Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This blog is managed by a group of administrators who are all in ongoing contact with each other. To share your questions or concerns with us privately, please send your email to: Maggie at shatzie1980@yahoo.com or sharla.smith@live.com
1. Do not be rude to other posters or call them names.
2. No online petitions.
3. Do not be rude about the children or call them names. Commenting on the behaviour that we have seen is acceptable, but no name calling.
4. Do not refer to calling CPS or use the term child abuse unless we something that actually is abusive.
5. Watch profanity.
6. Don't tell the moderators how to run the blog.
7. Be careful about boards on boards and please don't discuss or provide links to other Duggar boards.
8. No diagnosing mental/medical conditions.
9. No posting addresses.
10. Along with not being rude don't tell other people how to think, act, or behave - don't try to tell other people what to do or not do.
11. No using the kids' names or moderators' as your screen name.
12. Comments including "I'm sure you won't print this" will never be printed.
13. No unsolicited recaps. We are not recapping the Duggar shows.
14. The administrators are not able to verify the identity of people who comment here. Believe what you choose to believe.
15. Please use proper grammar, spelling, capitalizations and punctuations in your comments. No instant message type speaking.
16. Please refrain from beating the dead horses such as Josh's years ago expressed interest in law school. If the Duggars have moved on, so should we.
2. No online petitions.
3. Do not be rude about the children or call them names. Commenting on the behaviour that we have seen is acceptable, but no name calling.
4. Do not refer to calling CPS or use the term child abuse unless we something that actually is abusive.
5. Watch profanity.
6. Don't tell the moderators how to run the blog.
7. Be careful about boards on boards and please don't discuss or provide links to other Duggar boards.
8. No diagnosing mental/medical conditions.
9. No posting addresses.
10. Along with not being rude don't tell other people how to think, act, or behave - don't try to tell other people what to do or not do.
11. No using the kids' names or moderators' as your screen name.
12. Comments including "I'm sure you won't print this" will never be printed.
13. No unsolicited recaps. We are not recapping the Duggar shows.
14. The administrators are not able to verify the identity of people who comment here. Believe what you choose to believe.
15. Please use proper grammar, spelling, capitalizations and punctuations in your comments. No instant message type speaking.
16. Please refrain from beating the dead horses such as Josh's years ago expressed interest in law school. If the Duggars have moved on, so should we.
528 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 528 Newer› Newest»Being a Duggar does not mean you have power in Arkansas. Believe me. I live on the same road as them, and if you asked a random person in the grocery store about the Duggars, they may or may not know who you're even talking about. They really keep a low profile here. Michelle usually goes to the store by herself (even though the show makes it look like they travel in packs all the time). They really don't make that many waves in this community...but TLC likes to make it look that way. They are way more reclusive than the show makes them look. However, there is often tons of cars in their driveway. They must have company a lot.
My husband just brought home two cabbage patch dolls for me to make outfits for since I like to sew. Then I come up here to read about how Gothard believes these dolls were causing strange and destructive behavior in children that could only be alleviated when the dolls were removed or destroyed.
I did research online to see if this was true and sure enough he does or did teach this at one time based on people's testimonies.
I do not know how much the Duggars buy into his teachings. I know personally I could not condone the teachings of this man, but it does not make me think any less of the Duggars if they desire to follow some of his teachings.
JimBob Duggar said other people view debt as a gift.
The doctors helping Josie have skills that are a GIFT to the Duggars.
It's not JimBob's or anyone else's business whether or not the doctor went into debt to become a doctor.
For JimBob to unilaterally criticize other people's finances, debt or not, as he did in the article, is just yet another example of JimBob's "unique" way of thinking.
reality bites said...
Also his comments on people seeing debt as a blessing and not their children as such, is the most stupid, arrogant and pompous thing I've heard in a long time.
_________
Said the people who put their kids private moments on TV for lots of money.
So the upshot is: Michelle did leave her preemie baby, the one who is in precarious health and struggling for life, to attend a meeting on whether to give a liquor license to a mini mart.
It appears that for some reason, Michelle thought it was more important that she attend that meeting than stay close to her premature newborn baby on breathing apparatus, heart monitor, and other equipment in NICU. If I'm not mistaken, that meeting was many miles away from the hospital, was it not?
I had a normal birth with my son, he was born healthy and well and we left the hospital after two days. (The birth was harder on me than him I guess lol)
Very little pulled me away from him as a healthy baby; and I think nothing could have dragged me from his side if his health had been uncertain.
Michelle is fertile and has had many babies. That I grant her. But I think she's lacking or maybe worn out the maternal instinct that ties us so tightly to our children that the rest of the world fades into insignificance when one of our children is in danger.
from all I have read quiverfull is opening your womb to god. everything else is more Gothard stuff. that's far worse. so they follow the basic tenet of quiverful but they follow a evil woman hating man that thinks he is god on earth. in the inner circles of his god domain he even controls who can have lots of children. it is more Gothard who is behind the army of god crap. the duggers are worse then quiverfull.
Jane in California said...
So the upshot is: Michelle did leave her preemie baby, the one who is in precarious health and struggling for life, to attend a meeting on whether to give a liquor license to a mini mart.
It appears that for some reason, Michelle thought it was more important that she attend that meeting than stay close to her premature newborn baby on breathing apparatus, heart monitor, and other equipment in NICU. If I'm not mistaken, that meeting was many miles away from the hospital, was it not?
----------------------------------
Jane-
I grew up in Little Rock and if the ABC board is in the State Capitol complex it is just a mile or so from UAMS and across the freeway from Children's.
But she still left her preemie who was fighting for every breathe regardless of the reason. (I do understand leaving to sleep, etc not to protest a liquor license)
"Wow, just wow. I found this so eye opening. In one way you do get an idea how those who follow QF deal with people that might "stray" or moms that may have more on their plate than they can handle ATM. It's so very sad. Some of the other articles are just draw dropping.
http://nolongerquivering.com/2010/02/02/the-49-character-qualities-of-ruth-5/#more-3917"
While her story is indeed very sad, it is simply not representative of all QF families, or even any QF churches there may be.
"Quiverfull" is a rejection of birth control, and a strong view of children as a blessing. There are cruddy, scary, cultish people who have that belief among their other beliefs, and there are loving, egalitarian, even leaning-towards-feminist people who reject contraception/fertility-control for various reasons. And everything in between.
"Those who follow QF" vary hugely in their beliefs. There is *one* belief we all hold in common, and that is the one having to do with no birth control. Apart from that, we are very diverse.
Was grazing channels and saw the promo for the "airplane" show. Noted that Josh was DEFINTELY wearing AEROPOSTALE shirt, not the "Our Apostle" shirt someone claimed he wearing some time ago. Guess his tastes have changed, or the viewer of the earlier show was mistaken.
Cyn said...
The Duggars have repeatedly said they are NOT quiverful.. Posters on blogs and in articles keep lumping the Duggars into the quiverfull movement with the thought process of "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a duck."
(snipped)
----------------------
Yep, that poster would be me, well, one of them anyway. I can't recall who all posted the others on other threads. I've rewritten this post about 90 times, trying to keep it short & trying to figure out how best to explain.
I loved your post Cyn, well voiced & well thought out as always. I liked your analogy very much & please don't take the following as disrespect. What made me smile is that the Duggar's are Donald Duck & the QF are DAFFY duck. That is going to stick with me forever now. Every time I see or hear QF, I'm going to think DAFFY.
In very short, I don't believe the Duggars. I know I'm not alone in thinking this, so I post the links, because I believe those people might be interested. I figure anyone who isn't interested won't bother with it. I don't know why other's feel this way about the Duggars & if I did it wouldn't be appropriate to speak for them.
In not so short, my intuition/ gut feeling/ whatever you want to call it won't shut up on this one. Yep, it's a sucky response. It irritates me, it's bound to irritate others, which is why I hold back from some posts, I can't exactly put "Well I have a feeling" or "my Spidey sense says danger, danger it's not real cheese". I've just learnt enough over the years to sit up & listen to it because when I don't it always comes back to bite me on the butt.
I'm really sorry I can't be more logical atm, but it's been taking it's sweet freaking time on the whys. I've read that statement of their's about not being QF so many times trying to figure out just what it is thats bugging me & it's got me pulling my hair out.
Yes, I know I'm heading into crackpot country, I can hear the train whistle
CappuccinoLife said...
While her story is indeed very sad, it is simply not representative of all QF families, or even any QF churches there may be.
(snipped)
"Those who follow QF" vary hugely in their beliefs. There is *one* belief we all hold in common, and that is the one having to do with no birth control. Apart from that, we are very diverse.
---------------------------
It was not my intent to lead people to believe that ALL QF families were this way. If I did I apologize as it was not my intention. It was posted as any other link for people to look at or disregard as they like.
@Cyn@Quiverful, Cyn, It seems a very fine line between the chosen lifestyle of the Duggars and their Quiverful friends.
While Duggars may not openly lay claim to being Quiverful, they DO subscribe to some of the main ingredients of the Quiverful belief system, including:
1) not using birth control of any kind and 'letting god' decide the # of children they bring into this world
2) via home schooling and keeping a very tight reign on how much exposure even their 20 year olds have with the real world, they, like Quiverful, are raising 19 carbon copies of themselves and their beliefs.
In summary, though they may not overtly support Quiverful, by their chosen lifestyle, they are certainly emulating the Quiverful lifestyle.
JMO, there's no real difference between the Duggars and Quiverful folk, except the Quiverful folk openly waive their "birthing God's righteous warriors" banner, while the Duggars are more covert so as to be more PC for TLC and potential viewers.
I have done some reading on QF and I am very sorry, but I find it very scary. I found the articles on the site to be mostly conjecture and lacking in any scientific objectivity. Citing multiple references does not mean it is objective. The studies must be replicated and in peer reviewed journals. The same results must be shown many times in order for a change in medical practice to occur, this is evidence based practice. I do not believe that exhaustive research of scientifically published research has been done. I am very uncomfortable with the way these journals are used to sway people. It reads like a presidential campaign-1/2 truths, opinion, and lots of emotion; including fear.
I hear very similar talk out of the Duggars. This is yet another reason why I find them so very disconcerting. Jim Bob (it's usually him) is often making statements that have little to no basis in fact. I never hear JB trying to objectively consider someone else's POV.
Many people are very sincere and serious about their faith. Since JB is also very serious about his faith, would people listen to what he says due to their common beliefs? (Not looking to get in to arguments over specific dogma, just talking about commonalities.) Misinformation and fear can cause so much damage. I am not trying to offend anyone, it's just that I work in health care and there is so much bad information out there, particularly that found on the net. QF and the Dugs only represent ONE point of view, but JB states things as if they are a fact for everyone (i.e.-people view debt as a gift.)
I often wonder, are there any non-caucasian families in QF? There may be, I just haven't seen any. I am starting to see the Dugs as more of a cult than a family. JMO.
Amanda said:
Jane-
I grew up in Little Rock and if the ABC board is in the State Capitol complex it is just a mile or so from UAMS and across the freeway from Children's.
But she still left her preemie who was fighting for every breathe regardless of the reason. (I do understand leaving to sleep, etc not to protest a liquor license)
* * *
Thank you Amanda for the information. So at least she didn't drive miles away to attend the meeting, but she still left the hospital shortly after having serious health issues and a c-section, and leaving her newborn premature baby.
It does show a very different side to Michelle and I found it very telling. As I said, the maternal instinct seems to have gotten messed up. Maybe when you churn baby after baby out, after awhile they all become a bit of a blur and you don't feel that extremely strong maternal protective attachment anymore?
Interesting how we haven't seen this outing in any of the recent episodes. I guess TLC also realizes that it wouldn't go over well with the general public.
And before anyone says "well, this is her private business and maybe the Duggars didn't want it all over tv," remember they allowed filming of the actual birth. You can't get too much more private than that!
Families that attend ATI conferences are fully on board with Gothard's teachings, not just SOME of the teachings. Your whole family is required to believe everything that Gothard believes if you want your family to attend an ATI conference. If the Duggars simply liked a few of Gothard's ideas, I can't imagine they'd be interested in his annual conferences.
Here's an application form for an ATI conference, the last page is particularly interesting to me:
http://ati.iblp.org/ati/admissions/documents/application.pdf?show=true
Here is an interesting article about TLC and mainly the Duggars. There are a few errors in it though.
http://onmilwaukee.com/living/articles/bigfamiliesonrealitytelevision.html?21641
but JB states things as if they are a fact for everyone (i.e.-people view debt as a gift.)
I'm just wondering when people started viewing opinions of JimBob's printed in a gossip rag like People as "facts?"
The guy is just stating his opinion based on what he has observed (high consumer debt and low birth rates amoung Americans). That doesn't mean anyone else has to agree with his opinion.
The guy is just stating his opinion based on what he has observed (high consumer debt and low birth rates amoung Americans). That doesn't mean anyone else has to agree with his opinion.
____________
That's what makes him and his comments so pathetic. Maybe if he got out into the real world more and observed your "average" American family, instead of driving around in a bus and parading his family around like a sideshow, preaching about why he is so wonderful, he'd see how very, very wrong he was in making that comment. Someone else said this here, and I agree. There is absolutely no positive spin that can be put on this comment. He, and people like him, are very self-righteous, and there's nothing that is a bigger turn-off.
It's not just Jim Bob, I have Uncles a lot like him, and they are pompous and self-absorbed, too.
I'm not kidding, I feel sorry for people like the Duggars, and my cousins, having been raised by these types of men.
Jib bob and his statement is pretty silly coming from someone who controls the thoughts and actions of his children. gives them no freedom and no experience with life. giving the girls no choice in their future other then making babies.
I am sorry this is not a good parent no matter that he is a christian. this is just a manipulative controlling gothard trained father.
the children are made to feel guilty if they don't follow every command blindly. that's why they are so well behaved because they are so well controlled by guilt and fear.
Duggars and the Super Bowl?
While talking Buffalo Wing recipes for the Super Bowl at church a lady said she can't watch the Super Bowl with her children because of the commercials.
That made me wonder do the Duggars get to do things we all consider normal, such as watch the Super Bowl?
I just read over the ATI application. I am so horrified on so many levels, that this is one of the rare times in my life when I have no words...
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Families that attend ATI conferences are fully on board with Gothard's teachings, not just SOME of the teachings. Your whole family is required to believe everything that Gothard believes if you want your family to attend an ATI conference. If the Duggars simply liked a few of Gothard's ideas, I can't imagine they'd be interested in his annual conferences.
Here's an application form for an ATI conference, the last page is particularly interesting to me:
http://ati.iblp.org/ati/admissions/documents/application.pdf?show=true
____
I laughed out loud when I read this question:
"To the father: how many hours per week do you work?"
Nowhere does it ask how many hours per week the mother works. I guess it is just assumed that she is a stay-at-home mom. The idea that dad could be the stay-at-home parent and homeschool teacher while mom is the main breadwinner apparently has not occurred to them.
That made me wonder do the Duggars get to do things we all consider normal, such as watch the Super Bowl?
__________________________________________________________
You'd be surprised at how very many people could care less about the Super Bowl. It's mostly a media contrived event and people who do not watch TV on a regular basis are immune to the hype.
