Jump to content
IGNORED

Jill, Derick and Israel- Lucky Number 13


keen23

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, CatsRevenge said:

Thanks so much!  I'm glad to be here.  I looked all over and missed that profile photo button, I'll try again.  I appreciate the help!

The Profile Photo button is actually the little icon that looks like a line drawing of a landscape photo in the bottom left of the avatar on the profile page -- it doesn't say Profile Photo until you hover. Sorry!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 458
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, nst said:

welcome to FJ - we have endless supply of laughter and snark about Derick being a caveman 

Ben being an edgy preacher and Jessa getting colored hair extensions and now with the Jill possibly pregnant - we can create new thoughts on how long her labour will be 

and for Michelle we light a candle because don't forget she was in the room when Ben was born 

Thanks!  Oh my goodness,  I don't think I knew Michelle was there when Ben was born!  And she was there when the Spurge was born.  Full circle.  Maybe if Jill is pregnant they'll name the baby Pebbles or Bam Bam.  I don't think I'd even be surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CatsRevenge said:

Thanks!  Oh my goodness,  I don't think I knew Michelle was there when Ben was born!  And she was there when the Spurge was born.  Full circle.  Maybe if Jill is pregnant they'll name the baby Pebbles or Bam Bam.  I don't think I'd even be surprised.

I could see them naming a girl India Ink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, CatsRevenge said:

Just want to thank you all.  I'm a single Mom with a newly empty nest and I've been afraid I'd never be happy again. But you all never fail  to cheer me up and even make me laugh out loud, so I'm here somewhere almost every day. I've been a lurker for a very long time to get a feel of everything and try to learn some do's and don'ts but after these last couple pages I had to post and say that.  And, in case you're wondering, my name here is a nod to Derick and the cat. That made me so mad.

Anyway, I've been thinking about the Dillards and their "mission work".  I've noticed them getting progressively more outlandish in the photos and just acting weird.  Short of them possibly getting into some local wacky weed, I think they're messing with us with some things, like the OFF picture.  I also think they're over the initial shock of being in another country and are really really beginning to love not having anyone breathing down their necks like back at the TTH.  Especially Jill.  Just think, they can have sex like bunnies all over their house, any time they want and there's no one to answer to.  Except little Izzy and he can just be shut away somewhere while they tear the place up.  They can eat and drink anything they want, as much as they want without sharing. Basically it would be like a kid moving away to college and going wild after living at home their whole life. 

I think Jill is much more of a people pleaser than Jessa is, so I bet this is really turning out to be something Jill didn't expect to like so much. She still gets to seem like Daddy's perfect little angel under the guise of doing all this work for Jebus, while at the same time getting her freak on with Derick.  That's just what I've been thinking anyway. 

p.s.  I can't figure out how to change my avatar.  Do I need a certain post count?  Or is there a guide somewhere?  Thanks!!

 

 

I have a couple of slightly used kids you can borrow, if you want kids around. I'm trying to make them good husband material, so they know how to cook some things, can do laundry, and one kid LOVES to sweep, mop, and vacuum. An added bonus is that they are fully housebroken, AND remember to put the toilet seat down.

The newly turned 12yo, can serenade you, with delightful tuba tunes, such as "Mary Had a Little Lamb", "When the Saints Go Marching In", and "Jingle Bells". The almost 10yo, will ask you life changing questions like, "Why is cheese orange?", "why do dogs stick their noses in other dogs' butts?", and "what time is it REALLY, because one clock says 9:42, and the other one says 9:43?".

They will entertain you for hours, with their constant bickering, about anything and everything. They will eat you out of house and home, since they are both in the throes of puberty, which renders them with what I call "hollow leg syndrome". They might cause slight hearing loss, because they are SO DAMN LOUD, plus the 10yo DOES have a hearing impairment, so you have to be DAMN LOUD too.

They can be yours, to borrow, any weekend you want. No background check required.

Just kidding, I love them to pieces, even though they drive me insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, withaj said:

...and this is different from what he is already doing... how? Those blog posts are damn near incomprehensible already. Make them a little longer and he's there.

Maybe this is why Boob and Michelle came to see them suddenly.

M: JimBob, come look at this blog post. And the picture. He's got the crazy eyes, and I should know.

