Whitney and Zach Bates - Part 3

[Carm_88]

Is that Whitney's birth Mom or adoptive Mom? I know that there have been plenty of rumours about something going on between her and her adoptive parents. 

[VelociRapture]

16 minutes ago, Carm_88 said:

Is that Whitney's birth Mom or adoptive Mom? I know that there have been plenty of rumours about something going on between her and her adoptive parents. 

Birth mom. She either doesn't have a relationship with them or they don't want the public attention. I'm pretty sure the relationship fell apart for some reason though - it would have been after she married, but before Bradley was born.

[JillyO]

Ugh. I will never NOT be curious about what went on between Whitney and her two sets of parents. It's not just the fact that the relationship with her adoptive parents aparently went south, but also that she reconciled with her birth parents (whom she apparently had previously cut all ties with) around the same time. I just really hope it's not some Gothard anti-adoption bullshit.

And yes, I realize that it's none of my business and Whitney is in no way obliged to share this publically. Doesn't mean I can't wonder though.

[snickers34]

38 minutes ago, JillyO said:

I will never NOT be curious about what went on between Whitney and her two sets of parents.

SERIOUSLY. I mean for being a part of this show/fundie lifestyle, where optics of being close knit with your family is basically their whole schtick, it must've taken something bad for their relationship to fall apart.

[VineHeart137]

For the Perkinses to have lost custody in the first place there had to have been some type of abuse involved. And I could absolutely see the Bateses pushing Whit to get back in contact with her abusive biological parents due to the disgusting anti-adoption mindset.

I think that regardless of what the story is, it seems like Whitney had a rough life when she was younger. It's no wonder she Bates-ified herself as quickly and thoroughly as she could. They probably seemed like the perfect family. It probably also explains her gushy picture-perfect social media presence.

[nausicaa]

1 hour ago, JillyO said:

Ugh. I will never NOT be curious about what went on between Whitney and her two sets of parents. It's not just the fact that the relationship with her adoptive parents aparently went south, but also that she reconciled with her birth parents (whom she apparently had previously cut all ties with) around the same time. I just really hope it's not some Gothard anti-adoption bullshit.

And yes, I realize that it's none of my business and Whitney is in no way obliged to share this publically. Doesn't mean I can't wonder though.

Me too. She seemed really close with her adoptive parents at her wedding. 

I do wonder if it's some Gothard anti-adoption thinking. However, Kelly has adopted sisters and seems to have a good relationship with them, so I would think that would give her some pause as to completely vilifying adoption?

[VelociRapture]

Just now, nausicaa said:

Me too. She seemed really close with her adoptive parents at her wedding. 

I do wonder if it's some Gothard anti-adoption thinking. However, Kelly has adopted sisters and seems to have a good relationship with them, so I would think that would give her some pause as to completely vilifying adoption?

Her sister Beth is black. That didn't stop them from having that disgusting Confederacy type room in their house. I have zero trouble picturing Kelly pushing this all while having adopted family herself. Critical thinking appears to be lacking.

[Carm_88]

It makes me sad that Whitney cut off her adoptive parents. They did seem to really love her. I hope that it wasn't pushed upon her but I doubt it. 

[actuallyjessica]

Whitney was adopted in her late teens, no one knows how she was treated in that home, either. They may have been toxic people, just as her bio parents are speculated to be. We don't know. Family dynamics are often a wild and crazy thing, and the way one person sees on situation or relationship can be totally different to the way it actually is. Things like golden children, scapegoats and flying monkeys all come into play.

Any one who has had a close familial relationship with someone with narcissistic personality disorder will know exactly what I'm talking about.

[snickers34]

45 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

However, Kelly has adopted sisters and seems to have a good relationship with them, so I would think that would give her some pause as to completely vilifying adoption?

I really don't get how much people have jumped on assuming that they're anti-adoption. Yes, Gothard said it, but there's plenty of things that he said that people don't follow exactly. Similar to the Duggars - but we know that's not true since they have now literally adopted their nephew. I really think it's one of biggest myths that people keep running with.

[Carm_88]

1 hour ago, snickers34 said:

 Similar to the Duggars - but we know that's not true since they have now literally adopted their nephew. 

I think they are fostering Tyler. They haven't adopted him yet. 

[Coconut Flan]

Technically the Duggars have guardianship.  That is neither adopting or fostering.  They are caring for the child and have the legal rights to make decisions for him and the mother has agreed to the placement.  Should she become able to care for him again, the guardianship can be ended.

[mstee]

Did we ever figure out if legally Tyler has to attend school or are they allowed to homeschool him too? 

[snickers34]

3 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

Technically the Duggars have guardianship.  That is neither adopting or fostering.  They are caring for the child and have the legal rights to make decisions for him and the mother has agreed to the placement.  Should she become able to care for him again, the guardianship can be ended.

