Jump to content

Menu

Josh Duggar was arrested today


Katy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm astounded that the word "creepy" is getting so much attention.   It never struck me as a particularly formal word.   If that makes senses?  It's almost slang, which I don't think we expect to have very specific, nuanced meanings.     

It's like arguing over the specific standards that must be met before using the word crap.    Can it only mean literal crap?  Or is it okay that it's a metaphoric crap?  Does it have to meet some standard of crappiness before it should be used? 

  • Like 11
  • Haha 24
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, pinball said:

(oh, I had 2 other posts in this thread...I asked someone a question unrelated to the duggars and I linked the mini golf clip)

You also forgot to mention the one where you called me mean. Just fyi.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, hjffkj said:

why even participate in a conversation if this is how you are going to behave?  

Scroll down...I quoted nearly all my posts in this thread.

if you can’t handle my ONE post that used blah, blah and something something instead of a complete sentence then I got nothin for ya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Katy said:

@prairiewindmomma

Did you work with any federal cases?  Is it true that if he doesn't take a plea deal they'll add a bunch more charges (like for the additional 200 deleted images)?

Well, in my case my ex turned down a 15 year plea deal and got 90 years.

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pinball said:

She gave a concrete reason why.

your last paragraph is really mean.

And I think you’re using “begs the question” incorrectly

 

2 minutes ago, Stacia said:

You also forgot to mention the one where you called me mean. Just fyi.

Oh, this one. Mea culpa mea culpa mea maxima culpa

i am so sorry that I missed the one where I wrote 

“your last paragraph is really mean”

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glancing back over this thread, it’s kind of sad that we (myself included!) are attacking each other over word definitions instead of focusing on Josh Duggar, whom I think we all agree is an evil pervert. (But if anyone doesn’t agree that Josh Duggar is an evil pervert, all bets are off.)

Can we all at least agree that Josh Duggar is creepy? And evil? And a pervert? And that he should be in prison for many, many years? 

I’m really hoping we can agree on that.

  • Like 33
  • Thanks 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/7/2021 at 1:38 PM, pinball said:

Scroll down...I quoted nearly all my posts in this thread.

if you can’t handle my ONE post that used blah, blah and something something instead of a complete sentence then I got nothin for ya.

I think when a "new'' poster acts like an        that’s the enduring opinion, even if they earlier contributed non        things. If I behave brilliantly at a party but then curse and knock over a vase on my way out the door are people going to remember brilliant or are they going to remember         ?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

Glancing back over this thread, it’s kind of sad that we (myself included!) are attacking each other over word definitions instead of focusing on Josh Duggar, whom I think we all agree is an evil pervert. (But if anyone doesn’t agree that Josh Duggar is an evil pervert, all bets are off.)

Can we all at least agree that Josh Duggar is creepy? And evil? And a pervert? And that he should be in prison for many, many years? 

I’m really hoping we can agree on that.

Personally I'm using the language discussion to distract my brain from too much thinking about torture of toddlers.

So yeah, I agree.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maize said:

Personally I'm using the language discussion to distract my brain from too much thinking about torture of toddlers.

So yeah, I agree.

Good point. Maybe that’s what all of us are doing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bibiche said:

I think when a "new'' poster acts like an asshat that’s the enduring opinion, even if they earlier contributed non asshat things. If I behave brilliantly at a party but then curse and knock over a vase on my way out the door are people going to remember brilliant or are they going to remember asshat?

It depends how much I liked that vase. 😉 

  • Haha 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either pinball is new to the boards or pinball is reincarnated (as evidenced by a profile created a couple of weeks ago) but either way—I agree that the personal attacks are discouraging and distracting to the larger issue of the horribleness of Duggar watching children be raped and being se#ually excited by that after he abused his sisters....whose sisters’ work on their shared television show is likely paying for his defense and living expenses. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I also can't help thinking about how Josh himself may have been literally beaten as a toddler, and may beat his own toddlers.

I am not one who thinks every single instance of spanking is abusive, but my understanding of the kind of "discipline" tactics espoused by the ATI community definitely ranges into abusive territory. Even into torture territory.

The twisted sexual aspect is, I am afraid, only one side of this story.

Edited by maize
  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They likely all were. They were followers of the Pearls also.