JB: Is my Jilly Muffin ok? Mama, pack your magic green shirt and let's go! Plus, mosquito nets make me horny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2.3.2016 at 5:30 PM, EmCatlyn said:

I didn't read it that way.  I think Harriet chooses to say "obey" as part of a protest to what today we would call PC-ness."  She makes the point to Peter that he would want her to "obey" “if the place was on fire or a tree falling down and he wanted her to stand clear.”  I take that to mean that for her, the word "obey" did not have to connote wifely submission.  It is a joke, but I see it more as Sayers' dig at literalists.

Harriet can vow to "obey" Peter because she trusts that if he gave her an order it would be for a good reason that he would afterwards be able to explain if it wasn't self-evident.  At least, that is how I read it. (But it is also important to remember that this is the same Harriet who allowed herself to be bullied into cohabiting with Phillip Boyes-- so maybe she just likes the idea of masculine authority on an emotional level.)  

As for Sayers herself, she was a traditionalist and a Christian apologist but big into interpretation.  I really like her reading of the Martha and Mary story (she argued that Jesus was saying that Mary, a woman, was right to behave like a disciple). Sayers liked the "old forms" but interpreted them to suit her views. 

Apologies to all who don't know what we are talking about.  Didn't mean to derail the thread!! 

 

Thank you for your explanation! I have to admit, though, that I like the “Philip Boyes”-part of it best... :kitty-wink:

While it does make a certain amount of sense that Harriet may vow to obey Peter because she trusts him, I do not see why, in that case, Peter should not vow to obey her, too. She gets to say the words, he does not. Why make a difference if there, allegedly, is none, and if they are just two reasonable people who trust each other?

(I´d also like to apologize to everybody who may feel bored by this discussion. It´s just that I have been waiting for more than two decades in order to complain about this special point to somebody who understands what I am even talking about. :confusion-shrug: I just could not contain my feelings any longer... :pb_redface: Sorry, guys! Carry on!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, St.Clara said:

Thank you for your explanation! I have to admit, though, that I like the “Philip Boyes”-part of it best... :kitty-wink:

While it does make a certain amount of sense that Harriet may vow to obey Peter because she trusts him, I do not see why, in that case, Peter should not vow to obey her, too. She gets to say the words, he does not. Why make a difference if there, allegedly, is none, and if they are just two reasonable people who trust each other?

(I´d also like to apologize to everybody who may feel bored by this discussion. It´s just that I have been waiting for more than two decades in order to complain about this special point to somebody who understands what I am even talking about. :confusion-shrug: I just could not contain my feelings any longer... :pb_redface: Sorry, guys! Carry on!)

Dorothy Sayers rocks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SnazzyNazzy, I'll be happy to feed them and send them home to sleep off a food coma.  It would help me out because I still haven't learned to cook just for me.  I'm still cooking for a baseball team and he is 800 miles away!

So, this is a thing that actually just happened. My cat was warm and happy on my lap for 30 minutes.  I turned on a recording of a guy asking Josh a question. My cat didn't even wake up.  But as soon as Josh started talking in that weasly voice of his, she freaked out and jumped off my lap.   Cats know things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, St.Clara said:

Thank you for your explanation! I have to admit, though, that I like the “Philip Boyes”-part of it best... :kitty-wink:

While it does make a certain amount of sense that Harriet may vow to obey Peter because she trusts him, I do not see why, in that case, Peter should not vow to obey her, too. She gets to say the words, he does not. Why make a difference if there, allegedly, is none, and if they are just two reasonable people who trust each other?

(I´d also like to apologize to everybody who may feel bored by this discussion. It´s just that I have been waiting for more than two decades in order to complain about this special point to somebody who understands what I am even talking about. :confusion-shrug: I just could not contain my feelings any longer... :pb_redface: Sorry, guys! Carry on!)

(Continuing with the derailment)

Peter does offer to say "obey" also, but they worry that "it would be too much for the reporters."  This was back in the 1930's.  I know that from our perspective,  Harriet choosing to say "obey" is appalling.  But is it all that different from women today who despite enlightened views about all sorts of things, get all traditional and conventional when it comes to deciding or not to take on their husband's name.  I don't get it.  But we humans are not very logical.  