And there are people who let ATI have this much say in their lives? Unbelievable! How much tv, women working outside the home, the father doing anything away from family except work? And the music thing is just stupid. Maybe the Duggars will realize how unbiblical it is to follow one man's (Gothard) interputation of the Christian faith.
That made me wonder do the Duggars get to do things we all consider normal, such as watch the Super Bowl?
********************
Not everybody *cares* about the superbowl. ;) My kids didn't see it and they are not deprived or downtrodden for having missed it. What's normal to you, or normal to me, or normal to the Duggar's is different.
I know my kids wish they got to do some of the things that are "normal" for the Duggar's. Like having a climbing wall and a tunnel in the house. But we're not them, and we have fun in other ways. Neither one is superior.
Thank you Cappuccino Life, I appreciate your candor. The reason I posed the question is because I have read intimations that QF was covertly racist, which I found very disturbing. I am aware that the belief of no birth control is common in other cultures, however; I was referring to some of the references of both QF and Gothard regarding mighty warriors for Christ. I read something to the effect of preparing for a war against other religions; I believe it may have been in Newsweek, but I may be mistaken as it was quite some time ago. When I speak of QF, I am doing so with the impression of it in terms of Western conservative Christianity, not just eschewing birth control, so my apologies for any miscommunication and my lack of complete information. Thanks again for the info.
CappuccinoLife said...
That made me wonder do the Duggars get to do things we all consider normal, such as watch the Super Bowl?
********************
Not everybody *cares* about the superbowl. ;) My kids didn't see it and they are not deprived or downtrodden for having missed it. What's normal to you, or normal to me, or normal to the Duggar's is different.
I know my kids wish they got to do some of the things that are "normal" for the Duggar's. Like having a climbing wall and a tunnel in the house. But we're not them, and we have fun in other ways. Neither one is superior.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh yes, my children and I wish to do somethings that the Duggars consider normal and we are free to do so. I was wondering if anyone of the Duggars wanted to do something that others considered normal they would be free to do so. If they wanted to see what the super bowl was all about could they? (Super bowl just an example)
Even if the ATI principles weren't so odd, that application is to my mind way too intrusive into anyone's personal life. That would be enough to make me tell them to shove off. No one outside the family in the home? What about Jim Bob's mother?
the references of both QF and Gothard regarding mighty warriors for Christ.
I am decidely not a Gothard fan, but the above information is incorrect. Gothard materials refer to raising children to be mighty in the Spirit of God, not "mighty warriors for Christ."
An individual who follows the QF no birth control idea wrote a book called "Birthing God's Mighty Warriors." Her religious beliefs are not followed or shared by Gothard or the Duggars. She is WAY OUT in terms of not being a mainline Christian.
Another RN, I thought maybe that was what you meant, but wasn't sure.
What I tend to harp on a little is that "Quiverfull" is just a chosen label for a religiously based rejection of birth control. In spite of what people think it is not a "white, fundy, Duggar-like" lifestyle. It's just a label. Some people who use it fit that stereotype, many don't. Many who do fit the stereotype don't or won't use the label, while others who don't fit, do use the label. I have no problem using "QF" even though my family doesn't look at all like the Duggars, or some other family who uses that label.
ATI is something we can get our teeth into as an organization/cult (however you view it), with it's conferences, applications, stated lifestyle requirements, etc. Even the quiverfull homepage is very much unlike that, and very much focused on the subject of birth control and pro-life issues, not lifestyle choices. No HQ, no leadership system, no conferences with intrusive applications,...
So I wonder who is teaching The School of the Dining Room Table now that Michelle is spending the next year concentrating on Josie.
re: The ATI questions about the father doing anything away from family except work.
Then I guess JimBob is going to be ousted from the ATI Club, since he leaves the house to attend the oh-so-evil Weight Watcher Meetings !
Anonymous said...
So I wonder who is teaching The School of the Dining Room Table now that Michelle is spending the next year concentrating on Josie.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The show said that a family friend had come to teach.
I am decidely not a Gothard fan, but the above information is incorrect. Gothard materials refer to raising children to be mighty in the Spirit of God, not "mighty warriors for Christ
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you for the correction. I actually do remember that woman and her book and I misspoke and was inaccurate. Mea culpa.
Another RN said, "...to be mighty in the Spirit of God, not "mighty warriors for Christ
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Either way, "blessed are the meek" works better for me...
(and I doubt many who qualify as 'meek' would be willing to put themselves and their family on a reality show)
I was curious and "looked up" Bill Gothard and ATI. The ATI medical classes are entry level like first aid or skills useful in helping a sick neighbor; however, there are also medical doctors mentioned on the website. I was interested in the music courses because I have a music degree. They definitely believe in extensive musical education although with a Christian focus. Church is actually the most frequent use for musical skills if you are not a professional musician, but that is definitely "education" in my view.
If a family friend is teaching the children, and not the parents, it is against Arkansas homeschooling law, which clearly states that parents (or legal guardians) are the only ones allowed to do homeschooling. No siblings. No friends.
On April 2, 2007, Governor Mike Beebe signed into law House Bill 2394, changing the definition of a "home school" in Arkansas. Prior law defined this term as "a school primarily conducted by parents or legal guardians for their own children." The new definition for a home school is "a school provided by a parent or legal guardian for his or her own child." ~ Kay Brooks
guess it's NOT against the law...
http://homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/laws/blAR.htm
Why does ATI require submission of a recent family photograph, plus individual photos of any family member 14 and over?
I also found it creepy that they say any individual not related to the family should not live in the home. So if you have a family friend who is down on their luck, you can't open your home to them in their time of need? This sure seems to fly straight in the face of what Christ taught. "That which you do for the least of your brothers, you do unto me." I'm sure I have the quote wrong, but not the intent. Christ taught that we should help those in need, and I do not recall him saying "don't let non-ATI members live with you, even if otherwise they would be homeless."
I also notice that employment by the mother is greatly discouraged. The ATI people don't sound very cool with a mother working even in a home-based business, because it would take her away from teaching her children at home.
I wonder what ATI considers the "universal, non-optional principles of life found in the Bible"?
The more I learn about the Duggars and the beliefs they follow, the less I like them.
Time to reel things back in. Remember this is about the Duggars not a referendum on quiverful, ATI, adoption, Gothard, or the readers' personal lives. None of the Duggars are adopted so it really isn't relevant. Thanks.
Jane in California said...I also notice that employment by the mother is greatly discouraged. The ATI people don't sound very cool with a mother working even in a home-based business, because it would take her away from teaching her children at home.
*********************************
Michelle worked in the earlier years of their marriage, Anna is working with Josh...
Anna is with Josh at the car lot, but except for that one awkward, obviously forced attempt to show her "selling" cars, it doesn't appear she does much except sit on the couch and watch Josh. I've never seen her at a desk, doing paperwork or anything business-like. And now that she has a baby to "train," she will need to be at home much more, which could be a very good thing, because she looked darned uncomfortable trying to convince those people that Josh had a car to suit their needs.
I think she's there mostly to keep Josh company (or yell Nike at him). Guess he'll have to learn how to be on his own now, if he wants to be approved for the next ATI conference.
Jane in California said, "...I also notice that employment by the mother is greatly discouraged. The ATI people don't sound very cool with a mother working even in a home-based business, because it would take her away from teaching her children at home."
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
And, oh, also not so coincidentally, keeps the women folk away from those worldly ideas of equality in marriage + deprives them of honing actual work world skills/building a resume. Both of which just HAPPEN to have the net effect of making leaving even an unhappy marriage a daunting thought for these women. Then 'we' can all pat ourselves on the back for a supposedly lower divorce rate, which is supposed to be proof of how happy 'we' all are in our smug little patriarchy world.
Yep: keep 'em barefoot, pregnant, and down on the farm (at least mentally). How ELSE is a man supposed to keep his unquestioned authority and reign?
Anonymous at 9:36 am: I believe the key word "mother" would indicate that Jim Bob's mother is actually a part of their family.
Jane and Ohio, I agree again. I find the way the Duggars disguise their misogyny so typical of patriarchal systems. Many women work hours that are conducive to family life. Keeping a woman at home, IMO, can sometimes be more about control and inequality. (Notice I say "keeping", not choosing.) It creates an imbalance in the power structure. Anna is totally dependent on Josh to provide for their family. She cannot cross him, ever; because she needs him to put food on the table. I am not sure what Michelle could have done prior to TLC if something had happened to JB. Keep 'em pregnant so they CAN'T leave even if they want to or need to. This is spousal abuse 101 disguised as faith! I find the methods and messages disguised by ATI to be a form of brainwashing that has the potential to lead to abuse in many forms. Playing with someone's faith and emotions is classic manipulation. I find the Duggars dangerous to women.
People keep talking about how the older kids are forced to raise their younger siblings and not have much of a social life.
Maybe the older kids need to grow a backbone and stand up for themselves a little bit. Tell ma and pa duggar that while they are willing to help out around the house, they also need some time for a social life and they need to raise their own kids.
Yes the parents are turning the older kids into mini parents, but the older kids aren't doing anything to stop it. If you let someone take advantage of, they will.
What kind of work does Anna do at the car lot? Being there is NOT "working".
Speaking of reminiscing, do you suppose Michelle ever thinks back on her high school days when she was a cheerleader: Thinks of the fun of being in front of a crowd, being a "leader of cheers"; dancing to sounds of the band; Being a kid, laughing singing, dancing, hanging out with friends; Studying in the library and giggling at the boys?
Does she ever look at her "plodding along daughters" with babies strapped to their backs or chests, and secretly wish they could let loose and dance a little, have some fun.?
@Celestie: loved your post.
I'm afraid Michelle doesn't spend any time fondly remembering the girl she once was.
I'm afraid her only reflection on those days is that 'baggage' JB tells us is hers from having an interest in any male except him.
I'd love Mrs. D to change her intro voice over from "and Jim Bob, my WONDERFUL husband" to "Jim Bob, my manipulative captor."
Personally, I am thankful for patriarchy. I'm thankful for a father who worked two jobs so our mother could be at home with us kids. We didn't have to come home to an empty house after school. Our little brothers and sisters were never dropped off at day care for 8 hours a day, with it's constant staff turnovers and sick kids.
I call my parents blessed and to this day thank them for the investment they made in our lives.
I'd love Mrs. D to change her intro voice over from "and Jim Bob, my WONDERFUL husband" to "Jim Bob, my manipulative captor."
_____________________________________________
Nicely done, Ohio. BTW, that was me at anonymous 9:27. I clicked the wrong bubble, sorry for not disclosing myself properly.
I think it's great if a family is able to have a parent home full-time, don't get me wrong. However, the CHOICE to become a stay-at-home mom shouldn't preclude higher education. Even if every one of the girls chooses a similar path, having an educated mother is a great gift. Critical thinking and cultural awareness are essential in this day and age. (No, televised, pre-planned jaunts to "exotic" places and restaurants does not constitute a comprehensive education into the lives of people from other cultures or the history behind ourselves.)
I really hope one the kids gets the privilege to go to college. They can still be SAHMs after college. Education first, babies later. Besides, for me personally, I am in my marriage because I want to be not because I need to be. I wish the same for all women. JMO.
@Another RN: ".. the CHOICE to become a stay-at-home mom shouldn't preclude higher education.... having an educated mother is a great gift. Critical thinking and cultural awareness are essential in this day and age."
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Well said, fellow RN! I totally agree that there are benefits to staying home with kids before they are in school all day. And to moms lucky enough in these hard times to get to do so, more power to them & their lucky kids!
But once kids are in school all day, I see less advantage to either mom or kids. JMO. Seems stagnating to women to be home all day while their kids at school and hubby is at work, year after year. Seems also to encourage moms to unduly dote on kids who are old enough to be learning, instead, to be self reliant, so that mom can feel needed. Again, JMO.
I agree fully with you that it is a gift to have a mom who is a role model for being intelligent, independent, self respecting, & self sufficient.
It's great to be a happy partner in a marriage of equality, but it's also ok, when life takes an alternate route, to show your kids through your example that women are strong, smart, and will not die on the vine if some nice man doesn't come along to guide her every step in life.
With the Duggar women being kept so insulated and uneducated, I worry for them that if their lives happen to take a detour from The Patriarchy Plan, HOW will they cope emotionally and financially?
Anonymous said:
Personally, I am thankful for patriarchy. I'm thankful for a father who worked two jobs so our mother could be at home with us kids.
********
I'm a stay at home mom by choice. I am also not in a house that practices patriarchy. My mom was a stay at home mom and I did not grow up in a house that practiced patricharcy. I had a wonderful career and have chosen to be home now. I know if something (God forbid) should happen to my husband, I could go back to work to support my family.
Why does patriarchy have to come into play. I'm an equal all the way with my hubby of 21 years. We make decisions together. He also helps with laundry and dishes etc...I love him and he loves me, even though we both dated for years before we met. No one needs to submit in a marriage to make it work. No one I know does and we've all been married for years.
Ohio Buckeye said:
I really hope one the kids gets the privilege to go to college. They can still be SAHMs after college. Education first, babies later. Besides, for me personally, I am in my marriage because I want to be not because I need to be. I wish the same for all women. JMO.
************
Bravo!!! That is exactly what I tell my kids. Don't even think about anything until you have that college diploma. Now a days a woman needs to be as educated as a man.
After that, I'd love them to be able to stay home and raise their family, if that is what they want. I told my youngest, after she told me she was going to grow up to be a mommy like me, that that was wonderful, but you have to go to college for that, too.
If something should happen to her husband, she won't have to get a job at McDonalds. (Not that there is anything wrong with it, mind you. But, I'd prefer her to make more money, if possible, and love what she does.)
Anonymous said:
Personally, I am thankful for patriarchy. I'm thankful for a father who worked two jobs so our mother could be at home with us kids
_______________________
How wonderful for you, but not everyone is "blessed" with the same setup. My father died in his early thirties, leaving four little daughters under the age of 10. If my mother had been of the mindset of Michelle, we would never have survived.
OK this is kinda late in coming so maybe it was already mentioned and I missed it somewhere but...did anyone notice that Jana wasn't there when they watched the video announcing the gender of the baby (Josie)?
They've talked about selling Jana's old vehicle at the car lot before so we know she has her own vehicle and I assume that means she has places to go regularly. I hope they do an episode soon on what her life is like day to day and what she's involved in.
Anonymous said:
Our little brothers and sisters were never dropped off at day care for 8 hours a day, with it's constant staff turnovers and sick kids.
I call my parents blessed and to this day thank them for the investment they made in our lives
* * *
The Duggars choose to live life one way. That's cool for them. Ma and Pa Duggar are happy with the roles they have CHOSEN. As long as our children get to choose the roles they assume in life, then all is fine. What isn't so cool is parents deciding how their children should then live their lives, i.e., you are a girl therefore we will help you select a suitable husband when the time comes and then you'll begin having children and not only be a SAHM but also their homeschool teacher.
One size does not fit all, but it seems to me that the conservative religion the Duggars follow doesn't allow for differences or variations.
As to parents who work outside the home and place their children in daycare or after school care - there are some truly wonderful daycare and after school care programs. My son began preschool at age 3 1/2, and he loved it. The teachers and staff were truly loving and dedicated people who believed in what they did. The turn over was low. If you select a quality care program, you find dedicated people who love children.