Lest your memory be short, a decade or so ago here on these boards people were supportive of the Pearls and their methods. 2006-2010–I would have said the boards leaned towards the Pearls, Duggars, Vision Forum, Maxwells, and other more extreme evangelical families. 
 

The more moderate culture shift over the last decade is what has precipitated the board departures here....some en masse...in protest. 🤦

  • Like 18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bibiche said:

I think when a "new'' poster acts like an asshat that’s the enduring opinion, even if they earlier contributed non asshat things. If I behave brilliantly at a party but then curse and knock over a vase on my way out the door are people going to remember brilliant or are they going to remember asshat?

I'm going to disagree with your use of the term asshat here, as applied to pinball. 😉 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

They likely all were. They were followers of the Pearls also.

Lest your memory be short, a decade or so ago here on these boards people were supportive of the Pearls and their methods. 2006-2010–I would have said the boards leaned towards the Pearls, Duggars, Vision Forum, Maxwells, and other more extreme evangelical families. 
 

The more moderate culture shift over the last decade is what has precipitated the board departures here....some en masse...in protest. 🤦

I didn't hang out here much before about the end of 2010. I can only remember ever seeing negative stuff about the Pearls.

Edited by maize
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Seasider too said:

I believe this may be the same that Ottakee posted in a spin-off thread? It’s a solid statement from Denhollander, if y’all want to join the conversation in that other thread. 

I saw that separate post right after I made my post. I updated my post to link to the separate thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maize said:

I didn't hang out here much before about the end of 2010. I can only remember ever seeing negative stuff about the Pearls.

You are fortunate, then.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember seeing that clip of JB and M here and I'd like to contribute that I found it immature and juvenile and gross at the time. 

I think it's almost impossible to not now - with subsequent context - view it, retrospectively, as creepy. 

But in general, I agree that definitions of words do matter when conversing - creepy already has a fairly widely agreed definition. It's not being used in a novel way in describing horrible JB.

I don't think there's any need to attack EKS though. Or call her creepy. A slight disagreement re emphasis isn't a defence of child abuse materials or the abusers who view them, nor even of the Duggar's ugly cult. 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, maize said:

I didn't hang out here much before about the end of 2010. I can only remember ever seeing negative stuff about the Pearls.

I don’t remember anyone being especially positive about the Pearls but I do remember a more conservative Evangelical presence on these boards for sure.  

Young Earth Creationism was debated hotly.  I remember more discussions about wives obeying their husbands.  I remember people defending the Duggars and ATI.  It wasn’t the majority when I started (which would have been around 2011/2012ish) but it was present. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pinball said:

Scroll down...I quoted nearly all my posts in this thread.

if you can’t handle my ONE post that used blah, blah and something something instead of a complete sentence then I got nothin for ya.

I maintain that at the point where you stoop to saying 'if I cared and blah blah' you are no long willing to engage effectively in a convo and should probably bow out

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hjffkj said:

I maintain that at the point where you stoop to saying 'if I cared and blah blah' you are no long willing to engage effectively in a convo and should probably bow out

 given that it is a statement made ad infinitum on this board in certain situations, most people knew exactly what I meant. So I’d call that effective.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

The meaning of creepy can reasonably be put into the agree to disagree category, dropped and moved on.

I agree. 

I was surprised that it was ever made into an issue. 

Clearly, I will never be hired by the Grammar and Vocabulary Police. 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Catwoman said:

I agree. 

I was surprised that it was ever made into an issue. 

Clearly, I will never be hired by the Grammar and Vocabulary Police. 

You know, when someone's a dog with a bone, and can't seem to let it go, there's usually a non-nefarious reason. We don't all come to discussion with our triggers, conscious or unconscious, perfectly processed. For whatever reason, a word touched a nerve. Cue pile on. Not worth it. There's  less than a hair between creepy and inappropriate, and it didn't need defending. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

1 hour ago, prairiewindmomma said:

They likely all were. They were followers of the Pearls also.

Lest your memory be short, a decade or so ago here on these boards people were supportive of the Pearls and their methods. 2006-2010–I would have said the boards leaned towards the Pearls, Duggars, Vision Forum, Maxwells, and other more extreme evangelical families. 
 

The more moderate culture shift over the last decade is what has precipitated the board departures here....some en masse...in protest. 🤦

I don't remember the Dugger love ever going unchallenged.  The supporters were more vocal back then, but I don't recall them ever being a clear majority of posters.  Usually the arguing got heated enough that the thread was locked.  This may be the longest unlocked Dugger-related thread ever. 

