Josh Duggar Admits Molestation of 5 Juveniles - Part 6

[VelociRapture]

I'd like to address the "therapy" that Josh received. It only lasted four months? That is a red flag right there. It's not enough.

Again, personal experience. We were already calling around to therapists when our son's court case came up. When my son was court-ordered to undergo therapy, we were recommended to a local therapy group. It was weekly, it was mandatory, it lasted "as long as it needed to last for the child to "get the point".. and it was rigorous.

Part one. Mandatory weekly group meetings with similar aged males.

Part two. Mandatory (every two week) group meetings, boys AND parents or people who loved them. Included parents/grandparents, aunts/uncles, sometimes older siblings.

Part three: Mandatory monthly to "as needed" interviews/therapy with the people raising the child.. so parents/grandparents, etc.. "as needed" came as the boy approached discharge.

Part four: "as needed" individual meetings, therapist/boy.

Part five: in cases of incest, (N/A in our case) there was the reunification attempt, when the boy was getting ready to come home and re-integrate with the family, including the victim.

The length of time for the boy to graduate from the course of treatment was not set. They told us that if our son made incredible progress, the very least amount of time would be a year. Most boys progressed through in 18 months to 3 years of therapy. Occasionally, (and this happened in our case) a boy would be recommended for "more intensive" therapy, meaning in residence at a juvenile treatment center.

The group setting, which JB "pooh poohed" for Josh, was a VITAL part of therapy for our son. The peers, as they called themselves, did two things: They provided a community for, say, our son, meaning he wasn't alone in having done this. NOT to improve techniques or approaches, but very much to discuss his motivations, his fear of being caught, his shame and embarrassment about the situation. Not only that, but the group was instrumental in keeping the bullshit factor at a minimum. NOBODY can spot an excuse like another person who has done the same thing you have, and the peer group themselves would shoot down an excuse or a justification for the lie it was.

The moderators , ALL trained mental health professionals, were there to mainly keep the conversation on track, to point out things, to ask pertinent questions. They introduced topics and encouraged the boys to discuss what they needed to do.

If Josh had nothing like this, he still has all his excuses and justifications stuck in his head.

The family group setting sat boy with family. Sometimes the boys presented things to the families, sometimes the families talked more about what their questions or problems were. Many boys, when first coming into group, would say things like "I wish my Mom would just stop crying".. and they would have to hear another Mom say, "We've ALL cried in this room." Sometimes the parents would talk, and it was clearly good for the boys to hear things like, "I was absolutely livid that this had happened, I couldn't believe it, I was sure it was a lie".. and THEN to hear, "but he is my son and I'm going to stand by him until we get this worked out and get through that."

If Josh didn't get this, I feel sorry for him.

Then the individual/boy meetings: sometimes a therapist could get a "resistant" boy to open up individually in therapy, and then progress could be made in group from there. My son was especially resistant to saying anything in group. Some progress was made in individual and boy/parent therapy, but it took him being put in a therapeutic residential setting to get him to really explore his issues.

I cannot believe that Josh received any treatment like I describe, although I am relatively certain that every state has such therapy available to help youth, both female and male, who have sexual behavioral issues.

The in residence treatment was even more rigorous: DAILY group. WEEKLY individual. WEEKLY family.

I agree. I seriously doubt he would have been offered anything close to what your son was offered. And that is incredibly sad. Josh apparently wanted help if the reports are correct - if he did and was denied real help then that blame falls right on his parents.

And just want to thank you for sharing your experience with this topic. I know it may not have been easy, but I think it helps explain the vast differences between what should have been provided and what may have been provided to Josh.

[IrishCarrie]

I couldn't agree more with the previous two posters. I've stayed out of all therapy-related discussion up till now as I work in that field and didn't at to get into arguments. But I will say that our absolute minimum period for working with a sex offender is fourteen months (quite intensively). Usually it's at least two years.

I only work with adult sex offenders but I'm going to assume that children would need even longer.

[Snarkle Motion]

I'll repost something from Part 5 to help explain our position:

!