Ultimately, the Duggar kids will find their own way. Some will follow in their parents' footsteps, but I am sure some will not. If any choose to write a tell all book later down the line, I know I'd be interested to read the behind the scenes story.
There is a saying that "an uneducated woman is one man away from the Welfare line". If something bad happens to or with those "wonderful husbands", these young women will have to support their families somehow. THey will need some marketable skills, especially if they decide to follow the Quiverful philosophy...
Nothing is certain in this day and age, and in this economy. I want my daughters to know that they do not have to depend on a man for their happiness or livelihood. Marriages fall apart, husbands die or become disabled.
Women who are uneducated and have never held jobs are at a gigantic disadvantage if they HAVE to support their families. Read Nickel And Dimed...one can be totally poverty stricken trying to live on the wages of a housecleaner.
The best gift anyone can give their daughters (and their sons!) is the education and skills to be independent, financially and emotionally. Women who choose to be SAHMs, great, but get an education and some job skills first. Then, if God forbid, something happens, at least they'll be prepared to financially care for their families.
Patriarchy is just another way to leave women in the dark ages, unable to make any decisions for themselves.
I just read a blog where the author told how affected she was by watching the episode showing Josie's birth. Her thoughts were much the same as mine; babies are aborted at this age and here was the little babie kicking and fighting for her life. It is quite an object lesson and she had many readers, all agreeing with the feelings it brought forth for her.
Not everyone can be raised by two parents, especially nowadays. Be thankful you had the blessing of a two parent home.
My own situation was I had an absentee father who traveled many months out of the year. I had a wonderful mother who raised us well.
Not everyone is so fortunate.
"If my mother had been of the mindset of Michelle, we would never have survived."
_______________________
Apples and oranges. Michelle's husband is still alive.
"there are some truly wonderful daycare and after school care programs. "
Very few and they are very expensive and usually, MOST day cares only hire high school dropouts because they wages are so low.
So how ironic that the people who hate father-supported families and are insinuating that only college degreed mother are able to raise children, are the same people who are insisting that it's just fine for people to stick their kids in day care all day long to be raised by HS dropouts!!!
Dr. Love said
So how ironic that the people who hate father-supported families a
__-
Who is hating "father supported families"?
To the poster who said apples and oranges, Jim Bob is alive.
Death can come to anyone, at anytime. If you were a Girl Scout, you will remember, "always be prepared."
Women who choose to be SAHMs, great, but get an education and some job skills first. Then, if God forbid, something happens, at least they'll be prepared to financially care for their families.
Patriarchy is just another way to leave women in the dark ages, unable to make any decisions for themselves.
***********************************
Josh already has life insurance (mentioned before the plane ride). I think it would be safe to assume that Josh and Anna have the same type of Health Insurance that JimBob and Michelle do. (Monkey see monkey do if nothing else). And I would hazard to say since the seminar teaches it they also have disability insurance as well.
If anything happens to Josh Anna would be taken care of. It's one of the 'blessings' of living debt free. If they only have day to day bills and they live frugally (they know how) Anna would never HAVE to work. Neither would Michelle.
Michelle worked early in the marriage, it looks as though Anna is also going to help her husband with his endeavors. Why are we assuming that the Duggar girls will not work as well?
You may not like the choices Josh is making, or the job Josh is doing, or think he is doing it well. But Anna is NOT sitting at home doing nothing but "women's work". She is working along side her husband...
No reputable child care center hires high school dropouts. This is just bogus misinformation. Most childcare workers are early childhood educators with a college degree, or minimum of an associate's degree, which is already years more schooling than anyone receives at the Duggar home.
Dr. Love said:
So how ironic that the people who hate father-supported families and are insinuating that only college degreed mother are able to raise children, are the same people who are insisting that it's just fine for people to stick their kids in day care all day long to be raised by HS dropouts!!!
*******
I live in a father-supported family. I am blessed and I realize that daily. Unfortuntely not everyone is, and their children are not being raised by HS dropouts.
For people like the Duggars to constantly act like the man must be in charge is absolutely ridiculous. Patriarchy is a chosen lifestyle, for those who wish to live it.
My husband would hate it, as much as I. We've spoken of such relationships. When my hubby speaks, I'm usually cocking an eyebrow at him, instead of hanging adoringly on his every word. LOL
And he does the same. But, by God we love each other and our kiddos.
Deanna said, "Patriarchy is just another way to leave women in the dark ages, unable to make any decisions for themselves."
**********************************
Sing it, Sister! This is the truth and one wonders why women would CHOOSE to remain, even in marriage, 'little girls' who are dependent upon their 'daddy'.
JMO, something is amiss if the success of the marriage requires inequality/subservience of one gender to another. I don't believe for one nanosecond this is 'god's will'.
I'd never have to worry about working either, if my husband's grandparents had GIVEN US a house, like the one Josh & Anna got from his grandpa.
Just wondering how many houses that Grandpa Duggar owned? After all, each Duggar grandchild is entitled to the same as Josh, right? That's be 19 houses, plus 1 more if you count Cousin Amy.
Cyn said, "Why are we assuming that the Duggar girls will not work as well?"
----
Because in one previous episode, Michelle Duggar was standing in her kitchen, looked right into the camera and said, "They're hearts are in homemaking".
That pretty much sums it up.
Not that homemaking isn't work, it's the hardest work there is, but unless these Duggar-type families pay their wives for homemaking, it's not "outside employment" or "self-employment".
I don't know of any daycare centers that hire high school dropouts. That is just more propaganda to justify patriarchy and guilt women into not being educated and independent. Why must men like Jim Bob and the like insist on women being in a position of submission. What are they so afraid of?
I also didn't read of anyone "hating" father supported families. The point is that education is intended to be a growth experience and a protective action. My mother was a SAHM with a college degree. She had half of us before college and half of us after. She insisted we all go to college, male and female, because it made her a better mother. I remember her before and after, and I TOTALLY agree.
No one is advocating or criticizing day care. I read all of the posts as advocating fair access to education regardless of gender.
Another question for the group: We understand that the Duggars are insured, so Michelle will not have to work outside the home, but who would take JB's place as the "decider" patriarch of the home, should something befall him? Second part of question: Why wasn't Grampa considered the patriarch, as the oldest male and fount of all decision making when living in house?
Midwest Mom said...
Because in one previous episode, Michelle Duggar was standing in her kitchen, looked right into the camera and said, "They're hearts are in homemaking".
That pretty much sums it up.
*************************************
Michelle's heart was and is home making yet she worked the first 6-10 years of their marriage (maybe longer I don't remember how old they were when they moved out of the car lot house or how old the kids were when they sold the convenient store.)
Anna LOOKS to be doing the same thing (we won't know for years)
Michelle was simply saying the girls would RATHER be at home, they can and probably WILL work alongside their husbands, at least the first few years to establish their finances.
Patriarchy runs the gambit from women being kept at home in the kitchen, cannot leave her house once she starts showing, and must go to her husband for a few dollars to get milk and bread from the store (we've all heard the horror stories) to dad has the final say but LISTENS to the wife, the wife is a PARTNER in the marriage, and is free to come and go as she wishes, and rules the inside of the home.
When it's done as GOD commanded and not just as some men have decided it ought to, it works wonderfully. And God hold the MAN to a higher standard because of it. Men that go into this type of life with THAT in mind do not abuse their women, do not LORD it over them, or are cruel in any way. JimBob talks OFTEN about how he listens to Michelle and makes decisions based on what THEY have discussed.
another RN said...
I don't know of any daycare centers that hire high school dropouts.
**********************************
There is a difference between Montesorri day care centers or LaPettite. THOSE kinds of places hire the college grads. The one opened down the street in the empty store front though does NOT usually employ the college grads. Nor do the ones run out of a basement area. (both of which I have worked in without a college diploma). I also called a few of THOSE types and asked them... One wanted you to have at least taken child care classes in High School. The other wanted either a High school diploma and references. We aren't talking preschool centers, or the better after school programs... THIS is what the working poor uses for day care. These are the numbers up on the bulletin boards at the food stamp office. OR are on the lists the welfare workers pass out for CHILD CARE. (this mother takes in kids.. this grandmother has opened her house for 3-4 kids... she might teach them their colors and letters) The day care that was in an old school building up from my house was run by a grandmother (not college grad) and her daughters till she died a few years ago.... they did NOT hire college grads they hired daughters and mothers they knew worked well with kids. At most she had 10 kids at a time...
AS others have pointed out the BETTER daycare's have a higher educated teachers. But the ones that the working POOR usually use don't always and frankly usually do NOT.
With all this talk about the Duggar kids and college I was curious about how many high school graduates go on to college and then complete college. I found that 63.7% of the Arkansas graduates will go on to college, just slightly below the national average of 67%. However, to quote the only article I could reference which referred to Tn, it has a college completion rate of 45% which is only better than two other states, Ar, and Louisiana! That means that about 1/3 of the kids in Ar that graduate from high school will also complete at least a two year college program. The Duggars are not a highly educated family as has been noted. Neither of the parents graduated from college although they did get realtors certification which is not a college program here but rather a one month program taught privately and then requiring a certain number of hours working with another realtor to achieve license to practice as an independent realtor. These kids do not have role models that have gone on to college. I don't think even cousin Amy who is now 22 has gone on to college although I may be wrong there, does anyone else know?
I was the first in my family to earn a college degree. My husband had two sisters earn Assoc degrees after there children were grown. Two of my daughters dropped out of college after one year, the third has now completed her Assoc degree and is working on a bachelors. I am not saying this to share a personal story, but rather in an attempt to illustrate that children follow in their parents footsteps. I hope and trust that some of my grandchildren will obtain college degrees. One has and another is on her way to do so!
JimBob talks OFTEN about how he listens to Michelle and makes decisions based on what THEY have discussed.
*********
So, where does the patriarchy come into play? They obviously make the decisions together. What you've described is a normal marriage. Not a marriage of patriarchy. My husband works outside the home (unlike JimBob), I stay home. I make dinner, he eats. I wear aprons and make huge batches of cookies at Christmas for neighbors, teachers, friends, pastors etc...
I help with the homework, shop, do the laundry. We don't drink or smoke. We pray before we eat and we volunteer and tithe. But, my husband and I are complete and utter equals in everything to do with our marriage. Our kids know that. Most of all, I'm a *gasp* feminist. Not all Christians believe that God wants patriarchy. Homes without it seem to run just fine. Also education is a HUGE deal to us. For both boys and girls. I wish fundamentalist Christians like the Duggars and Bates and Kellers would look outside their small insular world and see that.
@Millie@Home: What a nice comment! Thanks for sharing that perspective.
My concern for the Duggars is that they are kept absolutely insulated from the real world. HOW is it possible for them to make an 'informed' decision about their future (or anything else) when the information they are exposed to is so limited and so skewed?
For Mrs. D to state 'homemaking is in their hearts' in reference to her daughters seems so simplistic IMO. What else could possibly BE 'in their hearts' since their exposure to other options is so extremely limited?
I believe you are right that many kids follow in the footsteps of their parents. With the Duggars, it seems the kids tend to be fairly unaware of any OTHER real options.
Can it really be considered a 'choice' when the kids know of no other viable alternatives and have been kept from information and skills to progress in any OTHER direction?
I believe the name of the show needs to be "Nineteen and Still CLONING".
Ohio said..
"And, oh, also not so coincidentally, keeps the women folk away from those worldly ideas of equality in marriage + deprives them of honing actual work world skills/building a resume. Both of which just HAPPEN to have the net effect of making leaving even an unhappy marriage a daunting thought for these women. Then 'we' can all pat ourselves on the back for a supposedly lower divorce rate, which is supposed to be proof of how happy 'we' all are in our smug little patriarchy world.
Yep: keep 'em barefoot, pregnant, and down on the farm (at least mentally). How ELSE is a man supposed to keep his unquestioned authority and reign?"
I'm certain there are men who think this way. But who is really trapped here? If JB & M were to divorce (assuming they made an average salary and didn't have their TLC gig, plus the average mortgage and car payments most people have), JimBob's monthly alimony and child support payments would be so huge he'd be lucky to have money leftover to feed his own self. It would be difficult for him to ever remarry or have a life with another woman with these financial burdens. With each child, his lot in life is increasingly sealed. The only way he'd get out of it is to drop off the face of the earth.
Michelle, on the other hand, would probably be able to get by alright with the child support and alimony, and she could use her real estate license. She would probably not have as much difficulty remarrying if she wanted to, because her children will always be JimBob's responsibility to support. This is the case with most patriarchs of large families.
If fathers of big families are looking for control and unquestioned power by having a lot of children and a stay-at-home wife, what they really have instead is a whole lotta work and responsibility. The patriarchs I know of big families have them because they truly love their children and find satisfaction and joy in parenting and supporting them.
Cyn: "Michelle was simply saying the girls would RATHER be at home, they can and probably WILL work alongside their husbands, at least the first few years to establish their finances."
---
But that's not what Michelle said.
She specifically said the girls hearts are in homemaking.
She said nothing about any of them probably working for the first few years.
I'm just going by what she said, not by speculation.
I hope that JohnDavid is having so much fun being alone in the Duggar house right now while the family is in Little Rock, that he decides to go apartment hunting and start his own life.
Deanna said:
The best gift anyone can give their daughters (and their sons!) is the education and skills to be independent, financially and emotionally.
* * *
I most definitely agree. I think JB would agree that we should "hope for the best but plan for the worst."
Also very much agree with the poster who commented that many women without skills or education are "one man away" from poverty or the welfare line.
The Duggars present what I feel is an unrealistic possibility for most people, especially should they decide to have numerous children. Relying on a father's income is a lovely thought -- but what happens when dad gets laid off, or heaven forbid, becomes disabled or dies? It can and does happen. Then you've got not only a wife with no education or decent work skills who will struggle, but all your many kids as well.
So, where does the patriarchy come into play?
The male makes the final decision.
*************************************
Maybe some of us have been watching and critiquing and praising for to long. This is why I say this.
My 26 yr old brother who vaguely knows who the Duggars are watched the part of last nights show with Josh and the plane. Where Anna and Josh were talking about the airplane ride and Josh was talking about how he talked it over with Anna first... (back at the house) His comment was "say it like it is brother you have to ask her permission first".. Having not watched more of the shows HE got the impression that ANNA was in charge.... I cracked up!! I was like maybe I watch to much and am reading into these... I showed him a few more episodes on youtube.. Then I asked him with Josh and Anna who would you say is in charge? His answer was well both it depending on the scene... Not scientific I know but it did show to me that we see what we want to see when we watch these shows... JMO
@LuvMyBabies: Re: child support: I think a whole lot of women who've been through divorce would have a different take on how financially 'easy' they have it based on the realities of child support.
I think they may also take exception to the thought that it's easy to find a subsequent partner who is willing to take on 19 of another man's kids.
No one can get blood from a turnip. In the case of divorce TWO households would need to be provided for, and if the income is short, guess who'd be holding the short end of the stick as far as finances - it won't be the spouse who has income-earning abilities, it'll be the spouse who has to RELY UPON the other for income.
I don't think anyone here has ever suggested most dads, even patriarchal ones, don't love their kids.
Just speaking for myself, I have serious questions about a man who needs/wants his wife to be subservient and I have a hard time respecting women who seeek this arrangement.