  • Like 8
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

You know, when someone's a dog with a bone, and can't seem to let it go, there's usually a non-nefarious reason. We don't all come to discussion with our triggers, conscious or unconscious, perfectly processed. For whatever reason, a word touched a nerve. Cue pile on. Not worth it. There's  less than a hair between creepy and inappropriate, and it didn't need defending. 

I don’t think the problem was that some of us thought JimBob was creepy and EKS viewed his behavior differently — everyone seemed to be in agreement that JB was inappropriate to one degree or another. The dispute was all about one single word.

I think the problem started when EKS decided that no one was allowed to call JB “creepy” because her definition of the word differed from ours, and she wouldn’t let it go. If she had said it once, I don’t think there would have been a pile on. But she kept arguing about it, so people defended their use of the word. Honestly, I still don’t understand why it was so important to her that we all admit we were wrong. 

As for me, well, anyone can call JimBob Duggar anything they want to call him, but I’m still sticking with creepy. A word like “inappropriate” doesn’t convey the way I feel about him. It’s far too mild and innocuous a word. But if anyone wants to disagree with my terminology, I’m fine with that, and had EKS said she thought JimBob was inappropriate and not argued at the same time that we couldn’t think of him as creepy, I wouldn’t have thought twice about it . 🙂 

 

 

Edited by Catwoman
Sentences should make sense. They just should.
  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

True.

*sits back in rocker, chews piece of wheat straw, contemplates own grey hair*

Back 10-15 years ago, we squabbled as much as we do now. Remudamom v. Joanne. Runnermom v. Mergath. The battles were long and heated. We even fought over the definitions of words then. (Look up the spanking v. whipping thread when CalmingTea saw a kid get spanked at church.) 

I think what is different about then is just some of the overall balance of opinions. No one comes out volunteering that they paddle their kids with an actual wooden paddle. No one asks CalmingTea, "Was it as bad as you think it sounded?" when she heard a repeated cracking noise in the spanking of a kid in a bathroom. There were always people who stood up and said that ATI or Duggars or Pearls were bad and wrong....but some of those voices that were, "The Pearls are bad but.....spiritual headship/submission of wives/spanking with something other than a hand is ok..." have all but gone away. We don't see as many mothers here with 8+ kids.  We don't see as many who head cover or do skirts/dresses only. We don't see as many who only do YE or the like.  We are much more likely to see someone with 2-4 kids, who has some college experience, and who lives in a suburban experience rather than on a homestead or farm.

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, prairiewindmomma said:

True.

*sits back in rocker, chews piece of wheat straw, contemplates own grey hair*

Back 10-15 years ago, we squabbled as much as we do now. Remudamom v. Joanne. Runnermom v. Mergath. The battles were long and heated. We even fought over the definitions of words then. (Look up the spanking v. whipping thread when CalmingTea saw a kid get spanked at church.) 

I think what is different about then is just some of the overall balance of opinions. No one comes out volunteering that they paddle their kids with an actual wooden paddle. No one asks CalmingTea, "Was it as bad as you think it sounded?" when she heard a repeated cracking noise in the spanking of a kid in a bathroom. There were always people who stood up and said that ATI or Duggars or Pearls were bad and wrong....but some of those voices that were, "The Pearls are bad but.....spiritual headship/submission of wives/spanking with something other than a hand is ok..." have all but gone away. We don't see as many mothers here with 8+ kids.  We don't see as many who head cover or do skirts/dresses only. We don't see as many who only do YE or the like.  We are much more likely to see someone with 2-4 kids, who has some college experience, and who lives in a suburban experience rather than on a homestead or farm.

I agree. We also see a lot fewer homeschoolers here than we used to. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, prairiewindmomma said:

True.

*sits back in rocker, chews piece of wheat straw, contemplates own grey hair*

Back 10-15 years ago, we squabbled as much as we do now. Remudamom v. Joanne. Runnermom v. Mergath. The battles were long and heated. We even fought over the definitions of words then. (Look up the spanking v. whipping thread when CalmingTea saw a kid get spanked at church.) 