{TEXT1}:

Josh molested his younger sisters, and he has admitted to it. That's really bad enough. We don't need to keep inventing more terrible shit that he might have done. Yes, it is likely that he committed other crimes, but random people on the internet being "sure" that he must have done something is not going to prompt an official investigation. If you poke around in the backwaters of the internet and uncover other old posts akin to concernedmom's and Alice's, then by all means tell us about them. Tell reporters and investigative journalists about them. If you worked for Oprah and have access to inside info and/or footage, share away. If you work in the Arkansas legal system and know where the bodies are buried, dig them up and show them to us. Buzzard and Polabear and the others who are uncovering old lawsuits = the right way to approach this. Speculating that Josh probably also molested the cat and the mailman, and is the proud owner of his very own glory hole down at the truck stop = the wrong way to approach this. Stop rumormongering and behave like responsible adults. Even though this is the internet. If you spot egregious speculation, report it and we'll remove it.

I understand this and should clarify that I in know way support gratuitous speculation about the victims or anyone under 18. I really appreciate all the moderators do here to support the forum and know it can't be easy dealing with the onslaught of new posts/commenters.

My fear is that there more to this story but that FOIA requests are not going to uncover it, particularly if there is political corruption or favors called in. I think the police report and the family's general friendship with prominent politicians suggests that is not widely out of the range of possibility. In light of that, it feels frustrating to be told wait for the proper channels but don't talk about it or speculate in the meantime. Which I'm not being told, just reacting to some of the personal attacks against others I saw in the last thread. I also think its unfair to say "Josh molested that cat and mailman" - which is obviously made up and no evidence for - should be treated as the same as wondering if the connection to the cop family friend with repeat pornography offenses could indicate more serious crimes.

I guess I feel that if speculating about this is so powerful that the media might run with it (which I obviously don't want them to do since there is no hard evidence) can it be argued that speculating may get media attention for them to pursue an important investigation possibly using means not at our disposal? Its so frustrating to be told be patient and trust in the system when by all accounts its the system that failed and the media that actually outed this by improper means. But I also understand that I'm not entirely rational when it comes to this topic.

[mebeforee]

If it's true that he came twice to his father crying and upset about his own actions, I think he very much wanted some help understanding and controlling his behavior. I don't think he ever received anything but prayer closets and manual labor, so who knows how that might have twisted him up further in his head. And I can't even imagine how it would be for the victims, not only is it unlikely that they received anything but Gothard's counseling guidelines from their parents or church elders, but they would have seen the inadequate nature of their brother's "counseling", too. If (as seems likely) Gothard therapy was ineffective or created further feelings of shame in them, they also would have known that their brother and abuser was not receiving any better treatment. It must have been extremely scary for all of them.

[DuggarCurls]

“Since his resignation, several group members of the Family Research Council reached out to GLAAD to apologize for what they called his ‘inexcusable behavior.'â€

http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/j ... h-council/

[treemom]

Four is enough. Thank you so much for your willingness to share

[SassyPants]

I understand this and should clarify that I in know way support gratuitous speculation about the victims or anyone under 18. I really appreciate all the moderators do here to support the forum and know it can't be easy dealing with the onslaught of new posts/commenters.

My fear is that there more to this story but that FOIA requests are not going to uncover it, particularly if there is political corruption or favors called in. I think the police report and the family's general friendship with prominent politicians suggests that is not widely out of the range of possibility. In light of that, it feels frustrating to be told wait for the proper channels but don't talk about it or speculate in the meantime. Which I'm not being told, just reacting to some of the personal attacks against others I saw in the last thread. I also think its unfair to say "Josh molested that cat and mailman" - which is obviously made up and no evidence for - should be treated as the same as wondering if the connection to the cop family friend with repeat pornography offenses could indicate more serious crimes.

I guess I feel that if speculating about this is so powerful that the media might run with it (which I obviously don't want them to do since there is no hard evidence) can it be argued that speculating may get media attention for them to pursue an important investigation possibly using means not at our disposal? Its so frustrating to be told be patient and trust in the system when by all accounts its the system that failed and the media that actually outed this by improper means. But I also understand that I'm not entirely rational when it comes to this topic.

Talking about the 2002-2003 incidents and the actions that followed are not really speculative. The info has been uncovered and corroborated by the Duggars in terms of Josh's behaviors.