Even the ARMY encourages people to 'be all that you can be'! Surely women are capable of being more than the silent, subordinate (there's a difference between being supportive and subordinate) in a marriage with no job skill development opportunities.
JMO.
Interesting point, Cyn. I never thought of it that way, but there could definitely be some truth to it. Funny how we all see things differently! Thanks for sharing!
Ohio said...
"But once kids are in school all day, I see less advantage to either mom or kids. JMO. Seems stagnating to women to be home all day while their kids at school and hubby is at work, year after year. Seems also to encourage moms to unduly dote on kids who are old enough to be learning, instead, to be self reliant, so that mom can feel needed."
The common belief is that if a mom has children in school and isn't in the work force, it's because she's at home floofing her hair, having her nails done, playing tennis and lunching with friends. This isn't always the case.
I was raised by a mom who worked from my elementary years on up. I'm here to tell you I could have really benefited from a parent who was primarily at home during my school years. As a result, I was involved in a lot of things that were not good and have been detrimental to my life. I know this is isn't an automatic result from a working mother, but this was my experience.
When my children are grown, I don't plan to go back to work. This isn't because I want to floof my hair, shop, and stagnate. I want to be able to serve in my neighborhood, community, and beyond if possible. I have a sister who has grown children, has never worked, and has been a tremendous force for good in her neighborhood, community and family. She serves where she can make a huge difference, and is the total opposite of stagnation.
I realize that while some professions are inherently rewarding and make a big impact, and that some women financially must work, it doesn't make sense to assume a woman must "go back to work" doing whatever, based on the assumption that not working would mean to stagnate.
Just another opinion and angle on the topic.
So, where does the patriarchy come into play?
The male makes the final decision.
******
Okay, so it's just a figure of speech then, this patriarchy thing. Because the husband and wife discuss it and basically come to a conclusion together and the guy is the one who "acts" like he made the decision. Most men, in a loving relationship will lean towards making their wives happy.
But, in a family where the wife is quiet and subserviant and obeys everything her authority tells her to do, (like the Duggars) I would imagine the husband would make the decision himself without her consult because she's so dominated she can't think for herself.
I don't know, it all seems sorta like all talk and play acting to appear holy. JMO
"@LuvMyBabies: Re: child support: I think a whole lot of women who've been through divorce would have a different take on how financially 'easy' they have it based on the realities of child support.
I think they may also take exception to the thought that it's easy to find a subsequent partner who is willing to take on 19 of another man's kids."
I did not say it would be easy for either spouse. It most assuredly would not be, especially in a marriage with many kids. I was pointing out that both parents are hamstrung, and that the father is particularly, in unique ways, because he will always be primarily responsible for the financial support of the children. Of course it's not always cut and dried, if you've got a dad that's unemployed or evades the law, but in that case the father's not going to have much of a life either.
I was addressing the insinuation the the patriarch of such a family is a power-mongering king with every advantange in the world over his wife, while the matriarch is a victim with the automatic short end of the stick. I just don't think that's accurate. In times past it sometimes was. I don't think we need to hang on to that outdated stereotype anymore.
Has anyone considered that if JB died, Michelle would simply take over his "job"? I mean he has real estate investments, rental units. She has a real estate background and surely she knows enough math to be able to keep the books. The cell tower provides a steady income also. She would need to have the property "kept up" by someone, but with all those boys, surely one or two would step in to help mama. Also in a patriarcal family, sons take care of their widowed mothers.
My dad died and left my mom with 8 kids, 7 still at home. She was a SAHM with a HS diploma. My dad was a farmer. She had worked beside him for years. She ran the farm herself. We all helped the same as before. After 10 years, when the baby graduated, she sold everything (none of us wanted to farm) and moved to the beach. Her life is filled with vacationing kids and grandkids, visiting old friends, church, and going to the beach.
I said all that to say this: a college degree is not a requirement. Intelligence and resourcefullness are not found on a piece of paper. If faced with the death of a husband, many "uneducated" women have found ways to support themselves and their children.
Concerning Grandpa being the patriarch of the family: First the Duggars do not follow the old traditional lifestyle in which the olders male clan is the big cheese.
Grandpa Duggar was a guest in their home, not the head of the household.
Has anyone considered that if JB died, Michelle would simply take over his "job"?
But...acording to Gothard, she needs to be AT HOME, taking care of those children. Working mothers are frowned upon.
And her sons will be busy supporting their broods, if they follow their parents' example.
Hopefully JB has a LOT of life insurance...
luvmybabies said, "The common belief is that if a mom has children in school and isn't in the work force, it's because she's at home floofing her hair, having her nails done, playing tennis and lunching with friends. This isn't always the case.
I was raised by a mom who worked from my elementary years on up. I'm here to tell you I could have really benefited from a parent who was primarily at home during my school years. As a result, I was involved in a lot of things that were not good and have been detrimental to my life. I know this is isn't an automatic result from a working mother, but this was my experience.
When my children are grown, I don't plan to go back to work. This isn't because I want to floof my hair, shop, and stagnate. I want to be able to serve in my neighborhood, community, and beyond if possible. I have a sister who has grown children, has never worked, and has been a tremendous force for good in her neighborhood, community and family. She serves where she can make a huge difference, and is the total opposite of stagnation."
*******************************
Sorry if I came across as believing there is never any value to being a SAHM - that's not at all how I feel and I must not have been very clear. Please accept my apologies.
However, I do believe there ARE some women who spend the majority of time, once their kids are in school, tinkering around at activities that I, personally, would find stagnating. Surely, though, did not mean to imply this is the case for ALL SAHMs.
However, having a mom at home after school is no guarantee that kids won't stray into areas we wish they wouldn't. And a mom who works while her kids are in school is not necessarily dooming her kids to stray to those areas either. As one poster upthread wisely said, "one size does not fit all."
You bring up a valid point that both divorced parents are relatively hamstrung with post divorce financial responsibilities. Statistics suggest that it is divorced women who tend to end up at the poverty line more often than their ex-husbands.
Also, though the practice of always giving the mom full custody is definitely changing, at this point, I believe this still happens more than it doesn't. Additionally, sadly, sometimes the dads fail to utilize the custody/visitation rights they possess, leaving the divorced woman to deal with needing to work yet having full time (or close to) constant child care responsibility/custody, as 'daddy' doesn't always follow through on his visitation rights. This can prove an especially difficult balancing act for moms who MUST work to keep a roof over her head and the heads of her kids.
Surely do not mean to paint the picture as 'women as victims': that whole thought is absolutely abhorrent IMO.
Just trying to share the realities of how divorce sometimes plays out in ways that put the lion's share of burden squarely on the ex wife, so having some job skills is to her (& her kids') great benefit.
For several reasons, I believe Ms. D would NOT have a smooth sail if she and JB ever split.
Further, if Ms. D were to be looking for a subsequent spouse, would it be likely she'd be looking for someone like JB, who might have a passel of kids from his previous marriage - I know "Yours, Mine, and Ours" is a cute movie, but somehow, I think it is a rose-colored glasses view into the reality of how a situation like that typically plays out. Again, surely there are some, but I wouldn't bet the farm that the odds are great.
I have to comment on this whole slamming Josh and JimBob for the whole patriach thing. After reading the Duggar's book and watching almost all of the shows I have to say that the Duggar men seem to treat their wives with waaaaay more respect than my husband does. He would never ask my permission to go on a plane ride, go hunting, anything for that matter. Meanwhile, I'm the one left to do the bills, take out the trash, and everything else. I would kill to have a strong, spiritual head of the house. Also in the book, JimBob always consults Michelle with everything.
Is Grandma Duggar also a guest in the home? If she is, then an incredible responsibility has been placed on her, as a guest. I don't think she has been sitting on the couch, eating bon-bons, while M and JB have been away with Josie. She most likely pitched in and worked very hard, taking care of the children. Even Josh said that Grandma needed a break. Just my opinion.
reality bites said...
snip
But, in a family where the wife is quiet and subserviant and obeys everything her authority tells her to do, (like the Duggars) I would imagine the husband would make the decision himself without her consult because she's so dominated she can't think for herself.
******************************
NOT like this Duggars which was my point, if you read the book you would know that they DISCUSS things together, and the FEW times he made a decision without consulting Michelle it got them in trouble so he has LEARNED to talk all MAJOR things out first.
The provide a united front to the world, with Michelle supporting her husband. We've all seen what it looks like when the wife harps on the hubby... Michelle simply refuses to do that in PUBLIC, or in front of her children. (Though I doubt she 'harps' on him in private either she DOES discuss things with him behind closed doors.)
reality bites said,
"But, in a family where the wife is quiet and subserviant and obeys everything her authority tells her to do, (like the Duggars) I would imagine the husband would make the decision himself without her consult because she's so dominated she can't think for herself."
In their book JB goes into detail, numerous times, about how he consults with Michelle, gets her advice, and makes decisions WITH her on EVERYTHING, including business decisions. He calls her his business partner. JB also says there were a handful of times in their marriage he made an impulsive decision without consulting Michelle, and he regretted it every time, and he committed to never do it again. He talks about Michelle in every way as not only being his equal, but even better.
I don't see anything in their behavior toward one another that contradicts this. I see Michelle sometimes does things that she knows he likes because she loves him and wants to make him happy. It isn't because he controls her. I do things for my husband that I know he likes because I love him and want to please him. He does things I like because he loves me and wants to please me. This is the reality of creating a happy marriage.
I don't see anything in their behavior toward one another that contradicts this. I see Michelle sometimes does things that she knows he likes because she loves him and wants to make him happy. It isn't because he controls her. I do things for my husband that I know he likes because I love him and want to please him. He does things I like because he loves me and wants to please me. This is the reality of creating a happy marriage.
**************
Exactly. That is the formula for a happy marriage. Doing for each other. Not authority, not patriarchy. You don't need "words" like that. I wish the Duggars would leave the stereotype of submissive wives at the door.
LuvMyBabies said, "He talks about Michelle in every way as not only being his equal, but even better"
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Surely in a long term marriage issues arise where the husband and wife simply cannot agree. JMO, it's unfair to then, be able to pull rank as The Patriarch and be free to make the final call. Again, JMO, but this is insulting to women.
And all of us who love our spouses do things for them or do some things our husband's way vs. the way we might have done it, but the point is, it's important to some of us to be free to make this decision for ourselves, not have to commit to hubby having the final word simply because he is The Patriarch.
Sometimes, especially in patriarchal systems, males toss women that crumb of 'women are smarter' or 'women are stronger' or 'women are morally superior' (to men), but without allowing women equal status (and the decision making rights that goes along with equality), these are hollow words, IMO. Spare me the flattery and give me, instead, the respect and equality I give to you, is my opinion, for whatever it's worth.
Anonymous said...
Has anyone considered that if JB died, Michelle would simply take over his "job"? I mean he has real estate investments, rental units. She has a real estate background and surely she knows enough math to be able to keep the books.
* * *
I agree with you -- I think Michelle would simply carry on with the existing income arrangements via rental units, cell phone towers, and any life insurance benefits.
My concern was more for the numerous daughters, who have a homeschool high school education but apparently little else, including any practical work experience outside the home. If that trend continues into any marriages they might enter, and their spouse was like many who work for an employer for a living, I then went on to say that they (the grown daughters) might have a very hard time trying to support a large brood if left motherless or with a disabled spouse.
I don't hate men, or men who work while wives stay home to raise the children. My parents had this arrangement and it suited them just fine. I respect my father for being the good provider he always was to our family. I am merely pointing out that I am grateful that my parents prepared me for the world and gave me good tools, such as the opportunity for a good education, encouragement to seek the path that appealed to me.
My hope and wish for the Duggar girls is that they have a similar opportunity, in the case that they don't want to get married right away and begin having babies, or if they should someday be faced with supporting a large family on their own.
Luvmybabies said
I do things for my husband that I know he likes because I love him and want to please him. He does things I like because he loves me and wants to please me. This is the reality of creating a happy marriage.
----
Couldn't agree with you more. Keep up the good work and marriage.
msrylee said...
Is Grandma Duggar also a guest in the home? If she is, then an incredible responsibility has been placed on her, as a guest. I don't think she has been sitting on the couch, eating bon-bons, while M and JB have been away with Josie. She most likely pitched in and worked very hard, taking care of the children. Even Josh said that Grandma needed a break. Just my opinion.
* * *
I'm sure she has been happy to help, although it must be very demanding work. I just hope she isn't expected to earn her way the rest of her life, by being an unpaid babysitter at the drop of a hat. My grandmother moved in with us when I was growing up, and it was wonderful to have that experience. But she also took trips and would be gone for a month here, a month there, and I'm glad she was able to do that too.
I hope Grandma Duggar is enjoying her golden years, and finds time away from the bustling family home for quiet peaceful breaks.
Cyn said, "The provide a united front to the world, with Michelle supporting her husband. We've all seen what it looks like when the wife harps on the hubby... Michelle simply refuses to do that in PUBLIC, or in front of her children. (Though I doubt she 'harps' on him in private either she DOES discuss things with him behind closed doors.)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Cyn, Good points. Let's remember that, just as the Duggars are an example of an extreme lifestyle, so,too, were the other couple on TLC (and not at all in a good way!).
I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that non-patriarchal marriages tend to lean toward the G8 model.
Any time EITHER gender offers the other less respect, less than equality, it's less than healthy, IMO.
It's great to discuss things behind closed doors as equals. It's great to be supportive to one another. It's just important to remember that there's a huge difference between being supportive and being submissive/subservient.
Ohio Buckeye said...I'm sure you didn't mean to suggest that non-patriarchal marriages tend to lean toward the G8 model.
*************************************
No, My word no I did not mean to implicate that at ALL... I simply meant what I said we have all seen what happens when the wife is a harpy... (BTW there are harpy's in the Duggars life style too, I assumed that was a given, sorry)
My only point was that Michelle and JimBob may disagree behind closed doors but once they are open they are a united front... To their children, to the media, to the world in general. If nothing else because their children are watching. If they say one thing and then act another the kids will catch it and start to wonder.
Cyn said, "... I simply meant what I said we have all seen what happens when the wife is a harpy... (BTW there are harpy's in the Duggars life style too, I assumed that was a given, sorry)
My only point was that Michelle and JimBob may disagree behind closed doors but once they are open they are a united front... To their children, to the media, to the world in general. If nothing else because their children are watching. If they say one thing and then act another the kids will catch it and start to wonder.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Thanks for the clarification - I'm relieved!
I totally agree with your point about discussing issues privately as a couple and not involving the kids in disagreements.
My mom came from an unhappily (but 50+ yr long) marriage (divorce was verboten in their Catholic world), and my mom's stated goal was to give her 5 kids a more peaceful childhood than she was given.
I'm sure she and my dad MUST'VE disagreed in their own 50+ year (happy) marriage, but they NEVER were disrespectful or ugly to each other and they handled their differences privately without an audience - as a result, their 5 kids had a very peace-filled and happy childhood, and for that I'm forever grateful to my mom and dad.
Ohio said...
"Sometimes, especially in patriarchal systems, males toss women that crumb of 'women are smarter' or 'women are stronger' or 'women are morally superior' (to men), but without allowing women equal status (and the decision making rights that goes along with equality), these are hollow words, IMO. Spare me the flattery and give me, instead, the respect and equality I give to you, is my opinion, for whatever it's worth."
