Duggar Fox News Interviews - Mild, Inappropriate Lying

[singsingsing]

There's got to be a middle ground between "they're allowed to feel the way they feel" and, "their parents/cult did not allow them to process what happened in a healthy way" - because both statements are true.

[Chubbi]

There's got to be a middle ground between "they're allowed to feel the way they feel" and, "their parents/cult did not allow them to process what happened in a healthy way" - because both statements are true.

The way they say they feel right now is perfectly valid, because it's how they feel, with their limited freedom to process their abuse. HOWEVER, their feelings might have been different had they been allowed proper care. Idk, that's just a stab?

[VelociRapture]

The way they say they feel right now is perfectly valid, because it's how they feel, with their limited freedom to process their abuse. HOWEVER, their feelings might have been different had they been allowed proper care. Idk, that's just a stab?

I agree and feel you summed it up well. I think it's ok to point out that they were raised in a way that severely limits their options for coping with what happened. I think the problem is that some people are going too far and almost blaming them for not reacting in a way they feel is reasonable. In my opinion, that takes it too far - it is sad that they were raised to view this situation the way they do, but they should be able to share what they feel about this situation without people making them feel like they're wrong for feeling that way.

[Snarkle Motion]

Would it be condescending and patronizing if say it were a victim of spousal abuse saying, "it wasn't that bad" and people felt the need to say no it's never okay and to express the view that her reaction may be a reflection of the nature of spousal abuse and not the end of the story?

I agree with this analogy. Its not that we are saying they NEED to feel a certain way but that the nature of their upbringing makes it dubious. These are not just you average person (if that's a thing) surviving sexual abuse - these are people who come from a cult that overtly teaches them to constantly keep sweet and obey the orders of their headship and that ultimately they must have done something to deserve it. I think given the nature of their cult teachings its fair to be skeptical of what Jill and Jessa have said. Maybe it really was not a big deal to them. But its also entirely possible that they have been instructed that they MUST say this and that they've been coerced for religious as well as financial purposes. And not to mention there is the possibility of physical abuse that has been used in the past (as the report says) if the girls had not been behaving in ways deemed "appropriate" and who knows what that may or may not considered "appropriate" responses afterward in that household.

[RosyDaisy]

I stand by what I said before. Jill and Jessa were coerced into doing that interview.

[Mama Mia]

I agree with you that they can feel what they feel but you are missing the point. Its not about not believing them its that if they are telling the truth the problem is it DOESN'T JIBE WITH THEIR PRIOR PREACHINGS!

Like, "oh it was just a couple seconds cupping the breast over the clothes no big deal"... but had my fiance and I did that before our wedding it would have been a huge sin that would have been the end of the world for me and my family. Jill front-hugged Derick when he came home from Nepal and apologized over and over for breaking the rules. So....yes....the girls are allowed to feel what they feel but how is it that front hugging your boyfriend was a terrible thing you felt guilty and shameful over but then not when your brother molested you?

They can't preach about how any touching with their intended partner before marriage is sinful and show them feeling extremely guilty for breaking minor violations in this ridiculous protocol and then say "nope, no big deal when my brother touched me" without some people scratching their heads at this logic.

Yes, people who experience sexual assault are entitled to interpret it however they want. But you can't expect to preach this weird purity doctrine on TV that shames girls for holding hands before engagement, then say "believe us when we say our brother touching us was no big deal", and then expect the public to just accept that as you go back to preaching your purity doctrine that shames girls. Its hypocritical and while we do not have a right to impose what we "expect" them to feel as survivors that doesn't mean we cannot be critical of their teachings and how their statements do not make sense and therefore they have no business further promoting this culture of shaming girls.

I absolutely agree their standards of " sexual purity" are bizzare , to say the least. I think their messed up, repressive, excessive, stringent shaming, abusive methods of child rearing likely contributed to the Josh situation in the first place. I agree the parents put them in an extremely unfair, hypocritical and unethical position when they expected them to all go on air and preach to the world that their most serious family issue had been an argument over Jessa kicking Jana's bunk.

But --

What is the big, huge, glaring difference between Josh groping them and their engaging in any sort of physical contact with their boyfriends ? What is the big element that would make a difference in whether they feel shame or guilt ?

Anyone?... Beuller?