I think what is different about then is just some of the overall balance of opinions. No one comes out volunteering that they paddle their kids with an actual wooden paddle. No one asks CalmingTea, "Was it as bad as you think it sounded?" when she heard a repeated cracking noise in the spanking of a kid in a bathroom. There were always people who stood up and said that ATI or Duggars or Pearls were bad and wrong....but some of those voices that were, "The Pearls are bad but.....spiritual headship/submission of wives/spanking with something other than a hand is ok..." have all but gone away. We don't see as many mothers here with 8+ kids.  We don't see as many who head cover or do skirts/dresses only. We don't see as many who only do YE or the like.  We are much more likely to see someone with 2-4 kids, who has some college experience, and who lives in a suburban experience rather than on a homestead or farm.

I think that there is a wider variety of homeschoolers nowadays. The demographics have shifted to suburban being a larger percentage. And many people who  are homeschooling for various reasons versus mainly religious reasons. 

I also think that those families do exist, but they've shifted over to other formats, like facebook

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Happy2BaMom said:

This hair-splitting focus on word usage s creepy. 

The word usage in this thread that threw me off? The police report calling Jim Bob "James" ... I had to literally reread it to remember that Jim Bob is James. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, hjffkj said:

I can't imagine the type of person who would knowingly continue to patronize his business.  But I do hope he doesn't get harassed.  That type of behavior can escalate into dangerous situations too quickly

Oh I don’t know... a man who knowingly downloaded, thereby encouraging people to make more, videos of baby tape and child sexual torture? I apparently don’t have nearly the forgiving nature I’d like to have... I don’t have much sympathy for evil men getting themselves into scenarios where they feel scared and vulnerable. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Katy said:

The creator of the video with the two toddlers, one of which was killed, is in prison for life in the Philippines.  I didn’t look further into whether that man is also who created the rest of the videos in the file, and if the other girls (up to age 9) are safe or not.  Frankly I couldn’t get past the first paragraph of his Wikipedia entry without getting physically sick.  I had nightmares last night.

I have been a foster parent to kids who were abused so I thought I had a higher tolerance for knowing about this than typical, but it was way too much.  I’m not going to give sources because I don’t think anyone not in law enforcement or a jury should know how awful it is. 

We have a monster living less than two miles away. Killed a baby and got off on a technicality in appeal. (Party, multiple men had access to baby, and apparently there either wasn’t physical evidence or it was tainted? Dunno.) I looked up all offenders in the zip code before we bought the house, especially because we are rural. One day I was in the gas station and someone was being obnoxiously loud and it was him.  I’m sure my face showed my horror but what really got me is that he was loud and drawing attention. A person filled with shame doesn’t do that...... How do people live with themselves?

  • Sad 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BlsdMama said:

Oh I don’t know... a man who knowingly downloaded, thereby encouraging people to make more, videos of baby tape and child sexual torture? I apparently don’t have nearly the forgiving nature I’d like to have... I don’t have much sympathy for evil men getting themselves into scenarios where they feel scared and vulnerable. 

Scared and vulnerable is not what I'm talking about.  He can and should feel that way right now. But tt doesn't matter what someone does,  the type of harassment that is likely to come to a person like that isn't just dangerous for that specific person.  Angry people who get riled up over heinous crimes sometime go over board when they gather with other angry people.  I don't want to see the possible hurt that could come from a mob of people harassing him.  

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all - this is ChocolateReign.  I think there was an attempt to merge my previous accounts but pretty sure due to an issue on my end it was an epic fail.  

Before I discuss the Duggars I just want to say I found Jim Bob's behavior creepy and from this position I shan't be moved!

On to Josh (soon to be Inmate #546738 or something similar)...

I read the arrest warrant and some information a friend picked up on Pacer.  I had a few questions about why there was such a gap between when the seizure of the electronics occurred and his arrest, but my *guess* is it was due to COVID and the need to hack his passwords.

Josh didn't pay for any of the material he downloaded. It looks like most was acquired via BitTorrent, which is a peer-to-peer (p2p) sharing service. He also had the tor browser downloaded and seems like they have evidence he used it for downloading a specific file (which is a bit unusual that software usually auto deletes activity), but it was the BitTorrent downloads which led the FBI to him. Sadly there is a lot of illegal material available on the torrent services, but the positive is that they are easily traced to the downloading IP.  Due to the sheer volume of potential material on those services the FBI and DHS often will tag certain files for priority targeting.  Based on how quickly they started the investigation after the download and the description of the flies I would assume they were targeting those searching for the more horrific material out there.

