|
Post by epeanymous on May 22, 2015 15:52:37 GMT
Oh yes I'm aware of that, but his curiosity came at a time when he had no other outlet. What "outlets" does my non-duggar son have that Josh didn't? My son doesn't have unsupervised access to the internet, just like Josh. He doesn't have the means to buy pornography, just like Josh. My son actually has fewer close relationships with females than Josh does with all those sisters. The curiosity and outlet excuses are gross. He committed a sexually criminal act, several times. Well, and I have seen similar arguments in a lot of places about "healthy exploration" through dating which, I am just going to say, there are pleeeeenty of 14/15-year-old boys who are not getting who do not live in fundamentalist families. Either because their parents will not let them date at that age, or because even if they could date in theory, the opportunity is not ... presenting itself. I can't argue that this family's weird sexual dynamics, where they are pretty much dry-humping in front of their kids while telling their kids "you can't do anything until marriage," doesn't mess with them a lot, but I don't think even that is turning their kids into child molesters. Anyhow, what their lifestyle does do is isolate these kids so when they do get victimized, they have nowhere to go. Their school is their parents. Their church is their parents. Their friends all live in their home and are related to them. They are also told to "keep a joyous countenance” and "keep sweet" in public, and that even looking at women who are "inappropriate dressed" will defraud them, so even when they are off the compound, they are being told to keep themselves fake and apart. THAT contributes to the abuse, because they can't get a sense of what is normal, and even if their normal-meters ping, they have nowhere to turn.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 15:53:56 GMT
Again, the victims names *have* all but been released in this case, by default, which was the original point being made. Makes perfect sense to me. And this goes back to my second (first?) post on this thread - if the only way to maintain that privacy is to sweep the entire incident under the rug, allowing the perpetrator to have continued access to his victims, or allowing him access to other children without informing those who are charged with their safety, then the cost of that privacy is too high. Exactly. That's been said over and over. It' sucks but we can't let him get away with it.
|
|
|
Post by jennyap on May 22, 2015 15:59:35 GMT
Again, the victims names *have* all but been released in this case, by default, which was the original point being made. Makes perfect sense to me. And this goes back to my second (first?) post on this thread - if the only way to maintain that privacy is to sweep the entire incident under the rug, allowing the perpetrator to have continued access to his victims, or allowing him access to other children without informing those who are charged with their safety, then the cost of that privacy is too high. To paraphrase scrappower, no-one said it should be swept under the rug. I certainly don't think it should. I just got the impression that bluerain was highlighting that there is a further cost to the victims of it becoming public.
|
|
caro
Drama Llama
Refupea 1130
Posts: 5,222
Jun 26, 2014 14:10:36 GMT
|
Post by caro on May 22, 2015 16:08:59 GMT
Somewhere up thread I think I read the girls all shared one room and went to bed fully clothed? Can you imagine that conversation: Mom -" girls you will all share a room because there is safety in numbers. And you will sleep fully clothed because your brother has urges he can't help. He makes mistakes quite often. " Sick, sick, sick
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on May 22, 2015 16:11:19 GMT
And this goes back to my second (first?) post on this thread - if the only way to maintain that privacy is to sweep the entire incident under the rug, allowing the perpetrator to have continued access to his victims, or allowing him access to other children without informing those who are charged with their safety, then the cost of that privacy is too high. To paraphrase scrappower, no-one said it should be swept under the rug. I certainly don't think it should. I just got the impression that bluerain was highlighting that there is a further cost to the victims of it becoming public. It's a trade-off.
If the "VICTIMS should have the right to not have their information splashed out there in public" then the only way to do that is to not report, effectively sweeping it under the rug. Otherwise, the best that can be done, the trade-off, is redacting the names of the victims in the police report, which is what happened.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 16:17:52 GMT
So what happens now?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 16:26:44 GMT
Sigh. I think you made the choice to defend your actions and take offense where none was intended. She made the wrong assumption but outside of that I don't think her intentions were as bad as everyone thinks. Yep. Now let's everyone HUG IT OUT!!! SIDE hug it out please....
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on May 22, 2015 16:27:29 GMT
Really? Because I dared not partake in a lynch mob without facts? I shouldn't have a daughter because I can understand how their views and immaturity could have easily lead to something like this? That boy had hormones and feelings that were repressed and shamed. And it's surprising that he acted in such a way? I guess I feel some compassion for a boy raised that way. If that makes me unfit to mother a daughter so be it. Never condoned it...just can understand how it could happen The facts were there, from the very beginning. You say assumptions were being made but you were the only one doing that. The rest of us were reading the FACTS. I was raised in the same exact environment as Josh Duggar. To date I have molested 0 children. Your empathy is misplaced and since you can so easily misplace such empathy it does make me worry for your children should they ever find themselves abused by someone you would prefer not to believe it about. I will never understand how a teenage boy can molest a child. It's disgusting to even entertain.
|
|
|
Post by Regina Phalange on May 22, 2015 16:29:33 GMT
Yep. Now let's everyone HUG IT OUT!!! SIDE hug it out please.... Anmore FTW!!!
