All things Razing Ruth

[Mecca]

In some states, you only qualify for Medicaid of you're disabled or pregnant/have children. My friend has diabetes and she is not pregnant or disabled, nor does she have children, so she doesn't get Medicaid where she live, which is in Rhode Island. She pays for her insulin out of pocket.

Yet here in NY, as long as you meet the income threshold, you qualify for it.

The point Laura is making, at least how I understood it, was not about the actual qualifying for Medicaid. It is about Of Duggar/Ruth at one point claimed to have at least one child. The story is not adding up. One time OD/R had a child, the other time OD/R did not qualify for Medicaid because she did not have a child.

[mrs]

Would it be possible for one of the mods to put this thread back in Snark? I think it is definitely related to fundies and a lot of people who don't read Chatter (or have access to it) would be interested in the turn of events.

I second moving this thread back to Snark.

I am happy members are being more open minded. I feel like in the past posters were discouraged from posting their doubts about Ruth/Mary's story. It would be great if someone who has met her, could post about their 'meet up.'

I wonder if she discuss the new issues ?

[chaotic life]

I really have no idea whether Ruth/Mary is real or not.

I do know that I have a lot of leniency for online people simply because *my* life is so full of drama that it would be far too easy to claim I am not real. I also don't solicit money online, but I still might appear false because of the drama in my life. I also know (related to finding obits to prove a death) that sometimes there are reasons to NOT post an Obit. My son does not have one. I didn't see a reason to spend $350 for the obit to run in an area we had lived in for four months. I figured anyone who knew and loved him knew from us that he had passed so there was little point in the extra expense (and death is expensive sadly).

I know that Vickie was quite naïve about online interactions when she started NLQ, was reeling from her past, and was dealing with a daughter with similar issues where they conflicted in their paths of healing. Whatever vetting she did or did not do of Ruth doesn't necessarily meet muster for those who are aware of what trolls actually are. I also know Vickie's drama has settled in the years since then, as has Angel's. If you told me today that Vickie vetted someone, I would have confidence in that process. In 2009, I would have to know what vetting meant back then and what process Vickie actually followed. She's FAR more internet savy now that she ever was back then.

I also know, having grown up on the fringes of Gothard communities and fundie-lite, that you can appear immature, inconsistent and trollish simply by leaving that world and trying to learn how to interact with the rest of the world. The nature of that lifestyle is that it deliberately disables you for normal life outside of it. So, again I give a LOT of grace to someone who triggers red flags from that world frequently.

I see nothing connecting Ruth/Mary to the Possum mom scandal/troll. However, the ofdugar poster on TWOP did identify herself as being Ruth/Mary. There are posts on the blog that appear to be direct answers to questions from the message board, a link on the message board to the blog stating it was ofdugar's blog AND a plea from ofdugar for people to ask questions of her on the blog and not the message board if they didn't relate specifically to the Dugar show. Then, there's the pesky child ofdugar clearly claims to have given birth to and parented while on TWOP.

I think most of all it is worthy of bearing repeating. Take anyone on line with a grain of salt, and IF someone has a real workplace don't show up there to harass or stalk them. If you give money to anonymous entities online, consider it a gift you don't intend to give back again. The internet is not real life. It's never going to be.

[flyawaystray]

The point Laura is making, at least how I understood it, was not about the actual qualifying for Medicaid. It is about Of Duggar/Ruth at one point claimed to have at least one child. The story is not adding up. One time OD/R had a child, the other time OD/R did not qualify for Medicaid because she did not have a child.

Ahhhhh, I see. Yeah, that is really bizarre. Is it possible she had a kid but gave it up for adoption? Instead of Rachel having a baby, maybe it was RR who had one.

I don't think we'll ever really get to the bottom of everything.

[FreeJosie]

It's developing the earmarks of when possum mama et al began overplaying her hand and got caught.