I was a bit surprised how tech savvy Josh was in some ways (Linux system and partitions) while in others he left an easy trail for the authorities.  Speculation on my part is he learned specifically how to beat the monitoring software while having no idea about how to cover his tracks otherwise.  What that means (imo) is that while I can't say this is a slam dunk case without knowing all of the facts I am fairly certain they do have the evidence lined up to convict him. His attorney is going to push the only possible defense (the material was downloaded but not by my client) but that is a tough sell in this case due to the minimal access anyone else would have had. I have seen that defense work before but more often when it really is a device shared by multiple adults with no way to determine who had access/when.  From what I have read that is not the case here.

The judge was correct in setting bail.  The default assumption in federal court is that you should receive bail, and based on his not fleeing in the time between the search and his arrest and with no current charges involving direct contact with a child, there isn't a great case to not allow him out. It's frustrating but with the conditions in place it is the right call.

I fully expect a plea in this case and I wouldn't be shocked to learn the Duggars are pushing for him to make a deal. The quicker this is out of the news the better for them.

  • Like 9
  • Thanks 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maize said:

Personally I'm using the language discussion to distract my brain from too much thinking about torture of toddlers.

So yeah, I agree.

This. I’ve tried to stay off the forum just so I wouldn’t think about this. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KungFuPanda said:

I don't remember the Dugger love ever going unchallenged.  The supporters were more vocal back then, but I don't recall them ever being a clear majority of posters.  Usually the arguing got heated enough that the thread was locked.  This may be the longest unlocked Dugger-related thread ever. 

 

50 minutes ago, prairiewindmomma said:

True.

*sits back in rocker, chews piece of wheat straw, contemplates own grey hair*

Back 10-15 years ago, we squabbled as much as we do now. Remudamom v. Joanne. Runnermom v. Mergath. The battles were long and heated. We even fought over the definitions of words then. (Look up the spanking v. whipping thread when CalmingTea saw a kid get spanked at church.) 

I think what is different about then is just some of the overall balance of opinions. No one comes out volunteering that they paddle their kids with an actual wooden paddle. No one asks CalmingTea, "Was it as bad as you think it sounded?" when she heard a repeated cracking noise in the spanking of a kid in a bathroom. There were always people who stood up and said that ATI or Duggars or Pearls were bad and wrong....but some of those voices that were, "The Pearls are bad but.....spiritual headship/submission of wives/spanking with something other than a hand is ok..." have all but gone away. We don't see as many mothers here with 8+ kids.  We don't see as many who head cover or do skirts/dresses only. We don't see as many who only do YE or the like.  We are much more likely to see someone with 2-4 kids, who has some college experience, and who lives in a suburban experience rather than on a homestead or farm.

 

I think there's also a fair amount more patience and civility here in general... not that we have improved, but there's been more than enough drama in the real world in the past 18 months that it seems (to me at least) that people have a higher ability to take things less personally.  And when not, it's either really banal, really personal, or really bad.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Catwoman said:

Can we all at least agree that Josh Duggar is creepy? And evil? And a pervert? And that he should be in prison for many, many years? 

Absolutely!

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, AnotherNewName said:

Hi all - this is ChocolateReign.  I think there was an attempt to merge my previous accounts but pretty sure due to an issue on my end it was an epic fail.  

Before I discuss the Duggars I just want to say I found Jim Bob's behavior creepy and from this position I shan't be moved!

On to Josh (soon to be Inmate #546738 or something similar)...

I read the arrest warrant and some information a friend picked up on Pacer.  I had a few questions about why there was such a gap between when the seizure of the electronics occurred and his arrest, but my *guess* is it was due to COVID and the need to hack his passwords.

Josh didn't pay for any of the material he downloaded. It looks like most was acquired via BitTorrent, which is a peer-to-peer (p2p) sharing service. He also had the tor browser downloaded and seems like they have evidence he used it for downloading a specific file (which is a bit unusual that software usually auto deletes activity), but it was the BitTorrent downloads which led the FBI to him. Sadly there is a lot of illegal material available on the torrent services, but the positive is that they are easily traced to the downloading IP.  Due to the sheer volume of potential material on those services the FBI and DHS often will tag certain files for priority targeting.  Based on how quickly they started the investigation after the download and the description of the flies I would assume they were targeting those searching for the more horrific material out there.