Not only does JB talk about Michelle being his equal, he walks the walk too. I haven't seen anything that makes me suspect that he is just tossing her a verbal crumb. I don't think JB is perfect by any means, but man he seems as sweet, loving and respectful as husbands come to me.
BTW, the term patriarchal, as I use it, simply means the husband follows God in all things good, and the wife then follows the husband - provided he is following God and doing all things good. It's all voluntary. It isn't about control. The minute he becomes domineering, controlling, or unrighteous, the deal's off.
LuvMyBabies said, "BTW, the term patriarchal, as I use it, simply means the husband follows God in all things good, and the wife then follows the husband - provided he is following God and doing all things good. It's all voluntary. It isn't about control. The minute he becomes domineering, controlling, or unrighteous, the deal's off."
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
LuvMB, I'm really glad to know that a definition of patriarchy is as you describe it, where the wife is treated well, because it's a real shame whenever ANYone allows another to treat them badly/with a lack of respect.
None of us can really know what goes on with the Duggars - like all other 'reality' shows, I fully believe most of this stuff is plotted and at least somewhat scripted, so who the Duggars REALLY are, who knows?
It sounds like you have a great marriage and I'm genuinely happy for you.
JMO, it doesn't measure up to my definition of equality when one partner is expected to 'follow' the other on the basis of gender. And Why would a god need to have a middle man (husband) between god and the wife? Why can't the wife directly 'follow' god instead of cueing up behind her husband?
Whatever works for each couple is great - but for me, personally, I want to walk BESIDE my partner, not behind him simply because he has a Y chromosome.
JMO, I just enjoy having a partner who does not need me to be his 'follower'. I enjoy my partner for lots of reasons, including the fact that he WANTS an equal partner, not a Follow The Leader set up.
But again, for the Duggars and everyone else, whatever floats your marital boat. Go with that and enjoy.
Some like to lead. Some like to follow. And some like to do life side by side as equals. JMO these designations make no sense when they are made solely on gender.
OK - We had a rare snowfall in Alabama yesterday, and so I'm spending my in-door time catching up on the Duggars.
I am now watching the episode where they visit the Bates to help them add on to their home.
Would like to specifically comment on the Bates' trip to the grocery store and the contents of their carts. I see a lot of potato chips, doughnuts, hot dogs and other highly processed foods.
And I know that others have made this observation with regards to the Duggars (i.e., "tater tot casserole, etc.).
These families may be large now, but they will quickly die out if they don't start eatting more healthy foods.
Since I have criticized Josh for his grammar, I feel that I must correct my mis-spelled word in a previous post. I believe that it is "eating" and not "eatting".
I caught a blip of the YesToTheDress epi as I was crossing channels. The part where M was prattling on about (what else) her baby Belly making the dress feel like a straightjacket, standing in a bathroom with the lovely toilet in view just steps away. Then J.B. pops in and raves about how great she looks...
My opinion, having not seen any of this before: 1) what is with the (fake?) tan? Why the fakebake? I thought modesty,etc. was the watchword?....and 2) As she walked into some churchtype building for the "wedding": her hair was too long and dry-looking,almost ratty-looking under that veil (she was filmed from the back so I got a good look). An Up-do would've been much more flattering, and more appropriate to that situation than the dry overly-long hair just a'hangin' down.
JMO
SteelMagnolia said...
Would like to specifically comment on the Bates' trip to the grocery store and the contents of their carts. I see a lot of potato chips, doughnuts, hot dogs and other highly processed foods.
______________________________
I saw this too, but i got the impression tha they were shopping specifically for the guests.
It looked like lunch entertaining supplies, rather than detergent and cereal...JMO
Has anyone ever considered how JB would manage if Michelle died? If he keeps her pregnant every 18 months, he just might find out! How would HE manage that brood, even if "Momma" is living there?
-------------
Kat said...
Has anyone considered that if JB died, Michelle would simply take over his "job"?
"JMO, it doesn't measure up to my definition of equality when one partner is expected to 'follow' the other on the basis of gender. And Why would a god need to have a middle man (husband) between god and the wife? Why can't the wife directly 'follow' god instead of cueing up behind her husband?"
It isn't a matter of who's following who so much as it is a matter of responsibility.
The way we look at it, husbands are assigned by God to protect their wives and children, make certain they are safe and cared for, treat them lovingly, and teach them about God. If husbands don't do a good job of this, they are accountable to God. It's a huge responsibility and a lot of work. I'm personally glad it isn't my responsibility. Some of my responsibilities are similar, yet different. Equal doesn't mean being "the same". I compare it to being king and queen of a kingdom. The king and queen counsel together and rule TOGETHER, lots of times the king even does when the queen tells him what she thinks he should do, but the king is ultimately responsible.
In the past, a lot of men were able to exert true control over their wives, because women were truly dependent on their husband's income and couldn't support themselves and their children, and many men used this to their advantage and wielded power and control over their wives. I'm SO THANKFUL it isn't that way anymore. True patriarchy isn't about control and power.
Here is a quote that I heard this week while I was having a conversation with a group of ladies (talking about nothing to do with the Duggars):
"The Bible calls children a blessing, and debt a curse.
Yet we apply for curses and prevent blessings!" (Doug Phillips)
I was startled because this is just a restatement of JimBob's comment in People.
This must be a philosophy that is circulated in certain circles, that JB and M have no doubt heard before, and that is where JimBob probably got his philosphy, that he restated to People magazine. I think the way it is said by this Doug Phillips person (don't know who he is) is said a little better - the Bible does say this, and people do apply for debt. It's a little less of a judgmental statement.
Just thought this was interesting.
I too find JimBob to be very smug and self serving in the way he constantly brags about his family being debt free. I'm sure it's pretty easy to be debt free when you don't send any of your kids to college, make money off of a tv reality show, have live in nannies (the older girls) for your horde of children, don't allow your kids to participate in organized activities etc.
They basically only give their children a rudimentary education. Most people are forced to go into debt to pay for their children's college.
Krissy said...
I too find JimBob to be very smug and self serving in the way he constantly brags about his family being debt free. I'm sure it's pretty easy to be debt free when you don't send any of your kids to college, make money off of a tv reality show, have live in nannies (the older girls) for your horde of children, don't allow your kids to participate in organized activities etc.
They basically only give their children a rudimentary education. Most people are forced to go into debt to pay for their children's college.
At this point they may not be paying for kids to go to college (which we really don't know for sure), but do you realize those home school curriculums which are required by the state aren't free? They actually might cost as much as sending a kid to a community college or tech school
Krissy said...
I too find JimBob to be very smug and self serving in the way he constantly brags about his family being debt free.
---
I agree with Krissy. I think the Duggars are very lucky to live in a part of the country where housing prices are comparatively low. I could live debt free if I could find a home to buy for under $100,000, but where I live the crummy homes in the mediocre neighbors start around three times that or more. We currently rent and pay around $2000 a month, and believe me, our place isn't big or fancy! That is just the cost of living in a major metropolitan area. (It also necessitates both partners working full time jobs just to make ends meet).
I think if Jim Bob had been elected to the Senate and the family had moved to Washington, DC, the family may not have been able to continue their debt-free existence, due to the high cost of living in that city. They couldn't buy a piece of land and just start building a home in the DC metro area with no mortgage or other debt!
It is very self-centered of Jim Bob to think that it is a feasible choice for the rest of the country and we will all just jump on board the Duggar-Boat and sail off debt free into the sunset.
The pace workbooks (which some of mine are in) cheapest school I found for them is 2,500.00 a year PER child.
That doesn't cover the school stuff the Duggars do on the computer, field trips, school materials, shipping the books back for grading or anything else.
It is very self-centered of Jim Bob to think that it is a feasible choice for the rest of the country and we will all just jump on board the Duggar-Boat and sail off debt free into the sunset.
Dave Ramsey became a millionaire by telling people to live debt free. There isn't anything wrong with JimBob telling people that it's best to be debt free.
Gentle reminder that we're here to talk about the Duggars not college education, homeschooling, or other educational issues in general or in our families. Thanks!
Someone asked about talking about homeschooling, Gothard, etc. You may talk about the Duggars' homeschooling, but this is not a forum for how anyone else does homeschooling. The same goes for ATI, Gothard, dressing, college, and all the other issues that arise around the Duggars. It is how they do it referenced in the show, on one of their appearances or speaking engagements, or in their book.
@LuvMyBabies, I'm glad you believe patriarchy is less about control than responsibility. And, again whatever works for the couple involved.
JMO I do not share your relief in not having patriarchial 'responsibility', as I believe women are as capable as men in this regard. Some men are more capable than some women, but, by the same token, some women are more capable than some men. It is simply not fair nor wise to base roles merely on gender IMO.
I understand the 'equal but not the same' concept, but JMO I prefer the marital responsibilities to be divvied up according to individual talents and interests rather than simply by gender.
Dividing these roles solely by gender can make it more difficult for individuals to reach their full potential, since they are denied opportunities to grow in certain areas of their own interests and abilities.
Women on the Duggar compound seem extremely thwarted in their individual growth. I find this lamentable and unfair.
I'm glad, though, that you and your hubby have found a solution that works well for you both - I congratulate you!
Cyn said, "That doesn't cover the school stuff the Duggars do on the computer, field trips".
----
The Duggars seem to be taking a lot more "field trips" since TLC started footing the bill for them.
In their book they talk about their home schooling and they really only use the ATI Gothard stuff for the wisdom booklets and a few subjects. The Duggars are actually pretty eclectic in their homeschool curriculum. They even have a state certified science teacher (taught at JBs highschool) come in and teach the children science lessons. To me it seemed that the Gothard stuff was supplemental and more about character building through education than it was about subscribing to a rigid way of life.
I am still trying to figure out why everyone keeps saying that the Duggars are little Gothard lemmings. It seems to me (watching the shows, the specials, and reading the book) that it is only a small part of their life. When it comes to things like having children Gothard, i believe, prescribes to the quiverfull idea but the Duggars have openly said they are not part of the quiverfull movement. They dont have children because it is their duty, they have children because God blesses them with children.
Maybe I missed something where the Duggars talked about their undying loyalty to Gothard and his teachings.....
--Lauren
Hello, this is a bit unrelated to the current thread, but I have a question.
A while back, I think in December, someone posted a comment stating that in one of the episodes, Michelle talks about how her daughters keep an eye on her monthly cycle.
I don't remember more details, but this has been bugging me because if it's true, I find it VERY bizarre. Does anyone remember the details about this? I would especially appreciate it if anyone could point to the specific episode in which this was mentioned.
Thanks!
I think if Jim Bob had been elected to the Senate and the family had moved to Washington, DC, the family may not have been able to continue their debt-free existence, due to the high cost of living in that city. They couldn't buy a piece of land and just start building a home in the DC metro area with no mortgage or other debt!
It is very self-centered of Jim Bob to think that it is a feasible choice for the rest of the country and we will all just jump on board the Duggar-Boat and sail off debt free into the sunset.
***********************************
JimBob would have simply rented a house out in Maryland, or Virgina father out from the city. When he was a state rep he traded houses with a friend of his for the 4-5 months they were actually in session then would come back home.
As another poster (and I) have pointed out Dave Ramsey (who took some of the same principles the Duggars follow) every Friday has 3 hours of every day people calling in and screaming at the top of their lungs they are "Debt Freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" quite a few of them are Mortgage debt and EVERYTHING just like the Duggars.
Thanks to Dave and The Seminar that the Duggars teach there are MILLIONS of Americans who are NOT affected by the recession other than worrying about other people they know.
What makes me the saddest is that so many people on these boards think either the Duggars cheated in some way to be debt free, or that if they lived else where they wouldn't be debt free, or that they NEED TLC to continue to be debt free.
Becoming, living and STAYING debt free is a CHOICE and a lifestyle, not a whim they stumbled onto when TLC showed up.
@Ash: There may be additional situations where Michelle noted that her girls watch her calendar 'like hawks', but the one I recall was when they were on a TV show ("Today Show", I think), announcing yet another pregnancy, and when asked if the kids were surprised this time, Michelle's comments included a statement that her girls watch her calendar like hawks.
Others out here may have add'l memories of Michelle making similar statements.
I agree with you: it's WAY weird. Young women the ages of the older Dugger offspring really ought to have more on their minds than their mother's probable timing for ANOTHER pregnancy. I think this is a sad commentary on life in Duggarville, especially for the women folk.
Ash--I read the same thing on here a while back! I have seen almost every episode/ special and read the book and I never remember hearing that about the girls keeping track of her cycle. If its true, I find that a little strange as well.
I am interested in some of the comments others have made about Josh being annoying with his preachy, cocky man-child attitude.
I agree completely. He really irritated me too, until recently when I saw one of the early specials (it was maybe the 2nd or 3rd one). They did mini profiles of all the kids where they asked them about their interests and what they wanted to be when they were grown up. Josh stated that he wanted to be an attorney. Now, he was at least 17 or 18 at the time--old enough that it wasn't like a little kid saying "astronaut"--the idea of becoming an attorney genuinely appealed to him.
I think it's sad that in such a short time he learned the hard way that such lofty goals were in no way compatible with the education he'd received or the expectation of early marriage and fatherhood. He'd probably have a hard enough time getting accepted or getting through a decent 4-year university. A law degree on top of that? It's a reach. And then he got a crush on Anna and realized that if he wanted to "be a man" like Jim Bob higher education would probably not be a priority. Most parents would have encouraged him to take it slow with Anna, pursue an education, and start thinking about a wife and family when he was more mature and had accomplished some of his personal goals--but not his parents! In fact, his family and their cultural system (including Anna's family and what was "expected" after courting a girl for however long) placed pressure on him to do the exact opposite!
I have a feeling his annoying cockiness could be a cover-up for feelings of inadequacy and self-doubt, not to mention the insane pressure felt by such a young and immature kid knowing he has to provide for Anna and the baby. Now that he's chosen the family path and abandoned his more individualistic dreams, how can he ever live up to the legacy of his father? I still find him annoying sometimes, but mainly I just feel sad for him.
Ash, Michelle has mentioned more than once (on the Today Show, etc...) that her girls "watch the calendar like a hawk."
I take this to mean that they simply notice when they are cleaning bathrooms if she hasn't had her period for a month or two, tipping them off to a probable pregnancy.
Like most guys, her sons and even JimBob probably wouldn't notice this.
-Katydid
Perhaps the girls watch Michelle's cycle to see if she has conceived rather than have in interest in her fertile times.
Thank you for the responses, ohio buckeye, mom in tx, and katydid! I appreciate the information because I had been trying to verify this for a while without success.
In case anyone is interested, I did locate a Today Show clip... from the replies it sounds like there may be other instances as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82qpf4eEGPA
Michelle's statement that "the girls watch the calendar like a hawk" happens just after the 4 minute mark. It's very quick and doesn't generate any responses. How strange!
Katydid, you took it to mean that the girls simply notice if she hasn't had her period for a couple months. I guess that's possible, but I don't know... it would be even stranger for them to be monitoring her use of feminine products in the bathroom trash! Especially considering that there are several women in that house using feminine products.