Still, I do know what you mean.  And I want to say that after a really rotten day at work, it is good to chat (however tangentially) to a fellow Sayers enthusiast.:romance-heartsmiley:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 3, 2016 at 6:55 AM, RootBeerFloat said:

Maybe this is why Boob and Michelle came to see them suddenly.

M: JimBob, come look at this blog post. And the picture. He's got the crazy eyes, and I should know.

JB: Is my Jilly Muffin ok? Mama, pack your magic green shirt and let's go! Plus, mosquito nets make me horny.

 

Haaaaaaaa yes! Your snarky narrative was probably how it went down! Laughed til I coughed up a lung. 

Do you think Michelle packed her own Deet just in case she might miraculously be with child?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On February 25, 2016 at 9:43 AM, MissBitters said:

I was married in Tennessee and "obey" wasn't used.Then again, we were married by a judge. I haven't been to many weddings, but the word wasn't used at the few I've attended in the same area. I haven't gone to any fundie weddings, though, so that may be the reason why.

Mr. J and I were married by a female judge in a courthouse in Georgia. It was awesome. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

 

Do you think Michelle packed her own Deet just in case she might miraculously be with child?

That's not funny. Don't even think about it. :my_smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 4, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Bad Wolf said:

That's not funny. Don't even think about it. :my_smile:

Lol. Pretty sure she'll never face the music or give up the dream for 20... :my_blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, LittleSpouseOnThePrairie said:

Lol. Pretty sure she'll never face the music or give up the dream for 20... :my_blush:

I can't wait for the day when Jana's married off and has a child, and Michelle snaps and steals her baby...and promptly hands her back to Jana to take care of, just out of sheer force of habit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2016 at 4:16 PM, RootBeerFloat said:

Dude looks like he's about to build a cabin in the woods and start writing manifestos.

All he needs is a hoodie, a la the unibomber.

To EmCatlyn and St Clara - I thoroughly enjoyed the Dorothy Sayers discussion and you have inspired me to re-read the Peter Wimsey series.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4.3.2016 at 4:14 AM, EmCatlyn said:

(Continuing with the derailment)

Peter does offer to say "obey" also, but they worry that "it would be too much for the reporters."  This was back in the 1930's.  I know that from our perspective,  Harriet choosing to say "obey" is appalling.  But is it all that different from women today who despite enlightened views about all sorts of things, get all traditional and conventional when it comes to deciding or not to take on their husband's name.  I don't get it.  But we humans are not very logical.  

Still, I do know what you mean.  And I want to say that after a really rotten day at work, it is good to chat (however tangentially) to a fellow Sayers enthusiast.:romance-heartsmiley:

(Aaaand here comes another completely OT comment - I am afraid if I say I am sorry, at this point, nobody is going to believe me any more...)

Thank you very much! :my_smile: And my heartfelt sympathies for your bad day!

No, in fact, it is not at all that different from women today, in many respects. It is just that I was expecting more from Sayers because, as I said, she made a lot of points that are (imo) worth considering even in the present time. I read her novels when I was a teenager and was fascinated by how she addressed issues that vaguely hovered in my mind but that nobody in my everyday environment cared to mention. So, she has definitely been somewhat of a (badly needed) mentor for me.

One thing I remember for example and still find highly relevant is the situation in "Gaudy Night" when Peter borrows Harriets gown (I think at least that it is he who borrows hers and not the other way round, not quite sure any more...). Harriet is fascinated and pleased by the thought that their statures would be so similar as to make it possible for them to fit into the same gown size. As a teenager, I did not like that moment at all because, gender equality or no gender equality, I still felt that a man should be notably taller... :my_rolleyes: (Even if I already knew from my very own experience that it can be quite challenging to kiss somebody who is taller than you by 12 inches or so. But who cares if it is comfortable as long it is manly...;))

When I think back now, I am grateful that Sayers made me aware that, at least in this instance, I still was very conventional and traditional, quite contrary to what I liked to think of myself at the time...:kitty-wink: It is easy to expect a man to be free from traditional prejudices towards women and to allow me to be the individual person I am (instead of some stereotyped doll). It is much more difficult to let go of my own stereotyped expectations. The biggest challenge, though, consists in not only (graciously...:irony:) allowing a partner to be an unstereotyped individual, but in actually getting to enjoy his individuality.