At this point, since 4 of the people involved in those incidents are adults and have remained quiet, all we can assume is that they have CHOSEN to remain silent and have dealt with the incidents, privately. The last minor victim spoke via a parent by having the record shredded, thereby ending the legalities related to the 2002-2003 incidents.

Could there be other untoward incidents? Maybe, but without proof of such, it's all speculative.

I'm going to stick to the TLC angle and what a farce/fraud JB's claims and ministry are-

[antwan]

After taking in days and days of media coverage and FJ thoughts and opinions, these are mine, -the ones that currently settle with me (and will likely morph as I continue to read what others have to say)...

1) Was there a "heads up" for Josh and Anna, and thus their families?

No. I don't think they knew it was coming, at least not any sooner than perhaps 24-27 hours of the news break.

2) Did TLC know?

I don't think so. If they had, the whole Honey Boo Boo would have been MUCH more difficult for TLC to address than to just dismiss the show.

3) Did the Kellers and Anna really know what Josh had done, when Pa Keller hand-picked him for Anna?

No way. I'm sticking with my gut on this. They were told something, I believe, but it was a Duggar's bill of goods they were sold, not the whole ugly truth.

4) Are the Kellers and/or the Seewalds truly supportive?

I think the Kellers are conflicted. Mike has got to emotionally torn between the realities of sex offenders he's encountered in prison ministry, and his draw to the First Family of Fundie-world. Michael Seewald, OTOH,...while I didn't think he could shock me, did. I mean I didn't expect him to be willing to publicly condemn Josh or his actions. But given his past posts that hinted at the Duggars' rigid ways, I did expect that he would at least keep silent (in an "If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all," kind of way.) To support the Duggars and Josh in this, -his DIL likely abused by her own brother in a home of "absolute purity"? Yes, Michael Seewald, it shocks me that you would presume to know that this whole issue has been safely laid to rest, and that "all is well that ends well." :angry-banghead:

5) Will the "show go on" in some form or another?

Nope. No 19KC, no spin-off. I think TLC is done with wagering on the Duggars. The gig had to end, eventually, anyway. I don't think even TLC will be willing to risk a spin-off at this point.

Sorry, Duggars. Your money train has come to a screeching halt. And as a born-again, conseravative, homeschooling, non-skirt-wearing, hair cutting, "able to think for myself" Christian wife and mother, I have to say, the premise on which you built your financial empire proved to be a deception, a manipulation of trust, and a lie. Count your fortune and lay it to rest now, yes?

Okay, FJ's, your turn. Current answers???

[Mylnijya]

I couldn't agree more with the previous two posters. I've stayed out of all therapy-related discussion up till now as I work in that field and didn't at to get into arguments. But I will say that our absolute minimum period for working with a sex offender is fourteen months (quite intensively). Usually it's at least two years.

I only work with adult sex offenders but I'm going to assume that children would need even longer.

Hi. I am just curious. So the podcast I listened to on This American Life about the teenaged pedophile, would you say that the conclusions are not accurate? There really is available therapy for pedophiles? The podcast made it seem like this is a "black hole" of research. (I actually think the interviewee used that term.)

[happy atheist]

I understand this and should clarify that I in know way support gratuitous speculation about the victims or anyone under 18. I really appreciate all the moderators do here to support the forum and know it can't be easy dealing with the onslaught of new posts/commenters.

My fear is that there more to this story but that FOIA requests are not going to uncover it, particularly if there is political corruption or favors called in. I think the police report and the family's general friendship with prominent politicians suggests that is not widely out of the range of possibility. In light of that, it feels frustrating to be told wait for the proper channels but don't talk about it or speculate in the meantime. Which I'm not being told, just reacting to some of the personal attacks against others I saw in the last thread. I also think its unfair to say "Josh molested that cat and mailman" - which is obviously made up and no evidence for - should be treated as the same as wondering if the connection to the cop family friend with repeat pornography offenses could indicate more serious crimes.