:popcorn2: :penguin-no: :popcorn2:

In situations like these, the scammer nearly always overplays his/her hand eventually. It's like they can't resist ramping up the drama to a level where people finally say, "OK, this is way too far-fetched to be real."

[Mecca]

Ahhhhh, I see. Yeah, that is really bizarre. Is it possible she had a kid but gave it up for adoption? Instead of Rachel having a baby, maybe it was RR who had one.

I don't think we'll ever really get to the bottom of everything.

With so many twists and turns, it is kinda hard to put it all together at times and make sense of what has been said.

Maybe I am just a big ol' jerk face, but I honestly question a lot of what this person Ruth/Mary has presented, period. I am not sure I buy the whole Rachel storyline. I understand that some people's lives can read stranger than fiction, but it always appeared that when anyone would actually question something, the next big cluster fart would appear as a defense tactic to derail and deflect people that where questioning her. You come off looking like the unsympathetic ahole for doubting her while she is going through a hard time.

I openly admit I am a natural sceptic, and I personally believe it is actually because of my fundie upbringing. I learned many people often lie to get you to believe something for their own personal gain. And again, that may make me a jerk, but I am OK with that.

[mockingbird]

I'm with CL... in some ways I have a really dramatic/weird life story, so I do tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. I wanted to believe RR because I really felt for her but I felt a little skeptical after awhile. I think what originally made me doubt her a little was how she started college and very soon after she had a "perfect"-seeming serious boyfriend. I know that is totally possible but the fact that he was so understanding/patient and they got so serious right away, all really soon after she started college, just seemed a little too good to be true, almost like a fantasy of what she wished would happen. haha And the fact that Rachel's baby just happened to go to a liberal lesbian couple? Again seemed to almost too-perfectly fit within her new world view/what she would like her niece to grow up with (aka the opposite of her childhood). It seemed like something that would happen in a "fundy recovery" Lifetime movie to me. I must be too cynical! (ETA: I wanted to believe her so I didn't take my doubts seriously. I thought and still think they aren't too out there that they couldn't have happened, but at the same time seem like easy fabrications.)

I forgot she broke her leg and it does seem weird that she seems just as unaware of her resources/options this time around... and even that she got sick right after moving to her new job. The stalker story sounded red flags for me right away which is why I didn't post about it at first, I didn't want to be the only one doubting her if it really happened. I could believe someone would track her down and show up at her work, and even that it might not be too weird if they'd been talking online. But demanding to see her driver's license? If it did happen, that part is definitely unacceptable behavior, but that's where it got a little too dramatic for me.

So yeah, disappointed but not really surprised about the ofduggar connection and possible baby. Personally I agree her story rings with at least a partial truth. I was not a fundy myself in any way but I know there have been numerous comments from former fundies on here saying she does have the little details of ATI right and it seems like that's the type of thing that would be hard to represent if you hadn't lived it (or have done really extensive research... but if I'm not mistaken a lot of it is only available if you are accepted to join and pay for it?).

[laura oz]

The point Laura is making, at least how I understood it, was not about the actual qualifying for Medicaid. It is about Of Duggar/Ruth at one point claimed to have at least one child. The story is not adding up. One time OD/R had a child, the other time OD/R did not qualify for Medicaid because she did not have a child.

Thanks Mecca, that was the point I was trying to make. Her stories contradict & that raises a red flag for me.

[Carla Bruni]

I actually believed Ruth's story because I really don't know very much about the ATI community and never followed her blog religiously (heh) to pick up on major inconsistencies. That said, I may be less skeptical about "online people" because I ended up dating three of them (never specifically sought it out, it just happened that way), and none turned out to be axe murderers, although the verdict may still be out on #2 in that regard :P

However, I found her reluctance to take up any of the offers of help (other than cash) a bit strange. I follow some charities pretty closely, and the least suspicious aid recipients are always the ones that have concrete needs and happily accept material assistance, like clothes and toys and those food shipment subscriptions and what have you. Sure, they might still be scammers, but at least they're not pocketing cash. Here we had people offering her a new wardrobe and all sorts of apartment necessities, and she didn't take up those offers, as far as I understand (correct me if I'm wrong!). So yeah, I dunno...