The word "calendar" does indicate to me a more rigorous weekly/monthly monitoring, as opposed to just happening to notice, "oh, she hasn't had her period in a while." Like at any given point they know where she is in her cycle. And why would they be watching it anyway? In what situation would seemingly normal girls be so interested in their mother's cycle? This is VERY strange.
This probably means that the older girls can pinpoint with reasonable accuracy the exact day on which their siblings were conceived. Ick!! :(
Re watching cycle:
What Michelle said was they watch the calendar like a hawk.
I took it to have several possible reasons...
1) She is the lead female (hormonally speaking when you have a bunch of females living together in one house one female will lead and the rest will start to follow her cycle with in days of each other) The probably know this and know that when Mom starts the rest of them are going to start soon after.
2) Michelle could have some forms of PMS (tired, cranky, swelling, mood swings...) they would want to know what days to be extra helpful, or stay out of her hair or what ever.
3) To know when she is pregnant because they actually like it when the new baby gets here...
My mother kept track of hers with a little red dot on the corner of the square on the kitchen calender, we girls watched it because we knew what it meant and when to be 'nicer' to mom, LOL.
PS cycle:
The reason my mother and others keep up with it on a kitchen calender is the FIRST thing Nurses @ OBGYN offices ask you is "when was first day of your last period" and since the phone is right beside that calender she used that one.
Another reason I thought of after I hit send the last time was "logistics"... There are 5 possibly 6 (Joy is young but the possibility is there) that would need 'sanitary supplies' at roughly the same time every month. They would want to have the supplies on hand JUST like you would need with diapers... So who ever does the grocery lists that month would want to know when they are "due" so they could plan that into shopping that week.
Cycle aside... I would love to live a week with the Duggars and watch how they make this work on a regular basis.
How do they keep track of things like food, the pantry, cleaning supplies... I admit they fill me with awe that they run as well as they DO... with or without the older girls help... Michelle DID it at first no matter what the facts are now.
I want to learn how Michelle NEVER yells at the kids... ever...
I want to learn how Michelle instilled that love of helping others.
And most of all I want to know how Michelle has the strength to stick to her convictions that GOD is in control, and not give in and take the easy way out. (last paragraph is just MY opinion of what I have seen and read)
"What Michelle said was they watch the calendar like a hawk.
I took it to have several possible reasons..."
you could be right.. but I think it could simply mean that they are tracking Michelle's ovulation. And technically, you can't track your period without roughly knowing your ovulation.
I just cant see any reason the girls or Michelle would need to watch their cycle "like hawks". I know I don't feel the need to. Nor did my mother. Furthermore, tracking menstrual cycles doesn't really need to be a family affair. (What happened to modesty?) And I am sure the Duggars do not go on monthly runs for "supplies". They buy everything else in massive bulk, why not tampons?
Sorry to be picky here, I just think Michelle's statement carried a huge amount of meaning and shouldn't be ignored!
but I think it could simply mean that they are tracking Michelle's ovulation. And technically, you can't track your period without roughly knowing your ovulation.
I think this is just something that we read into depending on how we look at things. I am 37 yrs old and I have NEVER consciously connected "its that time again" with "oo I'm fertile" neither did I connect it with my mother. Why should we assume the Duggar girls do?
I'm also not understanding what is indecent (or immodest) about discussing or keeping up with each others menstrual cycles between older girl children and their mother while they are living together? (Telling the REST of us that they do it is different)
I'd like to live for a week with the Duggars too.
Then we'd see the "real" story and not the "sanitized" version of 22 minutes each week.
I suspect, based on the regular mis-behaving of the younger children we now see, that a lot more of that nonsense goes on than anyone realizes
(Boy stomping on a girls back, children dragging each other across the tile, children sitting on countertop, hanging off staircase, refusing to get away from open oven door, boy swiping candy off of baby shower table).
If we taped Michelle every single minute for 1 year, I doubt she'd "never" raise her voice. Possible, but since she doesn't do most of the child-rearing (that's left up to the buddy system), I still think there's be an increased tone now and then.
She really has the ideal situation, i.e. give birth, breastfeed, then pass them off when they become naughty toddlers.
And teenagers that never ever rebel? Not one single moment? I'm not buying into this all-happy-all-the-time story the Duggars are feeding us. Isn't "testing the waters" now and then exactly the point of being a teenager? No, I don't mean drugs and sex, I mean regular why-can't-I-stay-up-til-1am kind of rebelling.
Although I am a non-modest, liberal agnostic, I feel very squeamish at the idea of watching my Mom's cycle calendar "like a hawk". All I can say to that is YUK. The Duggars are really interesting to me from a sociological perspective. I like to watch how they live and interact. They seem nice enough but there is literally nothing about them that makes them an "encouragement" to me or inspiring on any level. My family is also debt free - not for religious reasons but my husband and I both grew up without a lot and so we have been very conscious of not ending up in any financial trouble. I see nothing about this that makes us "better" than anyone else. We are just lucky enough that we got good educations and made good money and are scared of being poor again someday. ha.
Kellan said:
Sorry to be picky here, I just think Michelle's statement carried a huge amount of meaning and shouldn't be ignored!
* * *
I agree Kellan. What I took from that statement was a revealing look behind the facade that they let God decide how many children they have. I believe that Michelle very closely tracks her cycle, especially ovulation, and that information is used to then try to purposely procreate during a more fertile time. But she and JB don't want to come right out and say so, and I'm certain they'd not say so after Josie's birth and how hard that pregnancy was on Michelle.
I grew up with 7 siblings, five of them sisters. I can honestly say that never once ---- NEVER ONCE ---- did the discussion about my mom's cycle (or any of our cycles) get discussed. My mom simply kept a supply of necessaries on hand at the back of a bathroom cabinet and we girls knew where to go when we needed them. If we ran low, a quiet word to our mom was all it took.
The Duggars talk about being modest, but I am constantly amazed at the number of things they do I would consider extremely immodest and might I add, in bad taste?
Yes, I find the Duggars' unique brand of "we are soooo modest" rather off-putting.
In particular, I reference the episode where JB & Michelle were at the Bradley childbirth class, and the instructor was talking about "cervical softening" (that's code word for sex). The look on JB's face was....well....he had a big ole' grin, you could tell he was just raring to go on that one.
This used to be a family show, but the producers somehow don't understand that some of us don't want to hear about Michelle's cycle, the date a baby was conceived, "cervical softening", NIKE moments, etc.
Too Much Information. Enough already.
Just be honest about it, and re-name the show "19 Kids and Conceiving".
Wheather the older girls watch the calendar to figure out if Michelle is ovulating or is late with her period, the whole things just proves that there is WAY TOO MUCH emphasis placed on pregnancy and childbearing in that household. What normal teenage girl would be that excited about her mom's monthy cycle to watch the calendar for it? And what modest mother puts it on the family calendar? For someone that preaches modesty all the time, you'd think Michelle would have enough sense to keep a private calendar or datebook in her purse or bedroom.
I also highly doubt that it has anything to do with the grocery shopping as it would be much simpler to add the supplies to the list.
What I think Michelle's statement really reveals is that the older girls need a life and interests of their own. While having a new addition to the family is an exciting event, this family has build their life around it and it's high time they all found some new excitement.
Can some one explain something to me please...
Natural body functions like childbirth, breastfeeding, and that time of month are considered gross, immodest, and not a topic for discussion among the people living together (grown, and almost grown females).
Yet what the Duggars consider immodest in DRESSING, is not immodest the Duggars are simply old fashioned and "need to get with the program"
I looked up the word modest, and decency just to make sure I had the definitions correct. Both words are usually dependent on what society at large or the community say it is.
TLC and Discovery health, and several other stations (the first two more often I think) show births where there is nothing left to the imaginations, they come in to peoples houses for upwards of 48 hours after birth to see what the first 48 is like. The different shows go on and on... On any given Weekday on TLC it's hours and hours of these type of programs yet society as a whole has not called these immodest.
The Duggars have said they dress the way they do because they want people interest drawn to their FACE. They do not want to 'defraud' people or in other words make them think about sex. What I can't figure out is how does breastfeeding an infant (or pumping milk), giving birth, or seeing when mom is starting on a calender have to do with sex? OR making people think about sex.
(I really would like the answer to this please)
My final thought is this... The Duggars have said over and over again that they are leaving the size of their family up to GOD. That means flat out they are not going to do anything different to effect the outcome... not MORE sex and timing it to get more, and not having less and timing it to not get preg again. On this thought I wonder if because some do not believe the Duggars when they say this that they read more into what TLC shows than is really there...
@Cyn: Cyn, you and I are typically on opposite sides of the coin when it comes to Duggar discussion and I want to just say how very much I respect your nonjugmental posts. Though you are clearly a strong supporter of the Duggars, your posts are never insulting to those of us who are not in alignment with what the Duggars portray, and I find that commendable.
Re: the modesty issue, my take on it is that there is a difference between sexual modesty and personal privacy issues.
Some consider it a dichotomy that the Duggars make SUCH a big deal about all things sexual (including modest clothing) yet do not seem to know (or care?) about sharing too much information regarding issues/details that most of us wish they would keep private.
Different cultures draw these lines in different places. To some, the things the Duggars openly share seems tacky and just plain tmi. Sharing detailed info on menstruation/conception with each other (muchless a tv viewing audience) is right up there with sharing too much detail about bathroom habits and output. We really don't want to hear about it - it is personal and it should remain PRIVATE.
The severe modest clothing stand they take seems silly because it seems to assume everyone is always thinking about sex and need the Duggars' help to abstain from such 'impure' thoughts. Many of us do not feel we need help in this area, because we are perfectly capable of dealing honorably with our sexuality and that of others. It's a bit insulting that they seem to think our sexual mores depend so largely on their clothing and behavior. It's a little funny that the Duggars seem to need so much help (Nike!) in this area - I genuinely do not understand this mindset - it seems extremely immature.
Anyway, that's my understanding of the issue. I'm sure others have a different perspective and I look forward to reading these.
What I can't figure out is how does breastfeeding an infant (or pumping milk), giving birth, or seeing when mom is starting on a calender have to do with sex? OR making people think about sex.
(I really would like the answer to this please).
----------
Because giving birth is a result of having sex. No sex means no childbirth.
Because if "mom" isn't "starting" on the calendar, that means she's probably pregnant, again, a result of having sex.
I don't like having to explain to my 5-year-old, what is "cervical softening".
Oh, and yes, the Duggar girls are interested in drawing attention to their countenance, that is why Jessa wears all the eye liner, right?
Cyn:
Natural body functions like childbirth, breastfeeding, and that time of month are considered gross, immodest, and not a topic for discussion among the people living together (grown, and almost grown females).
Yet what the Duggars consider immodest in DRESSING, is not immodest the Duggars are simply old fashioned and "need to get with the program"
* * *
I want to try to clarify my thoughts when I discuss the Duggars and why I feel that certain things they say or do are inconsistent with how I believe modest people would behave.
Now, I have never said that breast feeding, menstruation, monthly cycles, or childbirth are gross. They certainly may have unpleasant aspects, but they are a part of life for most of us females.
My most recent comments dealt specifically with the fact that it appears the older Duggar daughters are very aware of their mother's monthly cycle. I find this strange and yes, a bit on the disturbing side.
It's a blurring of boundaries in my mind. Too much focus given on when their mama might become pregnant again. It's "TMI." Why is there any need to discuss between mother and children her monthly cycle? At this age, those girls should be focused on what they will be doing with their lives, yes, even in being self-absorbed teenagers. The last thing of any particular interest should be whether their mom is ovulating or not.
It is not the act of a woman ovulating, or having a monthly cycle, that I find unpleasant. It is the blurring of boundaries between what a husband and wife can and do share between themselves, versus what a parent and child talk about between themselves.
I can't remember ever looking to see when my mother was due to have her period and I don't think I was telling her when I had mine. I have three daughters and we don't share when we are suppose to get our periods. We usually know because one will say they have cramps or something but it is not something that we follow each month. With three of us at home all the time now, my oldest is away at college, I just make sure there are plenty of supplies available for when the time comes.
I don't actually know the Duggars so I don't always believe what they say and take it at face value just because they said it. They have said many things but then their actions tell a totally different story. One of those being when they were talking about Josh and Anna deciding not to kiss until they were married, but then they sat around the living room and Michelle tells them they are not allowed to kiss but could hold hands. They say one thing and do another quite often so I don't just simply believe everything they say to be the real way they do things.
Another reason I don't believe eveything about their leaving it up to God, is that I know many people like the Duggars and they say they leave having children up to God but they chart and all kinds of things. The reason being so they know when they will get their period. I have never charted and always have a good idea when I am going to start, I don't feel the need to know the exact day just that it is about that time.
As far as other TLC shows that show people having babies is we don't know these people. Granted we don't know the Duggars either really but it is probably safe to say that the majority of people that are on the other shows wouldn't be recognized with just a one hour show. People get to know families on a series. That makes it more personal so to speak. I don't want to know the most personal things about people I know in real life and I don't want to know the most personal things about people you get "to know" on tv either.
@ Anon
The point is does WATCHING some one give birth give you ideas about getting down and dirty?
Eye liner by definition is on the EYE which last time I checked was on her FACE, which is where the Duggars want your attention to be drawn.
@ Ohio I agree that sharing the information with US is a bit much, but the issue I was seeing on here was not that they told US, but that the GIRLS knew it, or that the GIRLS watched it, or that the GIRLS had the information. That's the part I do not understand. Telling the WORLD when you conceived is just way to much info.... Discussing softening of the cervix while in a child bearing class again I do not see the issue, airing the discussion on TV was TLC's choice.
It's not like the adult Duggars were having this conversation in a big family meeting, and or going into great detail as to HOW they were going to accomplish this.
PS to Ohio... some days it takes 4 rewrites and then Sharla catching them to make the rest sound like I'm non judgmental... I mean that usually that is my point but sometimes it doesn't quite come across that way. My entire reason for posting on these blogs and others is to honestly try and see how people see the Duggars and their actions the way they do...
PSS... the steps that the the kids were sliding down reminding me of my childhood. We had a time share we visited that had the stairs that close together and carpeted and they were a BLAST to slide down, we had pillows and cardboard boxes that would make the slide faster. It doesn't hurt the carpet OR the kids (other than a rug burn here and there) and it was a great way for us kids to burn off energy after being cooped up in a car for 4 hours.
I've always wondered why they only made 2 rooms for the kids, one for girls and one for boys. Why not 2 rooms for each gender? I can't imagine the older kids enjoy having to share their rooms with the little ones and not having time away from them. Not to mention sleeping. Do they all go to bed at the same time? A one year old and an 18 year old going to bed at the same time is insane
When they built that house the older children made the decision to have one large room per gender. That was not Michelle or JimBob's idea but the children's.
Maybe my vocabulary is off... When I said my mother and I discussed her cycle or our cycles. The convos in their ENTIRETY would go something like this: "Mom isn't it about time for us to start?" "Pretty close check the calender". Another convo would go like this: "Mom I'm gonna start soon are we out of 'supplies' (Supplies is my word simply for politeness on the board) cause I can't find any. NONE of these conversations took place at the kitchen table, or in front of the males (unless they wandered in during the question and answer). The conversation I had with my mother when I learned about alpha females was all of 4 sentences.
I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the boundary line being crossed with these type of convo's. The Old Testament of the bible discusses menses more than my family did OR I think the Duggars do. I also just can't see the girls OR the boys sitting around figuring out when Michelle's fertile days are.