I guess I feel that if speculating about this is so powerful that the media might run with it (which I obviously don't want them to do since there is no hard evidence) can it be argued that speculating may get media attention for them to pursue an important investigation possibly using means not at our disposal? Its so frustrating to be told be patient and trust in the system when by all accounts its the system that failed and the media that actually outed this by improper means. But I also understand that I'm not entirely rational when it comes to this topic.

!

{TEXT1}:

There's a massive difference between saying, "He must be guilty of worse things, I just know it!!1!" and saying, "It certainly is suspicious that the cop JB talked to ended up in jail for child porn." One is pulling stuff out of your ass, the other is talking about known facts. We're asking people to stop pulling stuff out of their asses We're asking people to stop making shit up. We're asking people to stop believing the rumors that they're starting themselves. We're asking people to vet their sources.

[mebeforee]

Hi. I am just curious. So the podcast I listened to on This American Life about the teenaged pedophile, would you say that the conclusions are not accurate? There really is available therapy for pedophiles? The podcast made it seem like this is a "black hole" of research. (I actually think the interviewee used that term.)

As I recall a lot of the problems that young man faced were due to the fact that he had pedophilic desires but was not an offender. Since he hadn't molested anyone, therapists didn't seem to know what to do with him. I wonder if the resources available to minors who have sexually assaulted someone are different than those available to non-offenders? And perhaps there would be issues getting that kind of therapy covered by insurance, too?

[princessmahina]

This hasn't been posted yet in this thread, but several commenters have asked why more attention isn't being paid to the physical discipline in the Duggar home:

defamer.gawker.com/police-report-reveals-the-duggar-discipline-method-th-1707154965?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

I'm glad the link between the Duggars and the Pearls is getting more attention now.

[OkToBeTakei]

Further the rules for speculation are not evenly applied. What was acceptable 3 weeks might not be acceptable today,especially if you factor in the member making the comment, and might be perfectly acceptable again tomorrow.

When Jill's birth "stories" were the topic of conversation, we were reminded that FJ was more than a snark board and that snarking on words spoken by the family was not necessary, yet today there have been comments made that FJ IS a snark board.

Except that's not really the way it happened is it? Basically you picked apart a birth story based on two magazine articles and possibly 5 minutes of footage for hundreds of pages. Where you concluded it was a conspiracy, that Jill had through her 'arrogant' choices put her child's life at risk, then in no particular order.....was lazy, entitled, a liar, amongst many other comments and on and on and on........

You are correct about one thing. It was not snark. It was just plain nasty bitching. Now you are acting all hurt about that and throwing around the 'certain members' card. You were called out on it. Seems you are a bit resentful :think:

[sense and nonsense]

The idea that people should have to censor reasonable speculation or thoughts because the media might do something inappropriate with it just feels a little too close to michelle's "its women's responsibility not to cause desires that cannot be righteously fufilled." Not saying that we shouldn't put the kibosh on ridiculous rumors but instead of shaming commenters can we just provide facts to contradict them? A lot of the things that people are claiming are absolutely false do so without giving any reason or evidence and just go straight to accusations and name calling.

In this case, I think worrying about media reporting stuff on FJ is a legitimate concern because of the nature of the discussion.

Also, attempts to stop speculation on the board may be a little harsh sometimes, but they mostly come from users who are looking to preserve the board culture. A lot of the discussion is turning into 'oh the poor girls, they need to break free, save Jana, I'm crying at how horrible this is etc etc'

A lot of new users are ex Duggar fans, and are taking the name of the forum a little too literally. These users are annoying because they clearly have not bothered to read the rules, or anything on the forum before rushing to weep on this main thread. Some of them also appear to be ignoring repeated requests to stop their line of posting, so far that the mods actually had to step in heavily and delete posts, something that is never done here.

(I'll admit I was rude sometimes in reply to these, but these posters continued riding the Internet Speculation Bus despite kinder warnings and typed out every hysterical thought that ran through their mind)

I'm not saying that you're one of these posters. I remember a link posted by you to evil beet gossip. While that was not hysterical speculation, discussing further victims, male victims and identities of victims had been banned by HA.

To all posters in general,

There are many valid discussions on this topic. Links are being posted to some very well written articles and responses.