(Aside: just discovered Quiver Full of Chatter, had no idea it existed :P Yay!)

ETA: I did find the boyfriend/fiance story a bit odd, because if you're really struggling and along comes this great guy who's offering you the moon, surely you'd want to hold on to that, right? Unless that would mean that donations would dry up in that perfect life scenario... hmmm...

[Mama Mia]

With all the drama going down on this thread, this made me laugh my head off. :big-heart: Phil Hartman! I usually only lurk on this thread and I am way late to this party, but IIRC when she discussed not qualifying for Medicaid because she didn't have children, that now raises a red flag with me because it sure looks like she's ofduggar on TWOP. I am always skeptical of anyone on the net, so I don't have the emotional involvement a lot of other big hearted posters do. Some of the deets of the ATI stuff does make me think that part of her story is true, but I feel that she got some attention and liked it so she started adding little exaggerations here and there, and before she knew it she'd spun one gigantic web. I don't think she's a bad person, just messed up and enjoys the attention and "there there's" & "You've been through so much you poor victim" she gets when the big bad world or the stalkers that live in it get to be too much to handle. YMMV

People don't qualify for Medicaid unless they have children or are disabled and low income. Some states and local governments have medical programs available for low income individuals, but there are large gaps, and at $14 an hour for a single person she probably would not qualify if her area does offer this.

I think one of the difficulties on sharing information online is that you need to screen/change portions of your life story in order to remain at least marginally Annonymous. I know that has been difficult at times even during debates on this site, for me. If you give enough details to verify your claims, you are giving up your privacy. If you don't give details you are accused of making things up. And when you are talking about family issues, you are also potentially violating someone else's privacy without their knowledge or consent.

I have had a huge series of personal and family issues and problems the past few years, and if I had a blog I'm sure it would read like a telenovela more than an actual life, so I can understand that kind of constant crises.

I have no idea if Ruth is real or not, or primarily real, or just a scammer....some of her blog postings read like she's actually older than she says ( for example calling aid AFDC, a term that hasn't been used in 15 years) , and other things are red flagish ..like the story about her dad and the period- seemed kind of unlikely that he would jump to that conclusion. But who knows.

Edited because I know the difference between "there" and "their" even if the iPad doesn't.

[EyeQueue]

I love this advice. I've seen you give it before. I'm too open to follow it, though, sadly. I can't seem to help myself. But it's great advice.

Treemom: unfrozen caveman lawyer?

It was a bit that Phil Hartman did years ago on Saturday Night Live (an American comedy show). You Tube doesn't seem to readily have any of the clips available, but maybe someone else has better skillz than I do?

[FreeJosie]

It was a bit that Phil Hartman did years ago on Saturday Night Live (an American comedy show). You Tube doesn't seem to readily have any of the clips available, but maybe someone else has better skillz than I do?

Here's a clip:

http://videosift.com/video/SNL-Unfrozen-Caveman-Lawyer

[laura oz]

Free Josie :lol: :lol: :lol:

ETA Phil Hartman was just a comic genius. Loved him and Lovitz in The Greatest Actor

[treemom]

I have a unbelievable drama filled life too. But I think it is reasonable people don't believe me...when it happens in real life I lift up my shirt and show my scars. When it happens on the Internet, I just don't feel the need to prove myself to people.

What is consistent about all of the drama filled stories I do believe about other people is that the drama is rarely so regular, consistent and repeated. (Broken leg/twisted ovary, rinse and repeat).

But it might be true and on different days I feel different things so I think the whole range of belief to disbelief is reasonable.

However, no matter what if someone went to her work uninvited that is completely wrong. I disagree with the previous poster who thought it want creepy. The Ruth story hasn't caused any real life harm except possibly people who donated who couldn't afford it and no one should be going to places of employment to find out the truth.