I was a bit surprised how tech savvy Josh was in some ways (Linux system and partitions) while in others he left an easy trail for the authorities.  Speculation on my part is he learned specifically how to beat the monitoring software while having no idea about how to cover his tracks otherwise.  What that means (imo) is that while I can't say this is a slam dunk case without knowing all of the facts I am fairly certain they do have the evidence lined up to convict him. His attorney is going to push the only possible defense (the material was downloaded but not by my client) but that is a tough sell in this case due to the minimal access anyone else would have had. I have seen that defense work before but more often when it really is a device shared by multiple adults with no way to determine who had access/when.  From what I have read that is not the case here.

The judge was correct in setting bail.  The default assumption in federal court is that you should receive bail, and based on his not fleeing in the time between the search and his arrest and with no current charges involving direct contact with a child, there isn't a great case to not allow him out. It's frustrating but with the conditions in place it is the right call.

I fully expect a plea in this case and I wouldn't be shocked to learn the Duggars are pushing for him to make a deal. The quicker this is out of the news the better for them.

I'm pretty sure that the merge mistake was not on your end...

I'm not sure what I can do about it, but I do want to apologize and I will look into this and see what I can do to recover older messages.  I do have to say that having 29,000+ upvotes on 1,000 posts (the representation) is pretty awesome.  But it's goofed up.  I'll look into it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Helpdesk said:

I'm pretty sure that the merge mistake was not on your end...

I'm not sure what I can do about it, but I do want to apologize and I will look into this and see what I can do to recover older messages.  I do have to say that having 29,000+ upvotes on 1,000 posts (the representation) is pretty awesome.  But it's goofed up.  I'll look into it.  

Absolutely no worries if it can't be fixed! 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, prairiewindmomma said:

I think what is different about then is just some of the overall balance of opinions. No one comes out volunteering that they paddle their kids with an actual wooden paddle. No one asks CalmingTea, "Was it as bad as you think it sounded?" when she heard a repeated cracking noise in the spanking of a kid in a bathroom. There were always people who stood up and said that ATI or Duggars or Pearls were bad and wrong....but some of those voices that were, "The Pearls are bad but.....spiritual headship/submission of wives/spanking with something other than a hand is ok..." have all but gone away. We don't see as many mothers here with 8+ kids.  We don't see as many who head cover or do skirts/dresses only. We don't see as many who only do YE or the like.  We are much more likely to see someone with 2-4 kids, who has some college experience, and who lives in a suburban experience rather than on a homestead or farm.

And some of us have changed since joining the boards. 

Signed,

No longer saying "The Pearls aren't perfect but..."

No longer young earth creationist

No longer only skirt-wearing, except in the summer (but still don't wear jeans without a long top) 😉 

No longer living in the country

Still head covering, but for worship service only

Still believe my husband is the spiritual head of my household

Only ever had one kid 😉 

Always was college-educated,

MercyA

Edited by MercyA
  • Like 22
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, MercyA said:

And some of us have changed since joining on the boards. 

  MercyA

Exactly. And I think some of us filtered reality through our own lens. I never watched the Duggars much but I was willing to believe there were a well meaning family, if a bit over the top. I saw the Pearls No Greater Joyvideos - where he’s rather jovial and assumed he didn’t mean much literally - my dad is like that - address the heart, work together, and discipline is more theoretical than IRL. 
 

i figures most folks who had a bunch of kids and chose to spend nearly 24/7 with them actually really liked and enjoyed them. 
 

So many of us who identify as large family and conservative Christians just filtered their lives as a deeper shade of our own reality (lens) and didn’t really understand the nefarious nature of the extremist sects, like ATI. Theoretically, I do believe in the concept of submissiveness but I can’t imagine my husband not receiving or respecting my choices and input... so this concept of submissiveness that we’re now seeing played out is beyond my ability to fathom. 
Similar:

In my head: “Oh, hm, interesting concept..” then gets translated through my life experience. 
Horror show commences....

 Conservative gapes in horror, “WHOA. That’s how “they” understood it?!?!” 
Conservative feels the need to add caveats to every successive discussion to distance self from horror show. 

