticisms of your pronouncement from the general public have much worth. So why would Der (or Jer) have listened to the complaints? Both of them think (or have thought, at least) that it's their calling to make sure everybody knows and heeds the important moral injunctions of the SBC (and other evangelical groups and leaders).

Two -- In a group that big, there's no way everybody in it agrees with all the pronouncements the group itself makes, no matter what they are and no matter how strongly they're stated by leadership.  We join and stay in churches because of the people in them, the services, the pastor's personality, and their main tenets -- the ones we sing about in hymns and hear about most often....and the many rules farther down the list, not so much....

So I'm sure there are plenty of Southern Baptists walking around who don't agree with these transgender and gender pronouncements at all. And Jill could be (or may someday be) one of them, or not. 

Edited September 26, 2020 by Churchhoney

[hathorlive]

3 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

The SBC position was a big part of what drove Der to do his rants because their position is all about what they know God's law to be....It was approved overwhelmingly at the 2014 annual meeting and as far as I know still holds. 

"The resolution was passed overwhelmingly Tuesday (June 10) as some 5,000 people attended the annual meeting of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination and elected as president the Rev. Ronnie Floyd, pastor of a northwest Arkansas megachurch.

"The delegates, known as “messengers,” affirmed "God’s good design that gender identity is determined by biological sex and not by one’s self-perception.”

https://www.glaad.org/blog/southern-baptist-convention-officially-condemns-transgender-people

They also came down on biblical gender roles and called loudly for lawmakers and courts to "resist and oppose the efforts to treat gender identity as a protected class." 

“[We] affirm God’s good design that gender identity should be determined by biological sex and not by one’s self-perception — a perception which is often influenced by fallen human nature in ways contrary to God’s design,” a portion of the resolution reads.

“[We] affirm God’s original design to create two distinct and complementary sexes, male and female,” the resolution continues. “We affirm that male and female designate the fundamental distinction that God has embedded in the very biology of the human race.”

The convention’s adopted language also urges all people, whether they be transgender or cisgender, to embrace gender “roles as ordained by God as part of the created order.” Citing First Corinthians 11:7-9, the resolution offers a biblical justification for the rigid enforcement of stereotypical gender roles: “For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.”

Additionally, the resolution reaffirms a belief in the literal interpretation of Ephesians 5:22-33, which famously tells women to “submit yourself to your own husbands” and “as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”

The document goes on to urge church members to "pray for and support legislative and legal efforts to oppose the Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” asking legislators and judges to “resist and oppose the efforts to treat gender identity as a protected class” and calling on members to “oppose all efforts by the media and entertainment outlets and public schools to mainstream transgender identity in the eyes of our children,” and to further instill biblical-era gender roles of womanly subservience to men.

https://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2014/06/12/southern-baptists-vote-are-trans-people-part-gods-design

This is the exact basis of Der's beefs with Jazz and family (and Jer's as well, although he was referring to different religious leaders, primarily and they were clearly following the precise directions of church leaders to "oppose all efforts by the media and entertainment outlets and public schools to mainstream transgender identity in the eyes of our children." 

When lots of us here call out Der and Jer for hate and prejudice on the basis of the very strident things they said about Jazz, we should probably give more thought to the fact that they were, in fact, following the direction of the largest Protestant denomination in the country (among other big-time religious leaders).

And on top of the "church leaders" thing, for Der there was the added influence of the fact that the SBC president elected at that same meeting was Ronnie Floyd, the head pastor of the church/churches Der's attended all his life, too. And Floyd has come down hard on this stuff. 

It seems ridiculous to me that people are so sure of themselves about things like this and are willing to extend their interpretations of ancient texts in the ways they do, and in ways that hurt people and that may well be contradicted by science and facts (intersex, among other things).... And I think there's a meanness in their saying the stuff they did, pastoral injunctions or not. But I also think that people's fear of difference is probably why ideas and crusades like this are carried out. And that calling out individuals for meanness probably doesn't address the big problem -- which is having very mainstream institutions making institution-level statements of this kind. 

But the SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the country, with about 14.5 million people, at last count, or around 5 percent of the population. And that means a couple of things to me --

One -- When you're somebody who's part of a group that big and you're following the group's strongly stated rules (claimed to have God behind them, too), you're unlikely to think that criticisms of your pronouncement from the general public have much worth. So why would Der (or Jer) have listened to the complaints? 

Two -- In a group that big, there's no way everybody in it agrees with all the pronouncements the group itself makes, no matter what they are and no matter how strongly they're stated by leadership.  So I'm sure there are plenty of Southern Baptists walking around who don't agree with these transgender and gender pronouncements at all. And Jill could be one of them, or not. 