Now I do know. But I have come a far way. Thanks to Sayers, I made the very first step on it. (It´s nearly impossible to learn if there is not anybody around making you aware of your ignorance first.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, St.Clara said:

(Aaaand here comes another completely OT comment - I am afraid if I say I am sorry, at this point, nobody is going to believe me any more...)

Thank you very much! :my_smile: And my heartfelt sympathies for your bad day!

No, in fact, it is not at all that different from women today, in many respects. It is just that I was expecting more from Sayers because, as I said, she made a lot of points that are (imo) worth considering even in the present time. I read her novels when I was a teenager and was fascinated by how she addressed issues that vaguely hovered in my mind but that nobody in my everyday environment cared to mention. So, she has definitely been somewhat of a (badly needed) mentor for me.

One thing I remember for example and still find highly relevant is the situation in "Gaudy Night" when Peter borrows Harriets gown (I think at least that it is he who borrows hers and not the other way round, not quite sure any more...). Harriet is fascinated and pleased by the thought that their statures would be so similar as to make it possible for them to fit into the same gown size. As a teenager, I did not like that moment at all because, gender equality or no gender equality, I still felt that a man should be notably taller... :my_rolleyes: (Even if I already knew from my very own experience that it can be quite challenging to kiss somebody who is taller than you by 12 inches or so. But who cares if it is comfortable as long it is manly...;))

When I think back now, I am grateful that Sayers made me aware that, at least in this instance, I still was very conventional and traditional, quite contrary to what I liked to think of myself at the time...:kitty-wink: It is easy to expect a man to be free from traditional prejudices towards women and to allow me to be the individual person I am (instead of some stereotyped doll). It is much more difficult to let go of my own stereotyped expectations. The biggest challenge, though, consists in not only (graciously...:irony:) allowing a partner to be an unstereotyped individual, but in actually getting to enjoy his individuality.

Now I do know. But I have come a far way. Thanks to Sayers, I made the very first step on it. (It´s nearly impossible to learn if there is not anybody around making you aware of your ignorance first.)

 

Maybe we should move this discussion to another forum.  Maybe @Curious will consider creating a Reader's subforum under Worldly Distractions and we can start a we love Dorothy Sayers thread. (If there already is a reader's forum, I apologize for missing it.)  Meanwhile...

Yes, I agree, Sayers is a remarkable writer precisely because she was so matter-of-fact about gender equality (and some other controversial topics that are still relevant today.). Supposedly she was once asked how she got male conversations "right," though she was a woman. she replied something along the lines that she just assumed her male characters were people, not men vs women. (I don't have time to look up the quote right now, but it was something like that.)

I read Gaudy Night first of Sayer's novels, in college after a favorite teacher recommended it. Like you, I was struck by the way it explores male-female equality and challenges the stereotypes.   The height/fit issue in the passage about Harriet and Peter being able to wear the same academic gown did not strike me all that forcibly, perhaps because I could wear my brother's shirts and jackets. (I was a female "small" but a men's "medium" back then.). But I remember thinking that it was a sign of how she felt connected to him, though still refusing to marry him.

The passage from that novel that really resonated for me was when Miss DeVine says to Harriet that if she ever finds someone who likes her because of her detachment, the liking is "perfectly sincere" and very valuable because with that person it is possible to be sincere. I used to get in trouble "Detachment" was not a virtue in my family, especially in a girl.  The idea that anyone could like me for being detached, for not letting emotions cloud my judgment was a new one.   And Gaudy Night is certainly a celebration of male -female equality.  

Returning to Busman's Honeymoon, part of the reason that Sayers had that bit about "obey" was that she was being snarky about the changes in the prayer book.  But, as I suggested in an earlier post, she had also created Harriet as someone who both wants to be overpowered and who is terrified of it, after her experience with Phillip Boyes.  So there is a certain psychological sense to Harriet's eagerness to promise to "obey" --That doesn't mean that Sayers approved/shared Harriet's somewhat confused feelings.

The only way I can connect this to the Duggars is that Sayers was very good at exploring how people who are driven by ideology and egoism can be dangerous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would definitely agree that people who are driven by ideaology and egoism are dangerous, both in a larger sense and on a personal level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, 2manyKidzzz said:

I would definitely agree that people who are driven by ideaology and egoism are dangerous, both in a larger sense and on a personal level. 