@ Anon That makes it more personal so to speak. I don't want to know the most personal things about people I know in real life and I don't want to know the most personal things about people you get "to know" on tv either.
2/17/2010 3:03 PM
*************************************
Here then I think is the problem, these shows ARE for those people that WANT to know those things. TLC created these types of shows because SOME BODY (lots of them) want to know these details.
Flip through the channels.. EVERY channel at some point or another will have these type of shows on them where we get to watch people all hours of the day and night and get to see the "personal" and "intimate" details. Some of them are series that last for months and years.
Society at large doesn't seem to have an issue with this OR those types of shows would have died out years ago. Instead we get more and more each year of these "reality" shows, the viewers are there waiting on baited breath to see what is going to happen on the show that night. If Society in general sets the standard for Modesty, and Decency...
How are the Duggars 'wrong' for sharing some parts of their lives with their older girls, and then MENTIONING this sharing to the rest of us? Had Michelle told US her cycle, or when they announced WHEN they conceived Josie THEN yes I agree that's just WAY WAY TMI.
I'm trying to separate the issues and obviously doing a very bad job of it. Telling the WORLD when you conceived a child TMI, older teen females and their mother having convos as listed above NOT on camera; there I don't see it...
Having another ADULT woman around when waiting on a pump to finish draining you like some cow on the assembly line (WHICH BTW she was covered for)(been there done that so I can say it CAN feel that way) so you can then go see your baby sister... On FILM may be TMI, the act itself .... nothing wrong with it.
What I keep seeing in the blogs are some have an issue with the ACTS themselves, not as much that they were aired on TV. That's where I am confused.
Anonymous 2/17 @ 4:53a.m.
I completely agree with you that there is some things that the viewers don't see. I was watching the re-run of the Duggar's trip to NYC and it showed a very tired and frustrated Jana in the background. She looked very upset. I also noticed that when little Jackson was lost it was Jana who was consoling him and not Michelle. Jackson looked as if he needed his mother's love at that point and not his buddy/sister.
Jim Bob modest? What about when he was putting his hands around MIchelle's hands in a very sexual way when she was trying to make pottery. I saw right through him. Can't he keep his hands off her for one moment?
When they built that house the older children made the decision to have one large room per gender. That was not Michelle or JimBob's idea but the children's.
Well, that's what was SAID at the time, but given all the inconsistencies disclosed up to now, I wouldn't be surprised to learn one day that Mom and Dad actually made that decision.
Even if it was nominally the children's choice, the older ones may not have considered that they would still be sharing a room with infant/toddler siblings when they were 20. Maybe they all expected to be married and gone by then.
Conversely, maybe they did think about it, and decided it was much easier to get up in the middle of the night and change diapers, give drinks of water, etc. if the babies were in the same room. The same reason a lot of parents choose co-sleeping arrangements.
When Michelle said "watching the calendar" I don't think she really meant literally watching the calendar. I think she meant that the girls generally have an idea of her cycles and when they are late, get excited. I could be wrong, of course. :)
I saw the same re-run today about Jackson getting lost. It really bothered me. I saw it originally but did not notice it as much. Jackson looked so scared and JB and Michelle were busy doing other things and even Jana wasn't really hugging him or anything. One of his smaller brothers came over and finally hugged him. I had to laugh when JB said "I RUSHED over to security" or whatever word he used, yet he was just walking. Poor Jackson.
I agree that the older girls being so interested in Michelle's period or ovulation is just plain weird and really reflects how abnormal their teenaged years are. I have raised teenagers and still have one at home. I guarantee not a one cared when I got my period. They were too interested in school, friends, homework, activities, etc. to make my "cycle" anything to garner that much attention.
@Cyn: Sadly, I believe you have a good point, that there IS, obviously, an audience for this kind of schlock (sharing TMI re: personal, private, and overly dramatized (partially scripted) stuff.
Sad commentary on our society, IMO.
It would be nice if the powers that be would AT LEAST knock off the pretense that they are "The LEARNING Channel" and/or that their programming is somehow honest and educational, promoting respect for diversity.
To your point, programmers are NOT promoting diversity as much as they are $$$selling to the lowest common denominator of viewer.
And, since they seem so hellbent on wooing the dimmest bulb population and the population that loves 'reality' soap opera dramas supposedly played out in real time, then it would be nice if they were at least honest and forthright about this and stopped attempting to appear as credible and worthwhile.
IMO, there is not one 'reality' program depicting 'family life' that is worth 5 seconds of my viewing time, and this includes the bizarre Duggar cult.
There is a difference between just noticing the date on the calendar and "watching it like a hawk". Watching in like a hawk, which is what Michelle said, would be paying close attention to and purposely seeing when she would be starting.
@Cyn, with further thought, here are a few other thoughts re: your surprise at viewers objecting to what the Duggars reveal:
It is indisputable that the Duggars strike some as self righteous. A perception of being self righteous, coupled with broadcasting your severe religious beliefs in a weekly tv program, sets one up for deeper scrutiny by more people than if a lower profile (not on tv and not coming across as holier than thou) was maintained.
In short, the Duggars, like every other family on TV opened these critique floodgates themselves by their willingness to be on tv AND their over-the-top and in-your-face religious views on camera.
Also, since the D's make a huge deal out of being ever-so-modest, the things they are willing to divulge on camera seems at odds with what many would consider to be modest in a discreet/privacy/polite sense of the word. Their boundaries seem illogical and convoluted.
Then you have the whole issue of grown women in the household watching their mother's calendar - yes, many find it very telling, and not at all in a good way, that young women these ages have so little else in their personal lives that their world seems to revolve around their middle aged mother's perpetual pregnancy-related states. This is sad for the young women, especially in this day and age when most (not the Duggars) women have so many more opportunities to grow and develop and excel in life and in the world.
Finally, few would find it objectionable to share a breast pumping session with a grown daughter. It is, though, a whole different can of beans to share this with your daughter ON TV. To many, it's just more Duggar tackiness and lack of couth. To many viewers, the Duggars continuously display a lack of decorum.
Since the Duggars have chosen to be a) off the scale by most people's measurement of 'religion' and b) weekly displays of personal family life on tv, it is only par for the course that many will find their show and their belief system objectionable and not at all educational nor entertaining.
Privacy should be priceless and valued. Some of us believe sharing personal family moments, no matter WHAT they are, is unwise and unwanted by many viewers.
To viewers who want this kind of programming, allow them to watch Freak Show Theater, which is really a more honest moniker than The LEARNING Channel.
They have said many things but then their actions tell a totally different story. One of those being when they were talking about Josh and Anna deciding not to kiss until they were married, but then they sat around the living room and Michelle tells them they are not allowed to kiss but could hold hands. They say one thing and do another quite often so I don't just simply believe everything they say to be the real way they do things.
What exactly is the inconsistency here?
Bubbles said:
What exactly is the inconsistency here?
* * *
On the one hand, Josh and Anna claim it was their own decision not to kiss, etc., until they were married.
On the other, the OP said that during a scene in the living room, Michelle told Josh and Anna they were not allowed to kiss before marriage.
One is a decision made by two young adults, the other would be a decision made FOR the two young adults by someone else.
I think that's what the OP meant.
I believe in one episode, JB and M stated that Josie was conceived on Father's Day. IMO that's just too much information. I think that personal issues such as when JB and M have sex is private, and shouldn't be included in the show. It is not inspirational nor encouraging to me to have that info.
Ohio Buckeye, loved your 8:55am post.
The final straw for me was when they wheeled out Grandpa Duggar (dying from a brain tumor and unable to speak) for a birthday party.
The party itself was fine, absolutely. Filming it for viewing by the family, absolutely fine.
Showing it on national television was absolutely the most ill-mannered thing I've ever seen. The man had no say-so in the matter.
Will this family stop at nothing to make a buck ?
I agree with the person who said there are inconsistancies.
How could it possibly be the couples choice not to kiss when their parents sit there and tell them they are not allowed to before the wedding. Also that the parents have to give permission for them to even hold hands. They are adults and if it truly was their choice then they wouldn't need mommy and daddy telling them they can't kiss. Actually at their ages the parents shouldn't be telling them what they can and cannot do.
msrylee said...
I believe in one episode, JB and M stated that Josie was conceived on Father's Day. IMO that's just too much information. I think that personal issues such as when JB and M have sex is private, and shouldn't be included in the show. It is not inspirational nor encouraging to me to have that info.
2/18/2010 12:08 PM
I Completely Agree !!!!
Actually what Michelle said was you can not kiss yet. Because Josh and Anna had made the decision not to kiss they were not ABLE to kiss.
If she was telling them not to kiss she would have said you may not kiss.
May = Permission
Can = ability
Michelle uses may and can correctly in her speech if you listen to her. When she is correcting the kids or giving permission she say "you may do this, you may not do that."
The entire convo in short was said playfully:
"You guys can not kiss" Michelle "But you can hold hands" Michelle "We'll do the kissing for" JimBob & Michelle
"You just tell us and we'll do the kissing" JimBob
Inappropriate convo to be having in the living room in front of all the kids ??? That's a matter of opinion.
Inconsistent not seeing it, Michelle and JimBob as the parents of one of the couple were 'teasing' them, and at the same time pointing out to the kids and the world in general that JimBob and Michelle were proud of Josh and Anna's decision not to kiss before marriage.
Anonymous @12:23 said:
The final straw for me was when they wheeled out Grandpa Duggar (dying from a brain tumor ... Showing it on national television was absolutely the most ill-mannered thing I've ever seen. The man had no say-so in the matter.
* * *
Yes, I too was horrified to see that. I know that if I were dying, either in pain or heavily sedated by morphine, I wouldn't even want a party, much less to be on national television. My aunt passed away of ovarian cancer several years ago. Near the end, she asked that no one come visit any further - she wanted to pass away in peace and without family seeing her ravaged by her disease. We respected her wishes, even though we wanted to say our goodbyes.
I felt such sorrow that Grandpa Duggar wasn't afforded the same decency in his last days. Loving your family does not always = putting them on national tv.
@Anonymous12:23, Thank You!
I share your disgust at the Grampa Has His Final B'day episode, and just felt so sorry for the dying man.
I realize viewers were SUPPOSED to be impressed at this Duggar love for Grampa, but come on, the man was DYING, yet he was wheeled out on camera for an EPISODE. Even in a hospital setting, RN's do more to protect a dying patient's dignity than THAT.
How could this be considered kind and loving? HOW could this possibly be an 'encouragement to others to develop a relationship with god'???
Pimping out grampa for a TLC episode crosses the line.
Pimping out DYING grampa surely is not inspirational and is beyond the beyond.
Who said the conversation about not kissing in front the kids was inappropriate? The reason I said where the conversation was, was to show I remember that conversation and I remember where it took place. You can wrap it up anyway you want, that what Michelle really meant was something different than what she said, they were told they could not kiss. Could not, may not it is semantics. You say she added yet, the yet would mean until they are married. I think you pointed out perfectly that they were told they could not kiss but could hold hands. It was mentioned at another time that Anna's parents gave permission and that the Duggars agreed that they could hold hands.
And for them to say you just tell us and we will do the kissing is jut plain creepy.
I wonder if the Duggars are allowed to watch the Olympics.
Anonymous @ 7:18 said...
I wonder if the Duggars are allowed to watch the Olympics.
__________________________________
No...too many NIKE moments with the figure skaters and the speed skaters and...lol
Actually it's not semantics... it's GRAMMAR something people accuse the Duggars of not using.
But when Michelle uses grammar correctly I'm splitting hairs?
I said having the conversation ABOUT kissing could have been inappropriate. I wasn't accusing any one else of saying it or implying it. I was granting the point that it could be.
And yes I agree saying "tell us and we'll kiss for you" was completely weird.
This proves I have no life...lol
I was rereading some posts on here and something dawned on me...
Have you ever seen the kids play with toys? Do the girls have baby dolls and dress up dolls? Do the boys have tonka type trucks and things to play in the dirt with?
Someone earlier said that Gothard doesn't like Cabbage Patch dolls and I realized that I don't remember the kids playing with toys or coloring. That may be why they are rowdy all the time- they are bored.
Maybe it's because it's an individual toy and family encourages group things.
Amanda said:
Have you ever seen the kids play with toys? Do the girls have baby dolls and dress up dolls?
--_-
Yes, they are called their siblings. LOL
You bring up an interesting point about toys. Children have always had toys of some sort. They help develop small and large motor coordination and build skills, both mental and physical. We never see them reading books for pleasure either.
Just swinging off the banisters. Those kids need to go outside and play or build blocks or something.
Anonymous said...
I wonder if the Duggars are allowed to watch the Olympics.
* * *
I doubt it -- that might give the girls ideas beyond their lot in life. I mean, look at all those female athletes, wasting their time on sports when they should have started on families by now.
Anonymous said...
The final straw for me was when they wheeled out Grandpa Duggar (dying from a brain tumor and unable to speak) for a birthday party.
The party itself was fine, absolutely. Filming it for viewing by the family, absolutely fine.
----------------------
That was my final straw as well. Since the age of seven, I've watched members & friends of my family pass away from various cancers, heart problems, emphysema, etc. When I saw grandpa Duggar terminally ill & on TV I was horrified & there aren't any words to express how angry & disgusted I was. I'm sorry but if that's how you're earning money I want nothing to do with you. This was not a documentary on grandpa Duggar's illness & if you want to show a family rallying around a dying member then there are more tasteful ways to portray that.
And should anyone suggest that grandpa Duggar chose to be on TV I'd like them to take the meds they put the terminally ill on for managing pain & see how good they are at making decisions.
Ohio Buckeye is right when she says RN's do more to protect a dying patients dignity. This is where my great appreciation for nurses comes from, let a relative near a terminally ill patient that attempts to make that patient unhappy in any way & see how quickly the hammer of God comes down. Personally I'd rather fight a pack of pit bulls.
They watch those who do not have the patient's best interest's at heart like a hawk & you'd think that patient was their own relative the way they watch over & care them. In my experience, I know it's individual to the nurse, they even come to the funerals & offer their condolences. I wish grandpa Duggar would have had this protection & care, go tell JB to make his money some other way. Tell the dim witted camera crew to get creative, as there are other ways to portray that you have a member of your family dying. It's wasn't enough to wheel the man out, they had to show him in his bed as well, is there no privacy in that house. If they had to show him, then they should have left it at him out sitting on the swing & I still don't like that.
If all that wasn't bad enough, I remember logging on here & seeing that they'd filmed the man's funeral for everyone to see. Poor guy can't even get any dignity in death, now it's on film for the whole world to see anytime they want. As with the two points mentioned above there are many ways to show a funeral &/ or grieving without showing the man in his casket. Not even death in this family gets you off the cameras.
Sorry for rambling, but those two episodes seriously bothered me.
The children do have toys. You have seen them receive toys as Christmas gift. I just think when they film they do what Michelle does, a 5 minute clean up. They put the toys away in their lockers. The children have indoor toys and outdoor toys, more than many other children.
The lack of age appropriate toys is something I have commented on here before, but it bears repeating, in light of what was (and was not) brought to Little Rock.