[Arete]

If R/M is scamming, she does cause real harm beyond a financial hit to individuals. Quiverfull/Christian Patriarchy/Dominionism is a nasty and dangerous ideology. People need to take it seriously. It is extremely damaging if someone this high profile in the fight to expose this type of creeping religious fascism turns out to be a fraud and a liar. The Gothardites and their satellite ilk would not hesitate to exploit that to discredit legitimate voices and concerns. It would be a perfect "bloody shirt" to wave around in order to paint the entire opposition as misled or making things up.

Back to lurking on this thread.

[laura oz]

If R/M is scamming, she does cause real harm beyond a financial hit to individuals. Quiverfull/Christian Patriarchy/Dominionism is a nasty and dangerous ideology. People need to take it seriously. It is extremely damaging if someone this high profile in the fight to expose this type of creeping religious fascism turns out to be a fraud and a liar. The Gothardites and their satellite ilk would not hesitate to exploit that to discredit legitimate voices and concerns. It would be a perfect "bloody shirt" to wave around in order to paint the entire opposition as misled or making things up.

Back to lurking on this thread.

Good point. They could use this to undermine and discredit the real stories about the abuses and damage this cult has inflicted on its devotees. Shit is complicated.

[Mustang Sally]

Wow, did this thread ever take an interesting turn. I was only slightly skeptical before, as I am of any hard luck story online, but I didn't see any good reason to strongly doubt. Now I am feeling differently.

I also agree this could be potentially damaging to the cause of opposing Christian patriarchy. I think it's fair of people to do research to verify whether Ruth is for real or not, but I still doubt that would extend to tracking her down in person at her (alleged) workplace.

This is the kind of thing internet and public records sleuthing was made for. Maybe the Warrior Eli Hoax sleuths could be of help in this sort of situation - http://www.warriorelihoax.com/

[treemom]

If R/M is scamming, she does cause real harm beyond a financial hit to individuals. Quiverfull/Christian Patriarchy/Dominionism is a nasty and dangerous ideology. People need to take it seriously. It is extremely damaging if someone this high profile in the fight to expose this type of creeping religious fascism turns out to be a fraud and a liar. The Gothardites and their satellite ilk would not hesitate to exploit that to discredit legitimate voices and concerns. It would be a perfect "bloody shirt" to wave around in order to paint the entire opposition as misled or making things up.

Back to lurking on this thread.

That is theoretical harm and I don't think can't justify showing up at a workplace uninvited.

[bionicmlle]

At one point didn't one of the admins (it could have been Alecto) verify that Ruth was indeed from ATI family? If so, and it WAS Alecto, that would be awfully interesting, particularly if this has been a scam.

[Oddeverything]

If R/M is scamming, she does cause real harm beyond a financial hit to individuals. Quiverfull/Christian Patriarchy/Dominionism is a nasty and dangerous ideology. People need to take it seriously. It is extremely damaging if someone this high profile in the fight to expose this type of creeping religious fascism turns out to be a fraud and a liar. The Gothardites and their satellite ilk would not hesitate to exploit that to discredit legitimate voices and concerns. It would be a perfect "bloody shirt" to wave around in order to paint the entire opposition as misled or making things up.

Back to lurking on this thread.

This is a perfect encapsulation of why I think we need to think very hard about whether or not Razing Ruth is permitted to post here any longer. I came to this via a completely different fundamentalist, but knowing that Ruth had so many people vouching for her here gave her legitimacy in my eyes. I don't think I am the only one. At this point, the ofduggar posts show Ruth has been floating different versions of her story for a while and I hope that the uneasiness she brings to the table in terms of her truthfulness isn't allowed to continue to taint this site.

[treemom]

At one point didn't one of the admins (it could have been Alecto) verify that Ruth was indeed from ATI family? If so, and it WAS Alecto, that would be awfully interesting, particularly if this has been a scam.

Alecto only verified she had pregnant sister who went from Arkansas to California.