And the Duggars are an example of both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will Jill and Derick be coming back to Arkansas for the show? I can't imagine they'll stay from the Duggars forever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 4, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Jucifer said:

Mr. J and I were married by a female judge in a courthouse in Georgia. It was awesome. :D

We were too (male judge though).  In the hallway of a courthouse, actually.  It took 30 seconds at most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elvis Presby said:

We were too (male judge though).  In the hallway of a courthouse, actually.  It took 30 seconds at most.

Mr. Four and I were married in front of  Justice of the Peace in a PA building. It was a rather short service. (we had a friend to stand up with me and a friend to photograph.) The next day we had a "blessing of the marriage" with church readings, music, the dress, etc..and friends and relatives, and that is why I wear two wedding rings, one with each date on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2016 at 7:33 PM, nst said:

welcome to FJ - we have endless supply of laughter and snark about Derick being a caveman 

Ben being an edgy preacher and Jessa getting colored hair extensions and now with the Jill possibly pregnant - we can create new thoughts on how long her labour will be 

and for Michelle we light a candle because don't forget she was in the room when Ben was born 

Michelle was in the room when Ben was born?! What??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More on the "Jchelle was in the room when Ben was born", please. Just picking myself up off the floor from that one!!!!!

And, really.....what IS Derick's deal? I almost expect him to start posting recipes with locusts and honey. He has got to simply terrify the local population, looking like that...... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Boogalou locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Trending Content

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/finally-engineers-have-a-clue-that-could-help-them-save-voyager-1/
      GO SCIENCE.
      · 0 replies
    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      I love baseball but I'm dreading the new season because the White Sox ownership is THE FUCKING WORST. I watched Dominican League Baseball (Lidom!) over the winter and fell in love with their joy, spirit, and exuberance. The broadcasts were in Spanish and my Spanish is pretty weak but I loved catching phrases and repeating them. Bombe! I'm sad about MLB and Commissioner Idiota's busywork rules. But I love baseball, always and forever.
      I guess I don't have a point. Just bitching. Te amo mucho, Lidom!
      · 0 replies
    • WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?

      WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?

      Happy International Women's Day!

      Humanity may have some work to do, to improve gender equality, but I was glad to hear that France has taken an important step to protect healthcare for women (and people of other genders who can get pregnant). 
      (The links are just to a UN page and the AP News.)
      Anyhow, love to y'all!
      · 0 replies
    • Giraffe

      Giraffe

      Feeling ragey this morning. I have a doctor's appointment this afternoon in the hope of getting help for an ongoing injury. I went to a (different!!) doctor late last year who completely blew me off. He wouldn't do diagnostic testin, he refused to send me to a specialist, and he just told me to "take it easy" and "take ibuprofen." I'm hopeful for today's appointment but I'm also feeling a SEVERE amount of rage at that doctor from last year! 
      · 6 replies
    • BlackberryGirl

      BlackberryGirl

      Well, the rash is back with a vengeance. It never completely cleared up. I saw the derm yesterday and they did another swab and yup, raging infection again, still? It is definitely strep skin infection. I am getting so damn tired and run down from this. Who the f would immagine being hospitalized freaking TWICE for a rash? 
      · 2 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      So angry right now.  If I could return to Luxembourg tomorrow and renounce my citizenship in this stinking shitpile of a country I would.
      · 0 replies
    • PennySycamore

      PennySycamore

      My niece is going to be a seat filler at this year's Academy Awards.  Seat fillers are asked to wear tuxedos regardless of sex/gender.  If you see a pretty young woman with very curly hair, it could be my niece. 
      · 2 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      Yeah, that's me.  Though to be fair I am trying to learn Italian and Spanish.

      · 0 replies
    • Kiki03910

      Kiki03910

      IT'S BASEBALL SEASON!!!!!
      ⚾❣️
      · 5 replies
    • mango_fandango

      mango_fandango

      It’s not supposed to be mosquito season right now but I still appear to have been bitten twice on the side of my foot. Bastards. I know I shouldn’t scratch but it’s so tempting… 😑
      · 0 replies
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.