Which would be the worse reality family to be a member of?

[SPHASH]

I'm a Christian and I would take the Kardashians over the Duggars in a heartbeat.

[Jessica]

Duggar, because I don't want to see other peoples' cleavage and butt cracks.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

I'd be a kardashian because they are rich and do whatever they want. The downside is most people think they are a joke, and they are mocked relentlessly. No other famous person takes them seriously. It would kind of suck to be a laughingstock however I think (I've heard) there are sites out there that snark on the duggars too ;)

[salex]

I think if I were to be on a reality show, It would have to be some version of Real Housewives or Pawn Stars--ie, faux social life or Faux work life. Less "family life"

I agree that both Kardashians AND Duggars focus on Vaginas quite a bit. But, I'd prefer to be a Kardashian than a Duggar for the following reasons.

1) Prefer having housekeepers to being a daughter in charge of a sibling and chores

2) Prefer Beverly Hills to Bugtussle

3) prefer La Scala to Chick Fil Et

4) Prefer grilled chicken to tater tot casserole

5) Prefer dating to courtship ala Jim Bob

6) Prefer the likelyhood of being able to escape and be successful and independent from the Kardashians vs the Duggars

[Mama Mia]

I think the reason I'd be more likely to be a Duggar daughter is I would have a really hard time being as extroverted as the Kardashians seem to be required to be. I would be the Jana of the Duggar's, and I haven't seen an equivilant Kardashian - if there is one in hiding then definitely I would prefer rich and invisible :D

Since I'm older though, I guess I'd have to be one of the mom's. Definitely I would prefer to be Michele a Duggar to Kris Jenner, because 1) the limited amount I've seen, she's just a horribly bossy and shallow person and 2) while I have 0 desire to sleep with either of the husbands, Bruce Jenner is even more of a turn-off than Jim Bob, that's horribly shallow and judgemental, but there is something VERY off about him.

[artdecades]

On the flip side, the worst family would be the Maxwells. They have appeared on the Duggars show so that counts, right?

[Snarkle]

I have said this other places on this forum, but the Kardashians and Duggars are two sides of the same coin to me. They both have oppressive and hard to meet standards. They both pimp their children (and their children's sexuality) out for financial gain. They both place little to no value on education (though a couple of the kardashians do have college degrees). They are both disconnected from reality. Just because one family does it naked and one family does it under the banner of religion does not make their behaviors that differently.

THAT SAID, while the Kardashian daughters made their money from their mom pimping them, they are financially independent. Kendell, who is only 18, just bought herself a multi million dollar apartment in NYC. In the Duggar family, even the married children live on Duggar property. Further, the Kardashians attended real schools, they are exposed to people from different backgrounds and ideas, etc. It is a lot easier for a Kardashian to leave their bubble than a duggar.

Holy mackeral, I was thinking exactly the same thing, artdecades, even the "coin" example! I agree - it is two sides of a very dubious coin. While the Duggars are patriarchal and the Kardashians are matriarchal, both sets of parents will never win parent of the year, and they're passing those lack of honors to their children. I feel both are very fake and are playing roles at this point - both have a lot of kids compared to most of society (while the Kardashian kids choose to have their own kids out of wedlock, and the Duggars will only have them IN wedlock), both hold themselves up as examples of what they think others want to be (rich and successful for the K's and chaste and bible-followin' for the D's), and both have trapped themselves into playing characters for the cameras at this point (oh, and can I add that both familes are tabloid fodder, but for opposite reasons?).

That said, I have recently watched the Kardashian's antics while on the elliptical at the gym, and I used to watch the Duggars on demand (until I found this forum and could rely on others to recap the episodes), so I feel I "know" the families pretty well. If I was made under duress to choose one, I'd choose the Kardashians simply because they HAVE choices, or at least they seem to, whereas the Duggar kids don't.

[Jana814]

On the flip side, the worst family would be the Maxwells. They have appeared on the Duggars show so that counts, right?

Agree!

[scc12]

I forgot about the Little Couple.Yes Tx is hot,but they are so sweet that I would choose them over any others. :)

[Vivi_music]

I forgot about the Little Couple.Yes Tx is hot,but they are so sweet that I would choose them over any others. :)

Ohmygoodness! Thank you for mentioning the Little Couple!

Yes. If I had to choose which reality family I would have liked to be born in (or in their case, adopted in), Jen and Bill would be on the top of my list. They seem the most down to earth, the most caring parents too. They aren't superstars like the Kardashians, so in that sense, you wouldn't be harassed by the media like the Ks are. They don't have the religious limitations of the Duggars or the Bates. Not to mention Jen and Bill seem both very intelligent and we know for a fact they value education. I really feel they will let their children be whoever they want to be when they grow up.

[Brittany15]

If I only had to be a member of the family for a week I would pick the Duggars as it would be fascinating. But a lifetime? I think I would pick the Kardashians because I could leave the nest, go to college, have my own life, and not go to hell for it.

[freejoyannatoo]

The topic is what would be the WORST family to be in,not the best one! :)

Actually, the question was "Which would be the WORSE family".

This is grammatically correct and gave me great pleasure, as I'm fond of proper grammar.

Here is why ...

There are two options given: you may pick the the Duggars or the Kardashians. Therefore the choice would be worse or better (comparison of two).

If you added in the Bates, you would then have three options, in which case the choice would be worst or best (comparison of three or more).

Thanks to the OP :D

[Flossie]

Actually, the question was "Which would be the WORSE family".

This is grammatically correct and gave me great pleasure, as I'm fond of proper grammar.

I learned it as something is worse than something else, but if you put the word "the" in front of "worse" it becomes "the worst". Have the rules changed, or have I been wrong all these years?