  • Like 29
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BlsdMama said:

Exactly. And I think some of us filtered reality through our own lens. I never watched the Duggars much but I was willing to believe there were a well meaning family, if a bit over the top. I saw the Pearls No Greater Joyvideos - where he’s rather jovial and assumed he didn’t mean much literally - my dad is like that - address the heart, work together, and discipline is more theoretical than IRL. 
 

i figures most folks who had a bunch of kids and chose to spend nearly 24/7 with them actually really liked and enjoyed them. 
 

So many of us who identify as large family and conservative Christians just filtered their lives as a deeper shade of our own reality (lens) and didn’t really understand the nefarious nature of the extremist sects, like ATI. Theoretically, I do believe in the concept of submissiveness but I can’t imagine my husband not receiving or respecting my choices and input... so this concept of submissiveness that we’re now seeing played out is beyond my ability to fathom. 
Similar:

In my head: “Oh, hm, interesting concept..” then gets translated through my life experience. 
Horror show commences....

 Conservative gapes in horror, “WHOA. That’s how “they” understood it?!?!” 
Conservative feels the need to add caveats to every successive discussion to distance self from horror show. 

Exactly this. I used to give them the benefit of the doubt for very similar reasons.  To the pure all things are pure.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AnotherNewName said:

I had a few questions about why there was such a gap between when the seizure of the electronics occurred and his arrest, but my *guess* is it was due to COVID and the need to hack his passwords.

 

I was a bit surprised how tech savvy Josh was in some ways (Linux system and partitions) while in others he left an easy trail for the authorities.  Speculation on my part is he learned specifically how to beat the monitoring software while having no idea about how to cover his tracks otherwise.  What that means (imo) is that while I can't say this is a slam dunk case without knowing all of the facts I am fairly certain they do have the evidence lined up to convict him. His attorney is going to push the only possible defense (the material was downloaded but not by my client) but that is a tough sell in this case due to the minimal access anyone else would have had. I have seen that defense work before but more often when it really is a device shared by multiple adults with no way to determine who had access/when.  From what I have read that is not the case here.

The judge was correct in setting bail.  The default assumption in federal court is that you should receive bail, and based on his not fleeing in the time between the search and his arrest and with no current charges involving direct contact with a child, there isn't a great case to not allow him out. It's frustrating but with the conditions in place it is the right call.

I fully expect a plea in this case and I wouldn't be shocked to learn the Duggars are pushing for him to make a deal. The quicker this is out of the news the better for them.

In my ex husbands case it was a very long time from police raid to arrest.  It was because the more they dug, the deeper it got and the more they found and the more they had to investigate and on and on.  They also want to make sure it was an air tight case.

Mine had files so well hidden they had to detail in court how they could be accessed and what it took to put them there.  I never knew any porn was there at all, let alone what was found.

Yep, the default is release until trial....sadly.

Also, he would likely be served well to take any plea deal offered to him.  Mine rejected a 15 year plea deal from federal (but there would have been state charges added) and ended up with 90 years in federal....at which point the state charges were dropped as there was no reason to make the victims testify as he was never going to get out anyway.   He also tried the "someone else did that and put that on my computer" defense....to no avail.

I hope that the federal prosecutor in this case is as strong as the one in our case.  She had the case sewn up tight by the time they had seated the jury.

  • Like 21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, fairfarmhand said:

I think that there is a wider variety of homeschoolers nowadays. The demographics have shifted to suburban being a larger percentage. And many people who  are homeschooling for various reasons versus mainly religious reasons. 

I also think that those families do exist, but they've shifted over to other formats, like facebook

When I first came here in around 2001, there really weren't too many places for me to go as an atheist Brit home educating for academic/geographic reasons. When threads described children being physically harmed, I spoke up. But I mostly didn't out myself. At that time I was living surrounded by illegal missionaries in China, so I was finding support where I could.

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

When I first came here in around 2001, there really weren't too many places for me to go as an atheist Brit home educating for academic/geographic reasons. When threads described children being physically harmed, I spoke up. But I mostly didn't out myself. At that time I was living surrounded by illegal missionaries in China, so I was finding support where I could.

I remember your posts back then, and that it was a complicated situation since most of the homeschoolers you knew were illegal missionaries.  I am so glad that homeschooling has become more common among expats in the last 20 years, although in some places you’re still stuck with that ultra-conservative Christian thinking if you want homeschooling friends.  We were glad to have access to activities at a missionary school in one country, although I never ever would have sent my kids there for classes.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...