Thank you for all of that research and particularly in tying Derrick's faith leader to the adoption of the "interpretation of scripture".   I guess I'm a horrible Christian.  I was raised Disciplines of Christ, which I've come to find out is the most liberal of all protestant denominations.  We never heard our minister call out groups or target groups.  He basically taught us to be nice to other people and help out when we had extra loaves of bread.  I've never been a person with much faith or even tolerance of the church.  But it must be very difficult to be spiritually moved by your church and not be able to pick out the hatred and intolerance they preach.  No one wants to think their minister is a hatemonger.   I do believe in free will and that trumps the bible for me (which is why I'm going to burn in hell, but whateves).  I just don't think you can say any group of any people in any place in the world all have the same thoughts and beliefs. 

[lascuba]

55 minutes ago, hathorlive said:

So Jill is guilty by association? That's like saying America issued a travel ban against 7 countries that contain Muslim people, therefore all Americans are anti-Muslim.  Jill belongs to the SBC, per her latest video.  Do we know that SBC hates transgender people?  She may have been indoctrinated since birth by a cult, but that doesn't mean she holds those beliefs.  She's been told since birth that women can't cut their hair or wear pants, yet she's doing both of those things.  While Jill has not denounced her husband's statements, we also don't have any social media posts supporting them either.  The last two "current events" that Jill has posted on has been RBG's death and supporting BLM.  I think its a disservice that denies autonomy and self actualization to a woman to say that someone's family is anti xxx so this person must be anti-xxx.  I personally don't know what Jill's beliefs are but I prefer to find out before I tar and feather someone.

I think it's infantilizing to assume a person doesn't  hold the values of a group she proudly claims membership of because...she seems really nice? Especially when she hasn't actually said that she doesn't hold those views.

Not all Germans were Nazis and anti-Semites and it shouldn't be assumed that they were. If someone claimed membership to the Nazi party? Sure, it's possible they joined because their family did, but I'm going with the logical assumption that she holds those views until she says otherwise.

Silence is complicity.

[lascuba]

15 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

But the SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the country, with about 14.5 million people, at last count, or around 5 percent of the population.

Any idea if it's 14.5 million active members, or is it like the Catholic Church that claims huge numbers but very few of them actually follow the rules or even attend mass?

 

[Churchhoney]

1 hour ago, hathorlive said:

Thank you for all of that research and particularly in tying Derrick's faith leader to the adoption of the "interpretation of scripture".   I guess I'm a horrible Christian.  I was raised Disciplines of Christ, which I've come to find out is the most liberal of all protestant denominations.  We never heard our minister call out groups or target groups.  He basically taught us to be nice to other people and help out when we had extra loaves of bread.  I've never been a person with much faith or even tolerance of the church.  But it must be very difficult to be spiritually moved by your church and not be able to pick out the hatred and intolerance they preach.  No one wants to think their minister is a hatemonger.   I do believe in free will and that trumps the bible for me (which is why I'm going to burn in hell, but whateves).  I just don't think you can say any group of any people in any place in the world all have the same thoughts and beliefs. 

I know exactly what you mean.

United Church of Christ here, so....same thing as you! To tie spirituality to active negativity against other people seems completely incongruous to me. ... In our confirmation class, we learned many good things about Buddhism, Islam, etc....Especially, of course, the different ways they teach about being nice to people! The contrast with churches where Der and Jer are really doing exactly what their faith role models teach them is so extreme that I don't know what to make of it, really.  

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

Any idea if it's 14.5 million active members, or is it like the Catholic Church that claims huge numbers but very few of them actually follow the rules or even attend mass?

 

It's active. They count repeatedly and, so far, seem to report the actual numbers they find. They have been dropping a bit, especially since about 2008 -- and it's been worrisome to them. And they've seen a slight dropoff in attendance and all that, too, as other churches have been seeing for a long time. The SBC numbers are the lowest now that they've been since the late '80s. 

Nevertheless, their declines have been quite small compared to the drops other denominations have seen. And they grew like crazy for many decades leading up to that. The Catholic Church and LDS seem to be the main groups that count everybody forever who ever said they'd join. 😁

Edited September 25, 2020 by Churchhoney

[Churchhoney]

19 minutes ago, lascuba said:

I think it's infantilizing to assume a person doesn't  hold the values of a group she proudly claims membership of because...she seems really nice? Especially when she hasn't actually said that she doesn't hold those views.

Not all Germans were Nazis and anti-Semites and it shouldn't be assumed that they were. If someone claimed membership to the Nazi party? Sure, it's possible they joined because their family did, but I'm going with the logical assumption that she holds those views until she says otherwise.