[freejoyannatoo]

I learned it as something is worse than something else, but if you put the word "the" in front of "worse" it becomes "the worst". Have the rules changed, or have I been wrong all these years?

Well, I just looked it up in my Chamber's dictionary and it gives these as examples

For the worse, have the worse, none the worse for, the worse for.

My understanding has always been that it stays as "worse" even with "the" in front. I suppose it's not something you say or see very often, though.

[Flossie]

I've been able to find sites that put it both ways, and they seem to imply that worse vs worst is one of those grey areas where some people will prefer it one way, others prefer is the other way, and no one is wrong. That sounds good to me. :)

[alba]

I think "worse" is technically correct when comparing two things (as is "better" rather than "best"), because "worst" is superlative, and therefore needs a comparison of at least three things (ie. "bad", "worse", "worst"). In colloquial usage, however, the word "worst" is often used when there's only two things being compared, and I think that's snuck into more standard English. It's kind of like how you should use "whom" when talking about the object and "who" when talking about the subject, but everyone says "who" regardless so it's now okay to say something like "Who did you give it to?" rather than "Whom did you give it to?" (some would argue that the correct form is "To whom did you give it?", but where noun cases existed in Old English the "rule" of not ending a sentence on a preposition only entered the language in the 18th century when people tried to adopt Latin rules).

Brought to you by your local pedant :P

[freejoyannatoo]

Loving all the grammar discussion :D

I agree that there is no absolute right or wrong here. It's about usage, and of course that changes over time. The thing that saddens me a bit, though, is where shades of meaning get lost. It impoverishes the langauge a little each time it happens, imo.

So, keeping "worst" for the superlative and using "worse" as the comparative gives more nuance to a sentence and enriches its meaning, even though we can perfectly well understand "worst" in both contexts.

However, in the great scheme of things, no biggie (as Shakespeare most certainly didn't say).

[Snarkle]

I'm a grammar freak, too, and realized that this debate about usage and changes of language over time would go over most, if not all, of the members of both the Kardashian AND Duggar families. Too many big words.

[docmom]

I've been able to find sites that put it both ways, and they seem to imply that worse vs worst is one of those grey areas where some people will prefer it one way, others prefer is the other way, and no one is wrong. That sounds good to me. :)

No, No, No!! We can't have compromise and wishy-washyness. We need RULES!! What does it say in teh Bible (KJV of course)? What would Stevehovah do?

[2xx1xy1JD]

Holy mackeral, I was thinking exactly the same thing, artdecades, even the "coin" example! I agree - it is two sides of a very dubious coin. While the Duggars are patriarchal and the Kardashians are matriarchal, both sets of parents will never win parent of the year, and they're passing those lack of honors to their children. I feel both are very fake and are playing roles at this point - both have a lot of kids compared to most of society (while the Kardashian kids choose to have their own kids out of wedlock, and the Duggars will only have them IN wedlock), both hold themselves up as examples of what they think others want to be (rich and successful for the K's and chaste and bible-followin' for the D's), and both have trapped themselves into playing characters for the cameras at this point (oh, and can I add that both familes are tabloid fodder, but for opposite reasons?).

That said, I have recently watched the Kardashian's antics while on the elliptical at the gym, and I used to watch the Duggars on demand (until I found this forum and could rely on others to recap the episodes), so I feel I "know" the families pretty well. If I was made under duress to choose one, I'd choose the Kardashians simply because they HAVE choices, or at least they seem to, whereas the Duggar kids don't.

Different sides of the same coin is right.

.

I'm not even sure how different they are in terms of potential independence for the kids. Kendall and Kylie were groomed for this lifestyle, and the younger one isn't even 18 yet. I'm not sure that "concentrate on your studies, don't get too obsessed with your appearance" was ever a possibility for them. They have no frame of reference for understanding what normal is.

[Mama Mia]

Actually, the question was "Which would be the WORSE family".

This is grammatically correct and gave me great pleasure, as I'm fond of proper grammar.

Here is why ...

There are two options given: you may pick the the Duggars or the Kardashians. Therefore the choice would be worse or better (comparison of two).

If you added in the Bates, you would then have three options, in which case the choice would be worst or best (comparison of three or more).

Thanks to the OP :D

Awesome! I was grammatically correct :D Thank you to my mom, or I would have said " worser" :?

I am watching more of the Kardashian show and think the Kardashian children definitely have a harder time than the Duggar's in some ways. Kris Jenner seems bossier to her married children than the most hard-core Fundamentalist patriarch.

[Full enough quiver]

I'd be a honey boo boo. You don't have to care about appearances, you get to live in the country, I don't think they're religious, and they seem to love each other. That doesn't sound too bad to me. Also, I like atvs and playing in mud. I think I'd fit in just fine.

[scc12]

A train runs thru their back yard,too.neat,but I guess it does wake them up sometimes!

I think it's funny when Honey looks at June at calls her dad 'your boyfriend'.The Duggars would throw a fit! LOL

I would love to see the Duggars invite June and co. over for some ttc.They'd prolly get into a tater tot fight! that would be hilarious.But I'm not holding my breath.I think the D's are too snooty to have them over.

would love to see them with the Bates as well.I think they would be sweet to them.Erin might run tho...she can't even stand anyone with green hair,much less the antics Honey and family pull.LOL

[Lissa08]

I would want to be a honey boo boo. My family is kinda redneckish and they seem like really nice down to earth normal people. I don't think living with them would be ideal but better than the other options.

[Grimalkin]

Wow, none of the above???

If forced, I guess I'd be the ugly duckling of the Kardashian family who reads books and doesn't give a shit about clothes or makeup.

This times eleventy!!!!!!!!