Before you post a link, copy paste the broken link into the 'search this topic' box on the top left to see if the link has been posted. Also, read the link carefully. Do not post links you see on other boards/FB without reading them and expect to not get called out, maybe rudely.

Don't post a general rant without reading the previous pages. The thread is topic jumping enough anyway.

Keep in mind that even though this is news to you and me, the Duggars have known about this for years. Don't make assumptions on their current mental state, or their actions throughout the years. As many posters have continuously reiterated, this revictimises them, and often isn't necessarily true.

If you are unaware of the other side of the Duggars' beliefs, read the SOTDRT forum to learn about ATI and IBLP. The ATI guidelines for abuse will help you understand how JB and Michelle would have likely dealt with this.

If you post a link, or a theory of your own which gets called out on the thread, or even ignored, do not repeatedly post it in the hope of getting noticed. Or on multiple threads. Do not make a new thread either just to draw attention to said topic. If majority of board members do not want to discuss the topic, don't throw a tantrum.

New members, I myself was where you are 3 months ago. Please, please, please take the time to understand board culture. I've been wildly speculative too (some posts that I highly regret on the Jillard thread a while ago).

Take the time to read older threads. For some quality snark that will help you understand both FJ and fundamentalism better, might I suggest the Jill Rodrigues and Lori/Ken threads?

Lastly, try not to take it to heart that some veteran posters are harsh, they're just trying to defend the board they love, and finding it hard to get used to newbies.

(Wow that turned out to be a long post)

Edited for typo.

[VelociRapture]

Okay, FJ's, your turn. Current answers???

I'll give my best try!

1) Was there a "heads up" for Josh and Anna, and thus their families?

I agree with you. I don't think they got much of a heads up at all. Maybe a courtesy call from someone at the Police Department (if its protocol to inform when a report is requested) or In Touch looking for a quote.

2) Did TLC know?

I can't be sure. I don't think they're dumb enough to knowingly work with a family that has a skeleton this massive in their closet. I could be completely wrong though. I just get the feeling they would have decided it wasn't worth the risk if they had known ahead of time.

3) Did the Kellers and Anna really know what Josh had done, when Pa Keller hand-picked him for Anna?

Totally agree with you. I seriously doubt that the Duggars were completely honest about what Josh had done. The Kellers may look up to the Duggars, but I don't think they would willingly put their daughter or future grandchildren in that type of situation. They do have a knack for picking pretty horrible son-in-laws, but I do feel there is a difference between what we know about Josh and what we know about the other two.

4) Are the Kellers and/or the Seewalds truly supportive?

I'm not sure about this. I think the Kellers are true believers that asking for forgiveness makes everything ok. I do think that there may be concern for their daughter and grandkids, but I don't think it's much.

As for the Seewalds, I wasn't too surprised. Michael seems to have strong views about everything - something he passed down to his son. While his stance on forgiveness and everything makes me want to hurl, I did really appreciate the fact that he made it a big point to say that it is never the victim's fault that the abuse occurred. I think its possible he was trying to be quite careful on how he worded things so he didn't piss off the Duggars, but still got some of his views across.

5) Will the "show go on" in some form or another?

I hope not. The release of this information may have seriously damaged this family's relationships with one another and it caused a huge amount of embarrassment for all of them (for various reasons). I think the family as a whole may want to continue the show, but some members may not want to be a part of it. It's also possible that TLC is desperately attempting to figure out a way to continue the show without pissing off a huge number of viewers - those who want it to continue and those who don't.

Honestly, I don't see a good option for the network.

[SassyPants]

This hasn't been posted yet in this thread, but several commenters have asked why more attention isn't being paid to the physical discipline in the Duggar home:

defamer.gawker.com/police-report-reveals-the-duggar-discipline-method-th-1707154965?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

I'm glad the link between the Duggars and the Pearls is getting more attention now.

I do wonder about how the house was run in the earlier years vs what has been shown since 2005. I would not say that the younger children are instantly obedient or overly disciplined. Running, jumping, pogo sticking in the house, walking on counters are behaviors I would not have tolerated, particularly when you know the Duggars live on a large parcel of land. It seems like there was lots of idle time in that home.