How about that if Jill or Jessa decides to cross a sexual boundary that she feels is wrong or sinful it's a conscious choice shemade. A boundary she deliberately broke. It may be a crazy, messed up boundary according to the vast majority of society - but it's one she apparently believes ( although I really didn't see the level of apology you read into the hug - only Michelle seemed freaked out by it ) .

That is vastly different than an action that was imposed on them by their brother. One that as they stated, repeatedly, was a bad, bad thing for him to do.

I really, truly do not understand how it would be somehow better if they were feeling like shit about this. Or how, on earth, people think their feeling like shit a dozen years later would be a somehow less misogynistic view. Or, most bizzarre of all - how some people feel convinced they should attend years and years of therapy - in order to feel like shit - oh, I'm sorry - I mean - " understand how the rest of the world feels " - so they can eventually, after more years of therapy, not feel like shit again.

[Snarkle Motion]

I absolutely agree their standards of " sexual purity" are bizzare , to say the least. I think their messed up, repressive, excessive, stringent shaming, abusive methods of child rearing likely contributed to the Josh situation in the first place. I agree the parents put them in an extremely unfair, hypocritical and unethical position when they expected them to all go on air and preach to the world that their most serious family issue had been an argument over Jessa kicking Jana's bunk.

But --

What is the big, huge, glaring difference between Josh groping them and their engaging in any sort of physical contact with their boyfriends ? What is the big element that would make a difference in whether they feel shame or guilt ?

Anyone?... Beuller?

How about that if Jill or Jessa decides to cross a sexual boundary that she feels is wrong or sinful it's a conscious choice shemade. A boundary she deliberately broke. It may be a crazy, messed up boundary according to the vast majority of society - but it's one she apparently believes ( although I really didn't see the level of apology you read into the hug - only Michelle seemed freaked out by it ) .

That is vastly different than an action that was imposed on them by their brother. One that as they stated, repeatedly, was a bad, bad thing for him to do.

I really, truly do not understand how it would be somehow better if they were feeling like shit about this. Or how, on earth, people think their feeling like shit a dozen years later would be a somehow less misogynistic view. Or, most bizzarre of all - how some people feel convinced they should attend years and years of therapy - in order to feel like shit - oh, I'm sorry - I mean - " understand how the rest of the world feels " - so they can eventually, after more years of therapy, not feel like shit again.

I agree with you that is a good point about a boundary or rule that Josh had broken vs. one that they had. But that's not really what they've been preaching on TV since women are literally at fault for inciting lustful desire or whatever. Its not that I want them to feel like shit. If they truly don't feel like shit that's great for them! Honestly, that's what gets me so mad is that this purity culture makes people who are abused feel like shit about themselves for something completely out of their control.

I'm just having a hard time believing what they are saying wasn't carefully scripted and coerced to save the show. Especially based on all Gothard's teachings and preachings regarding women being responsible for men's actions.

You can't go on TV and preach about how sinful and terrible something is that you literally spend your whole life to avoid it. But when your TV show and financial future is at stake all of the sudden its no big deal. Its not that its "better" that they feel like shit - its just given the what we know its likely they were forced to hide their true feelings and defend their abuser because their family's livelihood depended on it. THAT is why people are outraged. Their response was the exact response one would expect JB to order them to carefully practice and say on camera to save the show.

That's what people are furious over - not that they don't feel like shit and need years of therapy - but that gee whiz isn't it convenient for Jim Bob and Josh that the girls feel this way despite all their teachings suggesting otherwise.

[SassyPants]

I agree with you that is a good point about a boundary or rule that Josh had broken vs. one that they had. But that's not really what they've been preaching on TV since women are literally at fault for inciting lustful desire or whatever. Its not that I want them to feel like shit. If they truly don't feel like shit that's great for them! Honestly, that's what gets me so mad is that this purity culture makes people who are abused feel like shit about themselves for something completely out of their control.

I'm just having a hard time believing what they are saying wasn't carefully scripted and coerced to save the show. Especially based on all Gothard's teachings and preachings regarding women being responsible for men's actions.

You can't go on TV and preach about how sinful and terrible something is that you literally spend your whole life to avoid it. But when your TV show and financial future is at stake all of the sudden its no big deal. Its not that its "better" that they feel like shit - its just given the what we know its likely they were forced to hide their true feelings and defend their abuser because their family's livelihood depended on it. THAT is why people are outraged. Their response was the exact response one would expect JB to order them to carefully practice and say on camera to save the show.