Sorry, didn't mean to lead the thread drift.  My point is just that we've seen plenty of evidence to suggest that they're fine with adopting, and none to suggest they're against it (besides one thing that Gothard said at one point). It seems like a huge leap to think that the Bates would encourage Whitney to disown or fight or whatever with her adoptive parents. Seems way out of character for them.

[VelociRapture]

3 minutes ago, snickers34 said:

Sorry, didn't mean to lead the thread drift.  My point is just that we've seen plenty of evidence to suggest that they're fine with adopting, and none to suggest they're against it (besides one thing that Gothard said at one point). It seems like a huge leap to think that the Bates would encourage Whitney to disown or fight or whatever with her adoptive parents. Seems way out of character for them.

It's manipulative and sneaky, which is absolutely in character for them. I'll repeat something I said earlier in one thread - this is a family that had a room dedicated to the Confederacy when they have black relatives (at least one of Kelly's sisters, who was adopted.) If they can somehow perform the mental gymnastics necessary to rationalize that, then they can rationalize manipulating Whit to distance herself from her adoptive family.

That said we don't know the details about how she wound up with them or why the relationship ended. Whit isn't offering details and, as far as I know, the adoptive family aren't either. I think it's natural to be curious, but I would hope they don't feel pressured or compelled to speak about it if they don't want to.

I just don't think we can rule out the Bateses exerting their influence over Whit. It's still entirely possible at this point.

[snickers34]

1 minute ago, VelociRapture said:

It's manipulative and sneaky, which is absolutely in character for them. I'll repeat something I said earlier in one thread - this is a family that had a room dedicated to the Confederacy when they have black relatives (at least one of Kelly's sisters, who was adopted.)

I think this takes significantly less mental gymnastics than you think. I know plenty of family, friends, co-workers, etc, that have different beliefs and values but are still able to love each other. Seems hard in Trumpland, I know. Additionally, as fucked up as I think it is, there are plenty of people that argue against the Confederate flag being just about slavery. The Bates are not alone in that, meaning that they would see no problem with having a confederate flag but also having genuine love and acceptance for black family/friends. Fucked up for sure, but I'm not sure why this suggests some level of master manipulation on their part.

[nausicaa]

19 minutes ago, snickers34 said:

I think this takes significantly less mental gymnastics than you think. I know plenty of family, friends, co-workers, etc, that have different beliefs and values but are still able to love each other. Seems hard in Trumpland, I know. Additionally, as fucked up as I think it is, there are plenty of people that argue against the Confederate flag being just about slavery. The Bates are not alone in that, meaning that they would see no problem with having a confederate flag but also having genuine love and acceptance for black family/friends. Fucked up for sure, but I'm not sure why this suggests some level of master manipulation on their part.

Just for the record: They didn't only have a Confederate flag, they had a portrait of Nathan Bedford Forrest, far and away most known for his help in establishing the Klu Klux Klan, a terrorist organization that murdered, assaulted, and intimidated black people in the South for nearly a hundred years. 

I find that a lot harder to reconcile than I do a Confederate flag, which I suppose if I were feeling generous I could chalk up to insularity or superficiality. 

(I know that Forrest actually reformed a lot on his opinions on race in his later years, but I'm willing to bet every dollar to my name that Gil and Kelly don't know that and were not putting up his portrait to memorialize his evolution. NBF = the Confederacy and the KKK in the minds of nearly everyone.)

[front hugs > duggs]

My aunt was briefly married to a racist bigot from West Virginia (she got knocked up and felt obligated at the time to marry). He was also very (and from my understanding openly) anti-Semitic, despite him really liking my (Jewish) father. He lost his shit when he found out my older brother was going to be raised Jewish, but was always genuinely nice to my dad.My dad never quite understood what to make of the whole thing.

Luckily he was out of the picture shortly after. Although I did find a picture while going through my mom's stuff last year of his combination 4th of July/birthday confederate flag cake. Yeeps. 

[Melissa1977]

7 hours ago, front hugs > duggs said:

My aunt was briefly married to a racist bigot from West Virginia (she got knocked up and felt obligated at the time to marry). He was also very (and from my understanding openly) anti-Semitic, despite him really liking my (Jewish) father. He lost his shit when he found out my older brother was going to be raised Jewish, but was always genuinely nice to my dad.My dad never quite understood what to make of the whole thing.

Luckily he was out of the picture shortly after. Although I did find a picture while going through my mom's stuff last year of his combination 4th of July/birthday confederate flag cake. Yeeps. 