[OkToBeTakei]

That is theoretical harm and I don't think can't justify showing up at a workplace uninvited.

I agree with both points. But if you are asking for money and put your story out there well.....

As I said many, many pages back I live on a totally different continent and could probably easily work out where she works. Wether her story is true or not is irrelevant. If any of you guys turned up at my workplace due to something I had posted here, of course I would think you were totally weird. But I would accept I brought it on myself.

She appears to not take responsibility for her own actions and I totally do not buy that somebody who has been online that long can blame her upbringing.

The whole showing driving license thing was all just too much crap. Think about it. Who does that? Who then takes the time to explain about their use of middle or other names etc. She was in a safe place with other people around she had no need to do that. Maybe it happened. My default sceptic says that it was a convenient way to stop people offering to meet/help her. The help she appears to want is the anonymous financial type.

[Oddeverything]

I noticed a couple of replies wherein people read the "ofduggar" comments on TWoP and could not find anything inconsistent with Ruth's stories. I can only imagine that they did not read the comment wherein "ofduggar" discusses having been pregnant and being a mother of a child she gave birth to, because that is definitely at odds with her entire story.

I have taken screen caps of the relevant information - the comment wherein she claims she had a baby and the comment wherein she posts to her own blog, Razing Ruth, encouraging others to come to discuss off topic elements of the Duggars with her.

I've seen one person stating that perhaps "ofduggar" accidentally linked to the wrong blog, but if that is the case, Ruth was not surprised when people came to her blog and left comments saying that they followed her over from TWoP. If "ofduggar" had left the wrong URL on TWoP and suddenly Ruth had readers she had not solicited, given the high levels of paranoia she exhibits in other entries, she would have commented on the strangeness of it. At this point, it is clear Ruth is "ofduggar."

Would it help this thread to post the actual screenshots so that people know exactly what it is we are discussing? I am unsure how to do it, but it people think it would help (and are willing to tell me how to do it), I would be only too happy to post them.

I would also be only too happy to type up the many issues with Ruth's various stories and how they fit neatly into the way scam and factitious bloggers operate. I simply do not know if this would help the matter and worry it could make things worse because much of it is subject to interpretation. Despite having been around FJ since the Yuku days, I am pretty quiet and don't know if my opinions/work will mean anything to people who do not know me. But at the same time, I also worry that Ruth may engage in further behaviors to shut down discussion - such as the tactic she used when she claimed a woman came to her place of work, which made people feel sorry for Ruth and it had the effect of causing people to argue with each other over whom of us would do such a thing. If we recognize the tactics, it may become easier to discuss.

And again, I hope we are all on the same page where harassment is concerned. Ruth should not be harassed or defamed in any way as we discuss this situation. Ruth's blog has the hallmarks of a sophisticated scam blog, but as I read back, I do not think Razing Ruth or the comments on TWoP originated from a desire for financial gain. It looks very much like the blog began as a factitious blog - such blogs are meant to get attention and positive feelings for the writers. If Ruth started this saga as a factitious blog that later became a scam blog, she did so because she has deep emotional problems and deserves pity and as much understanding as we can muster. I encourage people to read this overview of "Munchausen by Internet" because it can shed some basic light on such behaviors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnch ... y_Internet

[Miss M]

This is the kind of thing internet and public records sleuthing was made for. Maybe the Warrior Eli Hoax sleuths could be of help in this sort of situation - http://www.warriorelihoax.com/

Probably not, we talked about XGayGreg and Dede, but short of pinning her down and taking her for an ultrasound there wasn't much we could do, almost the same with Mary/Ruth.

[Mustang Sally]

Well, if I understand correctly, Dede is a bit different, since it's obvious to anyone with a grasp of grade school biology that she is not pregnant, and isn't her real name and location well known? Yes, she's lying and she's lying in public on the internet, but that's not the same as faking a complete identity and backstory, since she likely believes her own delusion and we all know who she is. Or am I missing something?