That's what people are furious over - not that they don't feel like shit and need years of therapy - but that gee whiz isn't it convenient for Jim Bob and Josh that the girls feel this way despite all their teachings suggesting otherwise.

Exactly!

Remove the girls' personal opinions from the equation, because we all know that under Gothard, they have no personal opinions worthy of being shared.

This is all on JB.

Sadly, not even Jill and Jessa's headships, their husbands, get to override JB's money, which is just another inconsistency. According to Gothard, the ownership of the girls and their hearts has been transferred.

People are not calling out the girls but rather, the inconsistencies.

[Snarkle Motion]

Let me put it another way. We've literally had 10 years of evidence of this family saying anything related to sex is sinful and that women are responsible for the actions of men. However the *ONE* instance that this doesn't seem to apply just happens to conveniently be when the show and the family's future are at stake. Then everything is peachy keen and no big deal and we're one big happy family....so please let our family go back to making a TV show where we shame girls about sex and dressing immodestly.

[violynn]

Let me put it another way. We've literally had 10 years of evidence of this family saying anything related to sex is sinful and that women are responsible for the actions of men. However the *ONE* instance that this doesn't seem to apply just happens to conveniently be when the show and the family's future are at stake. Then everything is peachy keen and no big deal and we're one big happy family....so please let our family go back to making a TV show where we shame girls about sex and dressing immodestly.

This is the part that confuses me. If they truly believe that the girls were at fault in some capacity for Josh's "needs" when he molested them, is there some kind of Gothard clause 4 part 2a stating it is permissible for parties to pretend it is not the defrauding girls who are responsible for the accused behaviors, but actually the accused who made a 'mistake' while he was being a curious boy? Because JB, M, Jill and Jessa all declared before God and everyone that Josh was the naughty fella and the girls were victims...completely contrary to Gothard's teachings.

Of course I know that they got on TV and spun it all that way so even the leghumpers could manage to forgive them, but do they have to do the equivalent of 15 Hail Mary's and 100 Lord's Prayers every night for a month for going against their beliefs just for money?

[Toothfairy]

Jess and Jill have a right to feel whatever they want. However I have a hard time believing what they say. They have no individual thoughts or feelings because they've been suppressed and controlled all their lives. Their parents put the blame on them, hid the abuse, and told the girls they have to forgive. All While preaching about modesty, virginity and purity. JB even said he tells all the kids to spit in a cup and the last one with the cup drinks it to show how important virginity is. Nobody wants a used cup that everyone else had. The main problem I have with Jessa and Jill is how they presented themselves in the interview. They said it was no big deal, this happens everywhere and they forgiven him. That's very dangerous to say since sexual abuse happens to many people. Especially people of faith. Now if a little 8 yo girl heard this or a teenager watch this interview and were being abused, then hear Jill and Jessa say it's no big deal that's very dangerous. These kids have so many young fans comment and will kiss their asses at everything they do. Sexual abuse is a big deal. It's not something a person gets over. They learn how to cope and deal with the abuse but the trauma will be with them for life. What they did opened a whole can of dirty worms. The duggars don't understand how they sound to normal people in the real world because they live in a box. In the real world sexual abuse is not all right and isn't easily forgiven.

[Nowyn]

... It's not something a person gets over. They learn how to cope and deal with the abuse but the trauma will be with them for life. What they did opened a whole can of dirty worms. The duggars don't understand how they sound to normal people in the real world because they live in a box. In the real world sexual abuse is not all right and isn't easily forgiven...

It can be something a person gets over. I think it's almost as bad to say that no one gets over than it is to say it's nothing for everyone. But I do agree that the majority can't just move on.