[Galbin]

I listened to the TAM podcast too. I found it very disturbing to learn that there is basically no treatment and extremely limited research. So really it's very likely that paedophiles will keep offending over the course of their lifespans.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Yes I do, I am 66.

I wasn't demanding respect, the young lady was.

How's the view from your high horse?

Here's a hint: people don't need to be older than you for you to treat them respectfully.

[Buzzard]

I understand this and should clarify that I in know way support gratuitous speculation about the victims or anyone under 18. I really appreciate all the moderators do here to support the forum and know it can't be easy dealing with the onslaught of new posts/commenters.

My fear is that there more to this story but that FOIA requests are not going to uncover it, particularly if there is political corruption or favors called in. I think the police report and the family's general friendship with prominent politicians suggests that is not widely out of the range of possibility. In light of that, it feels frustrating to be told wait for the proper channels but don't talk about it or speculate in the meantime. Which I'm not being told, just reacting to some of the personal attacks against others I saw in the last thread. I also think its unfair to say "Josh molested that cat and mailman" - which is obviously made up and no evidence for - should be treated as the same as wondering if the connection to the cop family friend with repeat pornography offenses could indicate more serious crimes.

I guess I feel that if speculating about this is so powerful that the media might run with it (which I obviously don't want them to do since there is no hard evidence) can it be argued that speculating may get media attention for them to pursue an important investigation possibly using means not at our disposal? Its so frustrating to be told be patient and trust in the system when by all accounts its the system that failed and the media that actually outed this by improper means. But I also understand that I'm not entirely rational when it comes to this topic.

There comes a time where we have to balance society's need vs. our desire for information. It is in the best interest of our children that juvenile records are sealed. Does it defeat FOIA? Yup, and that should stay. Would it be awesome if we could know EVERYTHING about this case? Yup, but things dont work like that. The bottom line is that the statute of limitations has run. Us finding out the truth wont change that.

The Duggars are done. They've been exposed as the hateful lying hypocrites that they are. Nothing that is in those files will change that. We would LIKE to know what else is out there because WE are curious. It doesnt help the victims, it doesnt change what happened, and it cant make things better.

We snark on things that we see, hear, or know. Guessing about what may have happened based on our imaginations doesnt really add anything, there's plenty out there for us to discuss so lets stick with that. We can scour the internet, rewatch episodes, look for writings, whatever, but lets keep the discussion in reality.

[halcionne]

There's a massive difference between saying, "He must be guilty of worse things, I just know it!!1!" and saying, "It certainly is suspicious that the cop JB talked to ended up in jail for child porn." One is pulling stuff out of your ass, the other is talking about known facts.

I think this is the hard part for some people (me, at least). When I'm agitated or passionate about something, I make the first type of comment. In speech it's easier to see that it's still just my opinion; much of the tone is lost in text.

Many members are indeed agitated or passionate about this, with good reason. It's always a good idea to preview your posts before hitting 'submit;' give it an objective once-over and think about whether your post needs to be qualified.

[ldttwa]

I've read all 5 threads and just can't get my head around it all. I do find it especially sad its so painfully obvious who the victims are. I genuinely believe the weddings would have been a great opportunity to really move on and be happy and to have it all dragged up will really dampen those precious new born and pregnancy days.

I fully think josh should have his commupence but it is those girls and the m'kids that will suffer from all this. The m'kids will never shake of 'your dad is a molestor' which I think has just as much potential to damage them to the same extent as the victims.

I don't want the family to lose everything when it means those children will suffer even more.

I wish the girls and children all the happiness, they deserve it.

UK article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... crisy.html not broken as main site.

[nelliebelle1197]

I agree. I seriously doubt he would have been offered anything close to what your son was offered.And that is incredibly sad. Josh apparently wanted help if the reports are correct - if he did and was denied real help then that blame falls right on his parents.

And just want to thank you for sharing your experience with this topic. I know it may not have been easy, but I think it helps explain the vast differences between what should have been provided and what may have been provided to Josh.

This is what gets to me. The kid was so indoctrinated that he told on himself. JimBob and Michelle Duggars are villains and terrible people. I hate what they - and IBLP - have done to these children

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

“Since his resignation, several group members of the Family Research Council reached out to GLAAD to apologize for what they called his ‘inexcusable behavior.'â€

http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/j ... h-council/

Which inexcusable behavior? I can't imagine that the FRC would apologize for anything Josh said against people who aren't straight and/or gender-normative. So what do they have to apologize for?