Silence is complicity.

I basically agree with you about this. I think we should find out what groups we belong to actually believe and either leave the groups or try hard to change the groups' ways from within if we think they're wrong about something.

 But I also think that virtually all of us would be condemned if we were held to this standard! -- whether for churches, political parties, community groups.......

We tend to join groups as at least partly a social thing, very much an emotional thing based on the feeling they give us, because our friends and neighbors and families belong to a given group, or that we strongly believe in or resonate with the group's primary ideas and haven't ever looked at the many smaller ones that are the books...... 

And it's an especially tough call to ask people to leave groups whose main ideas are good things -- but who have other ones that go with them. ....  I mean, I think most people enter or remain in Christian churches because they embrace the top-line ideas about faith and love and so on and don't even encounter a lot of the other stuff regularly. Christian churches don't generally have the same top-line principles as Nazis! 

It's just a tough call is all.  And most of us aren't analytical enough or brave enough to leave groups over a few things that we disagree with.......I agree that we should be.....But I'm pretty sure that's not the usual level of human operation. 

Especially hard, to me, for someone like Jill at this point, who's already faced with leaving her family, which for most people is the hardest leaving of all.....I'm going to give her some more years before I declare that she has to subject her new church to a purity test, too. For me, she's got enough to rethink and readjust right now! 

Edited September 25, 2020 by Churchhoney

[lascuba]

4 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

It's active. They have been dropping a bit since about 2008 -- and it's been worrisome to them. And they've seen a slight dropoff in attendance and all that, too, as other churches have been seeing for a long time. But their declines have been quite small compared to the drops other denominations have seen. And they grew like crazy for several decades leading up to that. 

Thank you.

I think the issue I'm having with all the positive assumptions about Jill is that I grew up in a culture where religion was just--traditional ceremonies we'd do occasionally while playing lip service to god and jesus while living our lives normally. I can count on one hand the number of Catholics (other than nuns and priests) I know who are at all religious. I have limited experience with evangelical Christians personally, and in my community they were always annoying killjoys everyone rolled their eyes at. I've never met a self-proclaimed evangelical that wasn't, well *gestures vaguely.* What I know, I've learned as an adult from pop culture and politics. Which just confirmed all the negatives for me. So you telling me that it's 14.5 million active members? Whew. Yeah.

[hathorlive]

19 minutes ago, Churchhoney said:

 But I also think that virtually all of us would be condemned if we were held to this standard! -- whether for churches, political parties, community groups.......

Especially hard, to me, for someone like Jill at this point, who's already faced with leaving her family, which for most people is the hardest leaving of all.....I'm going to give her some more years before I declare that she has to subject her new church to a purity test, too. For me, she's got enough to rethink and readjust right now! 

 

That's where I am at with Jill.  First, she does not have to agree with me down the party line to be an acceptable human being.  She has the right to her views, whether I agree with her or not.  Because to do otherwise is exactly what are parents have done to her.  She's a work in progress.  I would have never thought in a million years Jill would wear pants, cut her hair and send her child to public school.  But she did.  There's a chance she may shrug her shoulders at LGBTQ groups and say "rock on".  I've gotten much more Live and let live as I've gotten older.

[ginger90]

Some may recall this from last year.

10 pictures:

 

 

[freejennifer]

Is it just me who thinks Jill doesn't look completely relaxed in those pics? I know she posted them herself, which makes it somewhat less likely that this get-together was orchestrated by JBs camp, but she doesn't seem fully happy to me. Something about her eyes...

[hathorlive]

2 minutes ago, Zella said:

Where it leads for Jill? I have no clue. But I don't think it is a contradiction to recognize that the changes she has made are positive for her even if they don't lead her to a point where she agrees with the vast majority of people on this board. 

I've wasted dictionaries of words trying to say what you did in two sentences.  Thank you for summing that up.  She's growing, learning, evolving, but that doesn't mean she's going to be wearing a pussy hat and protesting with us.  And that's okay.  I admire her spunk.  She's been taught to be a sheep and she's got a huge herd of a family giving her the evil eye. But she's forging her own path and that takes a hell of a lot of courage.  So she gets all the positivity I can send her.

[GeeGolly]

One can have respect for other religions or groups but still have feelings of curiosity and concern about its message and its members. And members of religions or groups shouldn't feel surprised that others wonder about them individually. Its nobody's business what churches or groups folks belong to, or what others believe, until they make others' business. But when and if they do, they need to be okay with folks having assumptions.

If someone discloses they're (insert religion here), they need to be okay with others assuming they're all in, with all it teaches. If someone discloses they're part of the (insert group here), they too, need to be okay with others assuming they're all in. I'm not saying everyone will share the same assumptions or even give it much thought, but they might.