I don't know how much I believe about girls statements about their feelings, but not because I think they can't be ok with it. It's because of how much they lied in other things during the interview. Things we know to be wrong because of police report. Even if police report is partly erroneous, they lied a lot. Also, the ideas about purity they were taught are so different from the attitudes they displayed in the interview that I can't just think they told the truth. They have also been taught what to think and believe. So parroting something they were told to say is not unimaginable. But I don't know what's the case. I hope for the best, fear for the worst. Nothing about this makes me angry towards them. Actually nothing about the whole interview makes me really angry towards them. They might me so called adults, but I will give them a lot of leeway until they are a lot older. But what annoys me to no end is that nothing they said is a good message to anyone. Somehow they ended treating something that's very traumatic to most people like nothing. They parroted things (about sexual abuse in general) that are erroneous and unhealthy. They complimented their parents way of handling whole debacle. Even said they were going to act same (one thing I actually hope thy lied) with their own kids. I don't care what they said in relation to themselves, what I do care is everything else and if these were to normal young women I would be hella mad. But they are not. Wich makes me even more furious towards JB and M.

[SassyPants]

It can be something a person gets over. I think it's almost as bad to say that no one gets over than it is to say it's nothing for everyone. But I do agree that the majority can't just move on.

I don't know how much I believe about girls statements about their feelings, but not because I think they can't be ok with it. It's because of how much they lied in other things during the interview. Things we know to be wrong because of police report. Even if police report is partly erroneous, they lied a lot. Also, the ideas about purity they were taught are so different from the attitudes they displayed in the interview that I can't just think they told the truth. They have also been taught what to think and believe. So parroting something they were told to say is not unimaginable. But I don't know what's the case. I hope for the best, fear for the worst. Nothing about this makes me angry towards them. Actually nothing about the whole interview makes me really angry towards them. They might me so called adults, but I will give them a lot of leeway until they are a lot older. But what annoys me to no end is that nothing they said is a good message to anyone. Somehow they ended treating something that's very traumatic to most people like nothing. They parroted things (about sexual abuse in general) that are erroneous and unhealthy. They complimented their parents way of handling whole debacle. Even said they were going to act same (one thing I actually hope thy lied) with their own kids. I don't care what they said in relation to themselves, what I do care is everything else and if these were to normal young women I would be hella mad. But they are not. Wich makes me even more furious towards JB and M.

I agree.

Let's remove the show as part of the reason for the girls doing the interview.

What do we have left? If not for the continued life of the show, why would these girls go on worldwide TV to talk about this 12 year old incident that they claim was totally handled, years ago. What did the girls have to gain? Did it work?

Logically speaking, if coming forward had nothing to do with the show, they would have remained as silent as Josh, IMO.

[Mama Mia]

Of course abuse is something people can get over. Good God. It just boggles my mind that a forum full of people who ( mostly ) call themselves feminists can't see how fucked up it is to 1) insist that anyone who has been a victim of sexual assault must be traumatized 2) don't listen to these young women's actual words and completely invalidate their experiences - because they aren't saying the socially approved message they want them to parrot -- talk about invalidating women! 3) can't seem to seperate out the difference between having something done to you, and choosing to do something yourself. Again, more equating " purity" with sense of self.

And I also Find offensive the concept that all abuse is objectively the same. It's not. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that this was a big, horrible, deal in their family at the time. But that the girls don't remember it and therefore the event itself didn't have some huge impact on them personally. It obviously effected their family and family dynamic. But why should they feel compelled to act like an event they don't even recall, that happened a dozen years ago, is still impacting them today -- just to put out a socially palatable message that all victims are irrepably harmed?

And it is perfectly reasonable to assume that people will react in a range of ways to all types of assault. And all those reactions should be taken seriously - even if it's not how we think they " should" feel. But yea, generally, someone isn't going to have as strong a reaction to someone feeling their boob, over their nightgown, for two seconds, while they are asleep - as to being held down and raped. There is a continuum of abuse. That doesn't mean if one of them did happen to react extremely strongly, still, to what Josh did, that it would be " wrong" - but I don't get this insistence that all levels of assault and abuse are exactly the same.

[Handmaiden of Dog]

When Cows and Kids Collide http://whencowsandkidscollide.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/how-many-lies-can-you-find-part-two.html has a good analysis of the 2 interviews.

Internalization Four: The year between March 2002-March 2003 never happened.

Kelly: So, you had the family meeting. Did Josh go away right after that?

Jessa: He did pretty soon. At the time I was young so it kind of seems like everything was a whirlwind or whatever.

KELLY: Was there time that you were in house with Josh knowing this prior to him going away?

Jessa: Not really. I think that whenever it was brought to my attention. It wasn't very long after that Josh went away that I knew.