It's weird to understand. I know racist people who are nice to co-workers/neighbours of another race and they're sincere. They say "This person is nice because he's not like the other *put any race here* people". Or they say "I like this person because he dresses and behaves like me and not like people in his country". And so on. Disgusting, I know.

I even know immigrants or immigrant's children who critisize immigration. Or who are racists about people of their native country.

[Melissa1977]

15 hours ago, nausicaa said:

 

I do wonder if it's some Gothard anti-adoption thinking. However, Kelly has adopted sisters and seems to have a good relationship with them, so I would think that would give her some pause as to completely vilifying adoption?

Bates are not against adoption. Kelly made it clear in her old blog when she was asked about it.

*Just specutation*. I have the feeling the problem was that Whitney's adoptive parents didn't share the Bates' religious beliefs. Maybe they were fundie but far more mainstream and open minded than Bates (not that I know them, but they encourage secular college, normal jobs for girls etc). Maybe biological parents were re-born christians or admired the Bates and make them feel important, so Bates pushed Whitney into a reconciliation.

If Whitney was physically abused for her bio parents (which nobody knows) Bates could feel unconfortable supponting an adoption based in something they are proud to do to their children.

Whit seems to have such a fragile self-esteem. I can picture her doing whatever to get the love of her bio parents and the love of her in-laws. Even refusing relationship with her adoptive family. This said, it's not rare for a adopted person to feel guilty, to fight against adoptive parents, to idealize other families and to forgive childhood abuse.

[formergothardite]

8 hours ago, nausicaa said:

Just for the record: They didn't only have a Confederate flag, they had a portrait of Nathan Bedford Forrest, far and away most known for his help in establishing the Klu Klux Klan, a terrorist organization that murdered, assaulted, and intimidated black people in the South for nearly a hundred years. 

Exactly. It wasn't just a Confederate Flag. Their "Patriot Room" was only dedicated to people who defended slavery. 

[Dutchie]

In our country there is a politician that rallies against people with more than one nationality (mostly against moslims) my dad has two, my boyfriend has two and so does my son. (I don't, I feel left out) My dad totally supports him, even tough he would never give up his veins nationality and loves my son more than anyone in this world. (Yes, his only grand son and way more important than his kids, although he would give his live up for us kids, the seconds in choosing would be less for the little man.) I don't get his support

[VelociRapture]

Thanks @nausicaa and @formergothardite!

Sorry my post wasn't clear @snickers34. I have a five month old and its sometimes a bit tough remembering where I was going with something because I'm tired. Or because my tiny and adorable Dictator summoned and I forgot where I was going with my thoughts.  

But yes, I do believe that Kelly and Gil are very manipulative people. You don't get to the top at IBLP by being a nice person - you get there by sucking up and agreeing to coverup any crimes that may have occurred, such as sexual assault. They manipulated their daughters into believing they had an obligation to raise their siblings and they've manipulated the public into believing they're just a big, but normal and harmless family.

I specifically mentioned the Confederacy/NBF Room (and explained it badly) because of the connection with Kelly's adopted sister and because of how they tried to manipulate the public. I honestly do not understand how anyone claiming to love their black sibling could possibly justify having such a room in their home - you can't claim to love someone and then build what was essentially a shrine to a man and a movement that would have seen that loved one enslaved, raped, tortured, murdered, or so many other horrible things. I do think it's a good example of how the Bateses attempted to manipulate public opinion in their favor - they came up with all kinds of explanations when it became public opinion, then glossed it over and haven't spoken about the room since.

As I said before though, we have very little information to actually go on in regards to Whitney's childhood and families. I'm not blaming the Bateses for the falling out between them because we honestly do not know what role, if any, they may have played. All I'm saying is that it is a possibility and can't be ruled out unless one of the two main parties involved (Whit and her adoptive family) decide to speak publicly about it. And, as I said earlier, I hope they only do so if they feel it's the right decision for them and not because they feel pressured to by the public. At the end of the day, Whit was a minor when she started living with the adoptive parents and I do strongly believe her privacy should be protected because of that.

(I hope I did a better job this time. I've had coffee already, but coffee only does so much these days.)

[Jane M.]

Wait, Whitney's adopted but she has a relationship with her bio parents not the adoptive ones?

I've been living under a rock.

[VineHeart137]

1 minute ago, Jane M. said:

Wait, Whitney's adopted but she has a relationship with her bio parents not the adoptive ones?

I've been living under a rock.

Yup. From what I understand, her bio parents lost custody of her when she was about 12. Whitney was in foster care until getting adopted sometime in her late teens. It seems she was close to her adoptive family at one point (her adoptive father is the one that walked her down the aisle, and as far as I know her bio parents were not at her wedding), but by the time Bradley was born she had regained contact with her bio parents and her adoptive parents had seemingly disappeared. No one really knows what happened there.