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on May 22, 2015 16:33:16 GMT
Who is defending criminal behavior? My point was I can UNDERSTAND how this COULD happen given the nature of their lifestyle. These kids are freakishly immature and repressed about sexuality. A boy with crazy teenage hormones, a sexually repressive 'religion'/belief system, no outlet for information/curiosity fact checking, no privacy for dealing with your own damn body...recipe for disaster! He SHOULD have been punished! But a public hanging NOW doesn't erase the problem. And for ME..fondling breasts is WAY better in my minds cubicle than genitals. It's all wrong...but that just seems much worse to me. Abuse is abuse just like a sin is a sin but we all have our own levels of atrocity He DID touch their genitals! There now can you quit "understanding" his plight? It's like you want to have this block for the seriousness of this. I'm baffled.
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on May 22, 2015 16:46:25 GMT
Saying I hopefully don't have a daughter...and then any kids is basically saying that I'm unfit to parent. And that is a hostile and immature remark...expressing a wider point of view does not make me unfit to parent. Sexual abuse had touched me personally...maybe that's WHY I look at what makes people tick... *i* was the one who said that and I didn't even know IF you were a parent somehow could I be calling you unfit? You seem to read into everything. I will be very up front in why I said it. I question your ability to be empathetic to your child, should they God forbid, be molested. Anyone who can "understand" and be "empathetic" (your words)'to a child molester, is showing no empathy to the victim. You can't have it both ways.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 17:03:32 GMT
Saying I hopefully don't have a daughter...and then any kids is basically saying that I'm unfit to parent. And that is a hostile and immature remark...expressing a wider point of view does not make me unfit to parent. Sexual abuse had touched me personally...maybe that's WHY I look at what makes people tick... *i* was the one who said that and I didn't even know IF you were a parent somehow could I be calling you unfit? You seem to read into everything. I will be very up front in why I said it. I question your ability to be empathetic to your child, should they God forbid, be molested. Anyone who can "understand" and be "empathetic" (your words)'to a child molester, is showing no empathy to the victim. You can't have it both ways. Well, her name is gavins mom. I'm assuming she has at least 1 kid.
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on May 22, 2015 17:10:43 GMT
Haven't read all 12 pages - sorry, but I am even more sickened by the fact that this family wouldn't let their daughters have a normal adult relationship with their fiances as though they had never been touched when they knew their own brother had violated them.
Side hugs and no kissing in a normal dating scenario but fondling and whatever else their own brother did over time is just supposed to be like it never happened.
I knew that a family that size would have some deviants in it. And Josh always creeped me out.
|
|
likescarrots
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,879
Aug 16, 2014 17:52:53 GMT
|
Post by likescarrots on May 22, 2015 17:15:36 GMT
To paraphrase scrappower, no-one said it should be swept under the rug. I certainly don't think it should. I just got the impression that bluerain was highlighting that there is a further cost to the victims of it becoming public. Exactly. I did NOT say it should be swept under the rug. There are no easy answers in how to deal with situations like this. I was just feeling too much for his victims I guess. This case is probably not like most cases because of the public figures involved. I also think I was feeling anger because I don't think bringing it out like this was benevolence on anyone's part. It seems purely about sensationalism. It's a sad and disgusting situation for many reasons. I disagree, this is a person who had/has strong political aspirations. A person who could have ended up making laws that effect women, based on his perception of women and their place in society. I agree that it is horrible that his victims have to see this played out this way, but i see this story coming out more as a way of saying, "this is how fundamentalist Christians deal with sexual abuse/rape/child molestation, and we need to know this if they are going to attempt to force their "morals" on us politically".
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 17:16:34 GMT
And to think how they made such a big deal about saving his first kiss for his wedding day. I'm beyond disgusted with the whole family.
|
|
|
Post by stingfan on May 22, 2015 17:18:30 GMT
I just turned on TLC and the guide info says "19 Kids and Counting." But they're showing an episode of "The Little Couple." So maybe something is happening over there...
|
|
grammanisi
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,741
Jun 26, 2014 1:37:37 GMT
|
Post by grammanisi on May 22, 2015 17:24:27 GMT
I noticed twice today that 19 Kids and Counting is not on. Little Family(IDK) is on instead.
|
|
Olan
Pearl Clutcher
Enter your message here...