KELLY: Do you remember the dynamic of being in the house thinking --

Jill: We were sad.

Reality Check: Josh left the house one year after he confessed to molesting Jessa and Jill. According to the Duggars, they told Jill and Jessa about Josh's confession in the spring of 2002. They were in the house with Josh for over a year before he left.

[Snarkle Motion]

Of course abuse is something people can get over. Good God. It just boggles my mind that a forum full of people who ( mostly ) call themselves feminists can't see how fucked up it is to 1) insist that anyone who has been a victim of sexual assault must be traumatized 2) don't listen to these young women's actual words and completely invalidate their experiences - because they aren't saying the socially approved message they want them to parrot -- talk about invalidating women! 3) can't seem to seperate out the difference between having something done to you, and choosing to do something yourself. Again, more equating " purity" with sense of self.

And I also Find offensive the concept that all abuse is objectively the same. It's not. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that this was a big, horrible, deal in their family at the time. But that the girls don't remember it and therefore the event itself didn't have some huge impact on them personally. It obviously effected their family and family dynamic. But why should they feel compelled to act like an event they don't even recall, that happened a dozen years ago, is still impacting them today -- just to put out a socially palatable message that all victims are irrepably harmed?

And it is perfectly reasonable to assume that people will react in a range of ways to all types of assault. And all those reactions should be taken seriously - even if it's not how we think they " should" feel. But yea, generally, someone isn't going to have as strong a reaction to someone feeling their boob, over their nightgown, for two seconds, while they are asleep - as to being held down and raped. There is a continuum of abuse. That doesn't mean if one of them did happen to react extremely strongly, still, to what Josh did, that it would be " wrong" - but I don't get this insistence that all levels of assault and abuse are exactly the same.

1) I don't think people are insisting that they MUST be traumatized since they experienced sexual assault. Rather that their statements don't seem to be consistent which leads us to number 2...

2) As a feminist, I didn't get the memo where we must believe everything that comes out of a woman's mouth because...woman! I'm sorry, this logic is just as offensive and ridiculous as saying never believe anything a woman says since they are all manipulative liars. Are you telling me if a female politician made a statement that appears contradictory I'm not allowed to be critical of it because it might "invalidate" her experience? Because the Duggars are political figures who have used their celebrity to advance religious and political messages so I think its reasonable to be critical of their perspectives given the evidence of their former statements and teachings of their cult.

3) WE can separate out the difference between having something done to you and choosing to do something yourself. The problem is that the Duggars and their cult CANNOT! Michelle was on TV the day before the news broke saying how women are responsible for stirring up unrighteous desires in men. Their cult LITERALLY teaches that if a man does something to you it was your fault because you must have done something to deserve it. You've seen the Gothard materials about how sexual assault survivors need to consider their role in what happened to them, right? (Not breaking the link because news site - I think gawker counts as "news").

http://gawker.com/the-duggar-homeschool ... 1706406324

And WE don't consider them "impure". :naughty: Its that by their very own definitions and cult teachings they are considered "impure". They've LITERALLY WRITTEN A BOOK about how they've devoted their lives to protecting their purity before marriage - not just accountability for their own actions but going out of their way to make sure no else damages this "purity". Like not EVER being allowed to leave the house alone lest there be damage to their reputation or someone from the ebil outside world attacks them. Which is ironic considering the extreme lengths they went to protect them from outside the home versus inside the home.

[Mama Mia]

Of course I don't think anything any woman says ever is true. :roll:

However I think there is a big fat gap between doubting a politicians position on on issues and doubting a woman's description of her own feelings regarding an experience that happened to her.

All I keep hearing is " oh no, it's their horrible cult that has all these women shaming, purity cult ideals that makes women and girls feel that if they are touched outside of marriage they should feel like crap.....now let me tell you why I think they are lying if they say they don't feel like crap. And why no one should believe they know their feelings and why they should hide from the public eye.

Its the hypocrisy on both sides of the Duggar molestation reaction that is appalling. The fact that many on the far right were falling all over themselves to excuse Josh's behavior because he was a child -- when it's 99.99999% certain that if it was virtually anyone else they would of been posting about gathering up a vigilante mob to castrate him is appalling.