[Ali]

In this case, I think worrying about media reporting stuff on FJ is a legitimate concern because of the nature of the discussion.

Also, attempts to stop speculation on the board may be a little harsh sometimes, but they mostly come from users who are looking to preserve the board culture. A lot of the discussion is turning into 'oh the poor girls, they need to break free, save Jana, I'm crying at how horrible this is etc etc'

A lot of new users are ex Duggar fans, and are taking the name of the forum a little too literally. These users are annoying because they clearly have not bothered to read the rules, or anything on the forum before rushing to weep on this main thread. Some of them also appear to be ignoring repeated requests to stop their line of posting, so far that the mods actually had to step in heavily and delete posts, something that is never done here.

(I'll admit I was rude sometimes in reply to these, but these posters continued riding the Internet Speculation Bus despite kinder warnings and typed out every hysterical thought that ran through their mind)

I'm not saying that you're one of these posters. I remember a link posted by you to evil beet gossip. While that was not hysterical speculation, discussing further victims, male victims and identities of victims had been banned by HA.

To all posters in general,

There are many valid discussions on this topic. Links are being posted to some very well written articles and responses.

Before you post a link, copy paste the broken link into the 'search this topic' box on the top left to see if the link has been posted. Also, read the link carefully. Do not post links you see on other boards/FB without reading them and expect to not get called out, maybe rudely.

Don't post a general rant without reading the previous pages. The thread is topic jumping enough anyway.

Keep in mind that even though this is news to you and me, the Duggars have known about this for years. Don't make assumptions on their current mental state, or their actions throughout the years. As many posters have continuously reiterated, this revictimises them, and often isn't necessarily true.

If you are unaware of the other side of the Duggars' beliefs, read the SOTDRT forum to learn about ATI and IBLP. The ATI guidelines for abuse will help you understand how JB and Michelle would have likely dealt with this.

Lastly, if you post a link, or a theory of your own which gets called out on the thread, or even ignored, do not repeatedly post it in the hope of getting noticed. Or on multiple threads. Do not make a new thread either just to draw attention to said topic. If majority of board members do not want to discuss the topic, don't throw a tantrum.

New members, I myself was where you are 3 months ago. Please, please, please take the time to understand board culture. I've been wildly speculative too (some posts that I highly regret on the Jillard thread a while ago).

Take the time to read older threads. For some quality snark that will help you understand both FJ and fundamentalism better, might I suggest the Jill Rodrigues and Lori/Ken threads?

Lastly, try not to take it to heart that some veteran posters are harsh, they're just trying to defend the board they love, and finding it hard to get used to newbies.

(Wow that turned out to be a long post)

I agree that it would be wise to spend a little time lurking and try to understand the board culture before posting. More time spent lurking would take care of a lot of the conflicts I have seen on the Josh threads.

[SassyPants]

There comes a time where we have to balance society's need vs. our desire for information. It is in the best interest of our children that juvenile records are sealed. Does it defeat FOIA? Yup, and that should stay. Would it be awesome if we could know EVERYTHING about this case? Yup, but things dont work like that. The bottom line is that the statute of limitations has run. Us finding out the truth wont change that.

The Duggars are done. They've been exposed as the hateful lying hypocrites that they are. Nothing that is in those files will change that. We would LIKE to know what else is out there because WE are curious. It doesnt help the victims, it doesnt change what happened, and it cant make things better.

We snark on things that we see, hear, or know. Guessing about what may have happened based on our imaginations doesnt really add anything, there's plenty out there for us to discuss so lets stick with that. We can scour the internet, rewatch episodes, look for writings, whatever, but lets keep the discussion in reality.

All true.

I am concerned for the 3rd generation of Duggars.

We often talk about breaking cycles- this cult needs to be broken. When you know better, you tend, particularly as parents, to do better. The Duggars do not know better. Their collective ignorance needs to be neutralized.

The best shot at that is by working the TLC angle; ending their media platform.