Its okay to assume Jill is all in, the same way its okay to assume Jeremy is all in. Its also okay to give them the benefit of the doubt and think they're more liberal than their churches are. But there is a risk with attaching your name to faiths and groups. And even more so when you share your beliefs on TV and SM.

[sATL]

who  is doing the virtual at home-school  with  the boys? or did their school go back full time?

Anybody know how Jill is filling the time of her days ? hubby still has law studies...

I do wonder if Derrick ( and jeremy ) would support their wives going back to school, if they wanted to do so.

[ouinason]

Sam is still at home during the day, and I believe that Izzy has been at school since school started there, no virtual.

[Zella]

My thing about people is they are complex. Bad people can sometimes do good things and good people can sometimes do bad things. I don't think anyone is above criticism, but I also don't think anyone is below praise if they've done something commendable.

I don't know any of these people. And I'd venture to say I wouldn't enjoy knowing any of them. I can evaluate what they put on there on social media, and that's about it.

I have no problem commending Jill for taking steps that I do think are healthy for her (like being in therapy, setting boundaries with her family, exploring the world beyond the strict rules she was raised in) while also criticizing her when I think it is merited. I didn't comment on it but her maskless meetup with Jessa really irritated me, especially since Jill has sometimes been shown to wear a mask. 

I have no residual goodwill toward Derick because I think he is a liar. But I'll give him kudos for sticking out law school. I didn't think he had it in him to last a semester, but he seems on track to graduate and, unlike RFP, I do believe Derick is actually doing his coursework and is there on his own merits. 

You all know how much Jeremy bugs me. He is my BEC. But even as much as I dislike him, I will give him credit when i think it's due. I am not sure he has many moments of sincerity, but I actually do think his posts over Kobe Bryant's death earlier this year was him being genuine and not just hopping in a trend. And I say that as someone who strongly disliked Bryant and was bewildered by the outpouring of grief for him.

But that's very much where my perspective of Jill comes from. I don't have a pet fundie. But I do find myself intrigued by some of the stuff Jill has said and done lately. It doesn't make her infallible or beyond criticism, but I think it makes her life journey more interesting (even though her everyday life would not interest me) and (I hope) more emotionally healthy than the rest of these folks. 

[lascuba]

1 hour ago, Zella said:

I'd actually argue that Jill's upbringing in that kind of environment is what makes the new changes she's made significant compared to someone who had a more normal, less intense religious background. We have talked about this on here before, and I wholeheartedly agree that lifestyle changes are not the same as political/religious changes. However, at the same time, the changes she has made does demonstrate some changes in her worldview, and I do think those are positive for her as an autonomous person, regardless of what her political beliefs are.

To go from the kind of upbringing where you as a woman are blamed for the sexual urges of men so you have to cover up instead of them learning self-control and where you are told that every single person who disagrees with who is some godless pagan who is going to hell--and not just being from that upbringing but being one of the most ardent true believers in the family and one of the biggest people pleasers--to cutting your hair and wearing pants and socializing with people outside that milieu and being fine with your parents not agreeing with you represents some real progress for Jill as a person. 

That doesn't mean that Jill is going to become a registered Democrat, an avowed atheist, or an LGBT ally, but I do think she has shown a capacity for growth that nobody else in that family has. Sure, some of the other girls do wear pants and make other surface changes, but they still are on the TV show and they are still welcomed in the family fold--they don't seem to demonstrate any interest in critically examining their upbringing, but I think the fact Jill is in therapy does demonstrate some recognition that her childhood was fucked-up and that she is taking steps to help herself heal from that. As someone who is still processing residual bullshit from my childhood who has never found the courage to go to a therapist on my own, I find that remarkably mature for anyone to do that. I'd like to think I am more "normal" than Jill and better educated, but she has me beat there. 

I don't think Jill would have faced this without the family estrangement and her husband and dad being jackasses, but she seems to have responded to it in a way that I respect more than the other coping mechanisms these people have shown. Like Lauren being a passive-aggressive bitch who acts like a toddler having a tantrum or Jessa stubbornly insisting that the way she was raised was totally awesome, thanks so much for asking. 

Where it leads for Jill? I have no clue. But I don't think it is a contradiction to recognize that the changes she has made are positive for her even if they don't lead her to a point where she agrees with the vast majority of people on this board. 