I have never seen Michelle sit with her younger children at the table and do Playdo or clay or paint or use crayons, scissors, colored paper, etc. I spent hours and hours and hours doing these types of table activities with my children when they were small!
I wonder where the dressup clothes are, the toy kitchen, the blocks, the pretend play items? Even if they don't own any of these things, you don't see the kids EVER doing anything imaginative (like the G kids used to do). No "pretend school", "imaginary zoo" etc. that the kids plan themselves. Nothing remotely creative or imaginative.
I am also bothered by the lack of books. We never see anyone reading.
In general, I think the kids run amok because they have nothing to do, and no one has ever "played" with them, or taught them how to play appropriately. Their mother and sisters clearly do not, and they have never been to preschool where teachers have interested them in drawing, sand or water play, imaginative or cooperative play, etc.
It's really sad, actually, that climbing and running are ALL they do. Those activities (outside, in appropriate places) are important too, but there are entirely undeveloped parts of these children's brains, due to neglect from their parents and "childcare" sisters. What a shame.
Yes, in many episodes, toys are shown. Trucks, dolls, blocks, and yes, the kids do color. I remember crafts being mentioned more than once. If you refer to any episode, coloring and crafts seem to be mentioned quite often.
For me, the reason I think it was really Jim Bob and Michelle telling them they couldn't kiss is because if they had to have permission to just hold hands it is really hard to believe that they would have the choice of whether they could kiss or not.
"If she was telling them not to kiss she would have said you may not kiss.
May = Permission
Can = ability"
___________________________
No disrepect intended, but I am really curious about the meaning this post.
Who doesn't have the ABILITY to kiss?
Yes the girls have dolls (I have seen them playing with them in earlier episodes) There was a huge discussion on other places about the guns the boys were playing with. And I have seen them playing in the dirt with trucks I just don't have a clue of they were Tonka or not.
Michelle also talks about the "quick cleans" (in the book) they do throughout the day to pick up toys and keep the place neat. They also have lots of outside toys(bikes, scooters, skate board looking things, and a few others)
She also has an area where she swaps out toys so 1) not all the toys are out at one time 2) kids don't get bored with their toys because every so often there are new toys.
I have never seen the kids color, ever. Or do crafts, or playdo, or any of the other ordinary, normal preschool activities.
No one has said they don't have bikes and outdoor equipment (including balls and scooters that they throw and ride in the house!). It's the age appropriate indoor activities that I have never seen, except one book (too young for Joyanna) and a workbook page for one of the boys (also too young for him).
All the episodes are on Youtube. If someone has evidence of age appropriate indoor activities (not sliding down the bannisters frontward, or climbing all over the counters in shoes), I would love to see them. I don't recall ANY appropriate indoor activities (focused, calm, quiet ones, at a table or imaginative play, and with all those kids, there are plenty of kids to participate in something fun!).
Deanna either you have stopped watching lately or have simply missed it.
When they did the last show and were showing the new house the older girls were sitting on the mattresses on the floor and READING.
I have seen Joy with books as well.
@ Everyone Else or Anyone Else
As to seeing the Goselins playing they are 2 groups of kids ALL THE SAME AGE. So they are all pretty much going to want to play with the same things at the same times. With the Duggars you have 0-21 yeas living there. Do you really want to see the 20yr old playing house with the 2yr old, like the Gosleins would have?
Most multiple(s) shows I have watched they dump the toys in one room and gate them inside with their toys. Which is perfectly fine. Michelle is not going to do this; each child gets what he wants to play with from his cubby or spot or w/e plays with it and then at clean up time everyone cleans up the toys.
We have seen them make crafts, (robot pinata comes to mind) and in that episode Michelle talks about how creative they are.
When the older girls went to babysit they took crafts and things with them to use with the kids.
When one of the boys wore slap out a pair of cowboy boots, Joy tried to "fix" it with tape and a marker showing there IS a creativity in the house.
Again I feel the need to point out these are less than 20 min segments (commercials) EVEN if they only taped ONE day per show they are still going to have to cut out 75-80% of the film to make it fit in a 20 min show. AND make sense instead of snippets strewn together. Because we do not see something happen in the episodes does NOT mean it doesn't happen.
We have never seen John David at the fire station, or fighting a fire, or even doing the training for the job.... Yet we know he IS a volunteer Firefighter. JimBob and Michelle had/have Realtor licenses yet we do not see them buying and selling properties. We saw them at ONE auction yet they go often.... you get the point.
The kids have lots of toys. One reason you don't see them scattered about is mentioned in their book. As part of her organization method the kids are allowed to have one toy at a time so as not to create a huge mess. Also the younger ones especially tend to forget about toys when they are tucked away for awhile and then when they are brought out again it's like having a brand new toy all over again.
You see them buying toys, games, puzzles, etc when they film the "twice a year" thrift shop clothing spree in one of the 1 hour initial documentaries. You also hear and/or read (in the book) about Michelle describing that while they don't have complete dressers for all their clothing in their rooms, each child has a drawer in their room where they can keep a special toy, book, doll, what have you, depending on age. She also wrote that some of the older kids have started putting locks on their lockers in the playroom to keep the younger kids out, as they are allowed to have their own candy, treats, games, puzzles, etc.
Josh's refusal to tell his wife the sex of their baby until they were in front of a camera completely turned me off to this show and I will no longer watch it. He has become enchanted with the television paycheck and wanted to stage the reveal to make a good tv moment. I think Josh seems like a jerk.
Cyn - although you accurately point out the difference between "can" and "may" I do not believe that by Michelle saying that they are not able (definition of can't) to kiss she was distinguishing between the two in any way. From a grammar perspective, it doesn't matter whether it is Michelle giving the permission (may) or Josh and Anna giving themselves permission (may) - they were clearly ABLE to kiss. They just did not have permission (from whomever) So really Michelle did not use the term correctly using your definitions. She may have just been trying to remind them that THEY had decided that they did not have permission to kiss, or she may have been telling them that she believed they were not allowed to kiss. Regardless, they certainly CAN kiss (using the definition of being able to do so - nothing was stopping them).
I agree with everyone about how disrespectful the Duggars were of Grandpa D at the end. I have no doubt they loved him but it doesn't change the fact that he was not able to give permission for such a display. Maybe his wife did but I find it equally sad either way.
I don't see the kids playing with legos and matchbox cars- can you imagine how far a car like would go on their floor?
Yes I know they don't show everything but they can't manage to squeeze them playing with age appropriate footage in?
No playdo? You can even make homemade playdo? There really isn't "pretend" play. Pretend house, pretend hospital, pretend church, etc. Surely one of the kids has an imagination- is that not encouraged?
Have they ever done the sheets over the table or chairs into a tent?
If I am wrong please tell me what episode t5o watch on youtube I would really like to see the kids PLAY like kids and not just running and pulling each other around.
For all intents and purposes, Jennifer, Johanna, and several of the little boys, are like multiples. They are all nearly the same age. But you don't even see Jennifer and Johanna playing together with age appropriate toys or imaginative play together.
With all the running around and other crazy acting we see filmed, if there was any quiet and age appropriate play, I suspect we would see it. We don't see it because I don't think it happens.
Cyn, I haven't ever seen a single one of the kids go pick a toy, play with it, and put it back in their cubby or whatever. I have only seen the kids running around, sliding down stairs, climbing on counters or beds, or up towards fans, riding scooters in the house, bouncing balls, etc.
I have never seen a child go get crayons and sit quietly and color, or go get a pair of "angel" dressup wings or a big old dress (which there must be plenty of in that house) or cut snowflakes or whatever.
I just want to see the kids do something that isn't running around chaotically. And if the kids do other things besides wild play, I wonder why we never see it (since they are filmed being wild all the time, so I'd assume if there are some quiet moments, we might see them).
@IDon'tLikeJosh: The Duggars' too tight reign on even their adult kids seems to indicate their desire to create 19 JB&M's, Version 2.0.
They have achieved their goal with Josh. He is JB, 2nd generation.
No thanks, I'll pass.
Deanna, I agree with you completely that if the Duggar wildlings were truly playing with toys, doing crafts, dressing up, etc. we would get to see that filmed once in awhile. The fact that every time we see those little kids playing it is simply wild, destructive behavior leads me to believe that is what they primarily do. Especially if it is true that Michelle and JB want to be an "encouragement" to others - why don't they show the kids taking out their one allowed toy and then putting it away. I guess that would show that they really do manage their household the way the claim. (not that I really care how they manage their household one way or the other but they do seem to be a bit different than what they say they are in many areas)
For years people complained that the Duggar kids were little robots, now that we see on film they can be just as rowdy as the next kid they are undisciplined and have no structure.
The Duggars on these type points can't win for losing.
Play-doh and it's like have been banned in my house for YEARS and will never come back because of the MESS it makes and the stains it leaves on the walls, tile floors, and kitchen tables, and in carpets. (staining happens more with the home made that with the name brand) GOOD on the Duggars if they NEVER have it.
The legos went next because I was tired of stepping on them every time I walked in ANY room much less theirs.
Michelle on the other hand has trained hers to play with one thing at a time and put it up. More power to her.
They wrote the BOOK to answer these types of questions and to fill in what ISN'T shown on film.
@ Nancy.... Josh and Anna made a promise to themselves, God, AND to their parents.
They also take vows of chastity (those rings you see on the older girls), they didn't and don't treat them lightly.
COULD they have leaned over and pressed lips together YES!!! Physically....
But spiritually, mentally, and emotionally no they could NOT do it because it would break their word.
Here is an extreme version of the concept I am going for. I have the physical ability to shoot a gun. I also have the ability to hit the target. I can NOT on the other hand shoot a person or hunt for my own food. I might have permission, and even the ABILITY but there is still no way I can do it.... simply because it goes against every grain in my body to do so. This is an EXTREME scenario but I am at loss to other wise explain what I mean.
Michelle and Jimbob were TEASING them, they were not "laying down the law"... they were going "neener neener look what I can do and you can't" Childish and immature on the part of JimBob and Michelle possibly even probably, issuing a command or an order it wasn't.
Deanna said...
"I wonder where the dressup clothes are, the toy kitchen, the blocks, the pretend play items? Even if they don't own any of these things, you don't see the kids EVER doing anything imaginative (like the G kids used to do)."
Last year there was an episode where they had a bunch of large fabric-y type play houses and kitchens in the main living area that the little ones were playing in.
I also remember recently an episode where Johanna was marching around the house with some kind of cape or blanket-as-a-cape thing around her neck.
These are just off the top of my head. And, as Cyn has pointed out, these episodes are so incredibly short, there is so much of these people's lives we are missing (which is a good thing! They shouldn't have EVERYTHING broadcast). To say we've never seen such-and-such, so it must not exist, is jumping to huge conclusions.
Cyn said...
I have seen Joy with books as well.
--------------
I saw that episode, Joy was sitting near the computer desk area, trying to read a book, while one of the younger boys was twirling around on a chair being very annoying.
Joy then commented to the camera that it was very difficult for her to get her schoolwork done.
Doesn't seem like a very supporting learning environment to me, but then again, their education goals are less than lofty.
Oh, I remember Michelle "teaching" about shapes and colors at the Biltmore House (to her 1-20 year old children!). That was a good one!
Remember the episode where Johannah fell asleep sitting at the bar in the kitchen? When Jim Bob picked her up he commented that she had crayons in her hand. I am convinced they play quietly. I don't think we remember that as well as the running and jumping around. I think the producers are trying to enunciate Michelles calmness even when the kids around her are not. I have 2 kids whose noise drives me crazy. I admire her ability to let them play so loudly.
I don't watch this show frequently or closely enough to say what sorts of toys or arts & crafts items the Duggar children have. However, it's notable that the cameras don't seem to capture them working quietly at the large table on various projects, such as coloring or finger painting for the young ones, other more refined art projects for the slightly older ones, etc. Why is that?
Nor do I see any film showing the younger ones taking music lessons. What do we see of a regular naptime routine? When do we see the children actually cleaning up and putting their toys away? I'm wondering what sort of structure they have to their every day lives? What are the homeschool hours each day?
What I recall from the glimpses I've seen of recent shows is that when the little ones (now I sound like Michelle) are being filmed, it seems chaotic. They are running around, yelling in the house, racing on the floor, running into each other or things, and in short - behaving in ways that are simply not appropriate for indoors.
It does not matter whether it be one child or many -- rules should be in place and taught and enforced. After all, the Duggars supposedly exemplify how a strong patriarchal home really teaches children to obey, to behave properly, to have respect, yadda yadda yadda.
You don't need a patriarchal home for that -- but you do need structure, discipline, expectations, and follow through. When my son was young, I volunteered in his preschool. Three classrooms, one for 2's, 3's and 4's. None of this wildness took place. It was a joy to be there and help out. (On the other hand, I would not like being around the Duggar kids when they are "playing".) There was structure. The children knew the routine, and what behavior was expected of them. Outbursts happened and were dealt with calmly. Children DID NOT bang themselves or others and get hurt everyday because they were supervised properly, and also not allowed to run wild.
My point being, if you plan to have a load of children, then you need to learn how to keep order and structure and teach them how to behave. The Duggars are not giving a good example of this. I think JB and M are too infatuated with themselves and each other, do not do enough hands on day-to-day parenting, and put too much reliance on their daughters to do the grunt work.
In what I hope is related enough for this blog, I had a thought about the Duggars today when I was watching (and I'm embarrassed to admit it) The Real Housewives of Orange County. (I was home early, it was on, and I got hooked like eating potato chips even though you know you shouldn't!)
Anyway, I find those women and the lives they lead mostly horrifying. They are at the extreme of one end, and the Duggars (to me) are near the extreme at the other.
When you see the materialistic behavior of the housewives, the way they are so caught up in a bunch of nothing (tanning, shopping, plastic surgery, cattiness), then you can see why some people would find the Duggars so refreshing. You can certainly see why many are concerned over the "moral decay" around us.
I don't begrudge the Duggars for wishing to live they way they do. I certainly wish they'd offer their children more opportunities in this world, but I understand why they feel that could present more danger than benefit (don't agree, but I can understand why they might feel that way).
What I found interesting though -- is that the young children on the Housewives show are mainly kept off camera. How weird is that -- that the show that has these very vain, shallow women still manages to do a better job protecting their children from public scrutiny?
The point is that we ONLY see chaos in that house. I guarantee that that behavior is not considered ordinary, normal kid behavior. Certainly not in my home, or any other less religious or liberal homes I visit.
We do not see and Duggar homeschooling, at the dining room table, as we did in the old days (once, or maybe twice!). There is no structure visible at all anymore.
I don't recall any episode with play houses, and we surely don't see them, if they exist, anymore.
If there are quiet play times, board games (why doesn't Jim Bob get down and play Clue or Sorry or Monopoly with his kids, like a lot of dads do?), never see Michelle leading an art project (I have never had problems with playdo or clay mess, but if she doesn't like the mess, there are plenty of other mediums to use, which promote creativity and development of fine motor skills). They can surely afford a few crayons, paints, games, puzzles, etc. We NEVER see those, but do see balls and scooters in the house!
If the kids actually ever do take out a toy and play with it and put it away, it would be good to film. Perhaps that really would be an encouragement to others, because I can assure you that the unsafe actions and chaos of those unruly kids running around, with disrespect for their environment and each other, is anything BUT encouraging!
Post a Comment