Posts: 4,050
Jul 13, 2014 21:23:27 GMT
|
Post by Olan on May 22, 2015 17:25:37 GMT
Exactly. I did NOT say it should be swept under the rug. There are no easy answers in how to deal with situations like this. I was just feeling too much for his victims I guess. This case is probably not like most cases because of the public figures involved. I also think I was feeling anger because I don't think bringing it out like this was benevolence on anyone's part. It seems purely about sensationalism. It's a sad and disgusting situation for many reasons. I disagree, this is a person who had/has strong political aspirations. A person who could have ended up making laws that effect women, based on his perception of women and their place in society. I agree that it is horrible that his victims have to see this played out this way, but i see this story coming out more as a way of saying, "this is how fundamentalist Christians deal with sexual abuse/rape/child molestation, and we need to know this if they are going to attempt to force their "morals" on us politically". I had not thought of it in that way.
|
|
|
Post by greenlegume on May 22, 2015 17:30:09 GMT
|
|
tduby1
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,979
Jun 27, 2014 18:32:45 GMT
|
Post by tduby1 on May 22, 2015 17:32:57 GMT
*i* was the one who said that and I didn't even know IF you were a parent somehow could I be calling you unfit? You seem to read into everything. I will be very up front in why I said it. I question your ability to be empathetic to your child, should they God forbid, be molested. Anyone who can "understand" and be "empathetic" (your words)'to a child molester, is showing no empathy to the victim. You can't have it both ways. Well, her name is gavins mom. I'm assuming she has at least 1 kid. and I made no assumptions based on that. I've been on the net long enough to know that many people incorporate their furry kids into their screen name.
|
|
|
Post by anonrefugee on May 22, 2015 17:33:11 GMT
---"if I continued down this wrong road that I would end up ruining my life"----
That doesn't show a lot of concern about the lives of those he fondled or molested.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 17:35:29 GMT
I just found this: linkAt least one of the victims does not want to be identified. Sad all around. Well, at the risk of being cynical, I can't help but wonder if Jane Doe is one of his still-underage sisters and their parents, as her legal guardians, are initiating this action as much to protect Josh as anything.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 17:37:20 GMT
I just found this: linkAt least one of the victims does not want to be identified. Sad all around. Well, at the risk of being cynical, I can't help but wonder if Jane Doe is one of his still-underage sisters and their parents, as her legal guardians, are initiating this action as much to protect Josh as anything. Exactly. While I feel for the victim that doesn't mean the records should be destroyed. He molested them. Destroying them is revising history.
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on May 22, 2015 17:42:22 GMT
I just found this: linkAt least one of the victims does not want to be identified. Sad all around. Well, at the risk of being cynical, I can't help but wonder if Jane Doe is one of his still-underage sisters and their parents, as her legal guardians, are initiating this action as much to protect Josh as anything. I had the exact same thought. And for her to still be a minor, she was under 6 at the time of the molestation.
|
|
|
Post by greenlegume on May 22, 2015 17:47:24 GMT
Just seems like more sick games from the Duggars.
|
|
Peamac
Pearl Clutcher
Refupea # 418
Posts: 4,229
Jun 26, 2014 0:09:18 GMT
|
Post by Peamac on May 22, 2015 17:48:46 GMT
FYI- Not all fundamentalist Christians deal with sexual abuse/rape/child molestation in this way, and it's very offensive to say that. There are many people who are not the least bit religious who deal with such things the same way the Duggars did. Abuse/rape/molestation should be dealt with properly, no matter the religion/politics/wealth/power/etc of the people involved.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 8, 2024 4:32:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 17:51:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by papersilly on May 22, 2015 17:53:00 GMT
I think TLC made the right decision to pull them off the air. I feel the girls were victimized and to keep showing them after this came out would just continue the victimization.
|
|
|
Post by knit.pea on May 22, 2015 17:53:47 GMT
He has always come across to me as overly smug. And maybe Jim Bob built him up as the next patriarch, being the oldest boy, to carry on their beliefs.
To betray his sisters like that ... disgusting.
Those poor girls. Victimized and then forced to live their lives around what he *might* do again??? Sleeping fully clothed, in a group? Ridiculous.
So he, Anna, and the kids will probably move home again. Jim Bob will set him up with a job/business, and everyone will all be in contact again. Blech.
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on May 22, 2015 17:58:01 GMT
Thank goodness. I hope the show is permanently cancelled, and not just on hiatus.
I also have fear that the girls/victims will be blamed for the fall of dynasty Duggar. That show generated a lot of coin for JB and Michelle and their church.
|
|