I don't think that the changes Jill had made are insignificant. As a long time viewer of the show, I know they're a big deal and I delight in knowing that JB and Michelle must be dismayed/furious about it. But the conversations about these changes haven't kept it to that, and I take issue with the conflation of these changes to changes in social issues, or that the former must mean that the latter is coming. There's plenty of pants wearing, alcohol swilling bigots out there. It's wild to me that pants, a haircut, and a pina colada have people viewing those two in such a positive light. And it's disheartening how many have poo-pooed  the evils of her religion, her husband's words, their exploitation of Central Americans for their own profit and egos, like the stuff that has real effect in the world just don't matter that much. 

19 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

One can have respect for other religions or groups but still have feelings of curiosity and concern about its message and its members. And members of religions or groups shouldn't feel surprised that others wonder about them individually. Its nobody's business what churches or groups folks belong to, or what others believe, until they make others' business. But when and if they do, they need to be okay with folks having assumptions.

If someone discloses they're (insert religion here), they need to be okay with others assuming they're all in, with all it teaches. If someone discloses they're part of the (insert group here), they too, need to be okay with others assuming they're all in. I'm not saying everyone will share the same assumptions or even give it much thought, but they might.

Its okay to assume Jill is all in, the same way its okay to assume Jeremy is all in. Its also okay to give them the benefit of the doubt and think they're more liberal than their churches are. But there is a risk with attaching your name to faiths and groups. And even more so when you share your beliefs on TV and SM.

Exactly. You don't get to attach your name to a such a huge, influential group and then cry foul when people attribute that groups very public beliefs to you. Religion isn't ethnicity. It's a choice. Own it.

[Zella]

I do understand where you're coming from, @lascuba. That's one reason why I try to clarify in my posts that one (lifestyle changes) don't equate to the other (political changes).

Edited September 25, 2020 by Zella

[Liddy52]

29 minutes ago, Zella said:

My thing about people is they are complex. Bad people can sometimes do good things and good people can sometimes do bad things. I don't think anyone is above criticism, but I also don't think anyone is below praise if they've done something commendable.

So very true!

[Growsonwalls]

You know I'm someone who considers myself extremely liberal. But we don't have a right to tell Jill what her political beliefs should or shouldn't be. My gut feeling is that because of her rather limited upbringing she simply doesn't have many strong political beliefs. Derick is different -- most people in law school are very into politics. But Jill? It reminds me of Ginger Rogers, who self-identified as a "staunch Republican" because her mother was that way. But people who knew Ginger Rogers said "she couldn't tell you any differences between Democrats and Republicans." 

[Spazamanaz]

Ok, I've tried but I just can't figure it out.... who is RFP? 

[GeeGolly]

Whether or not Jill is an informed voter is unknown, but she makes it a point to vote and post it on SM.

RFP is Reverend Fancy Pants.

[BigBingerBro]

20 minutes ago, Spazamanaz said:

Ok, I've tried but I just can't figure it out.... who is RFP? 

RFP = Reverend Fancy Pants AKA Jeremy Vuolo:

 

[Suzn]

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

I don't think that the changes Jill had made are insignificant. As a long time viewer of the show, I know they're a big deal and I delight in knowing that JB and Michelle must be dismayed/furious about it. But the conversations about these changes haven't kept it to that, and I take issue with the conflation of these changes to changes in social issues, or that the former must mean that the latter is coming. There's plenty of pants wearing, alcohol swilling bigots out there. It's wild to me that pants, a haircut, and a pina colada have people viewing those two in such a positive light. And it's disheartening how many have poo-pooed  the evils of her religion, her husband's words, their exploitation of Central Americans for their own profit and egos, like the stuff that has real effect in the world just don't matter that much. 

Exactly. You don't get to attach your name to a such a huge, influential group and then cry foul when people attribute that groups very public beliefs to you. Religion isn't ethnicity. It's a choice. Own it.

This is what I've tried to say, but this does a better job of pinpointing what I find disturbing.  Jill's visible changes do not mean those other things have or will change.

1 hour ago, Zella said:

I do understand where you're coming from, @lascuba. That's one reason why I try to clarify in my posts that one (lifestyle changes) don't equate to the other (political changes).

Precisely.

[Kiss my mutt]

I’m a liberal but maybe not enough for some people or too much for some people.  I reject certain teachings related to the faith I was brought up, so maybe not “Christian enough” or “Too Christian” for others. I try to meet people where they are and find common ground and I hope people would afford me the same consideration. I think Jill has grown leaps and bounds in examining HER beliefs and what they mean to her and I don’t have to agree 100% with her to give her credit for developing agency in her life to start questioning assumptions she has largely had no say in before. The fact that she chose a path that has resulted in largely being ignored by her family in itself shows just how different she is and I can’t imagine that has been easy for her. 

Edited September 25, 2020 by Kiss my mutt