It's just as hypocritical though to be railing on these young women because of who they are, when its 99% certain that if they were anyone else telling their story and being told by the inter webs they were doing victim " wrong" there would be threads full of angry posts about how they were being slut shamed.

[SassyPants]

Of course I don't think anything any woman says ever is true. :roll:

However I think there is a big fat gap between doubting a politicians position on on issues and doubting a woman's description of her own feelings regarding an experience that happened to her.

All I keep hearing is " oh no, it's their horrible cult that has all these women shaming, purity cult ideals that makes women and girls feel that if they are touched outside of marriage they should feel like crap.....now let me tell you why I think they are lying if they say they don't feel like crap. And why no one should believe they know their feelings and why they should hide from the public eye.

Its the hypocrisy on both sides of the Duggar molestation reaction that is appalling. The fact that many on the far right were falling all over themselves to excuse Josh's behavior because he was a child -- when it's 99.99999% certain that if it was virtually anyone else they would of been posting about gathering up a vigilante mob to castrate him is appalling.

It's just as hypocritical though to be railing on these young women because of who they are, when its 99% certain that if they were anyone else telling their story and being told by the inter webs they were doing victim " wrong" there would be threads full of angry posts about how they were being slut shamed.

Personally, my reaction to the girls is confusion. In one breath, they told us all was taken care of 12 years ago. They did not remember the incidents of light touching over the clothing when they were asleep, except during the times when they were awake, BUTTTTTTTTTTT, "we're victims and they cannot do this to us" *insert fake tears*. Then back to smiles and all is good.

In addition, when you add their parents' words regarding the same incidents, the waters only got more murky.

Are inconsistencies on national TV not allowed to be critiqued in America?????

And if you're unequivocally more bothered by others knowing about what happened to you, than by what actually happened to you in your own home and by your own family members, I'd say the counseling you had might need to be questioned and perhaps revisited.

Further, why go to the media whom you claimed made you a victim to try to explain it all away???

Sorry, it loops back around to being predominately about the $how.

[Snarkle Motion]

Of course I don't think anything any woman says ever is true. :roll:

However I think there is a big fat gap between doubting a politicians position on on issues and doubting a woman's description of her own feelings regarding an experience that happened to her.

In most cases I'd agree, but not this time. Whether the Duggar girls can smooth over the recent scandal has repercussions for the presidential election. I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that is has altered the GOP primary field. Huckabee's entry into the race hinged on whether the girls could help undo the damage he did by supporting Josh.

Given everything at stake and the many religious, political, and not to mention financial ramifications I think its reasonable to question whether these women are actually describing their own feelings or parroting what they have been told to protect their own interests and other powerful interests.

[Nowyn]

Of course I don't think anything any woman says ever is true. :roll:

However I think there is a big fat gap between doubting a politicians position on on issues and doubting a woman's description of her own feelings regarding an experience that happened to her.

All I keep hearing is " oh no, it's their horrible cult that has all these women shaming, purity cult ideals that makes women and girls feel that if they are touched outside of marriage they should feel like crap.....now let me tell you why I think they are lying if they say they don't feel like crap. And why no one should believe they know their feelings and why they should hide from the public eye.

Its the hypocrisy on both sides of the Duggar molestation reaction that is appalling. The fact that many on the far right were falling all over themselves to excuse Josh's behavior because he was a child -- when it's 99.99999% certain that if it was virtually anyone else they would of been posting about gathering up a vigilante mob to castrate him is appalling.

It's just as hypocritical though to be railing on these young women because of who they are, when its 99% certain that if they were anyone else telling their story and being told by the inter webs they were doing victim " wrong" there would be threads full of angry posts about how they were being slut shamed.

I think that most of the time in this world you need to think a minute before believing anything anyone says. I'm not saying that you shouldn't believe anyone but maybe think a little bit before you do. I think that there are some red flags with this interview. We know that they lied. We don't think they lied, we know they did, because we have the police report. I don't take the report as a gospel but even thinking it was less than 50% true there were some lies. I don't think that believing anyone without reservations when they lie in the next sentence is a wise thing. It's a different thing to doubt than deny that they can be ok. And it's different to doubt just because and doubt because something.

One of those perfectly rational reasons is things we know about gothardism. They can be ok, they can think they weren't at fault and it's even possible they were telling the truth (except when they didn't), but to believe it without reservations. Well, I can't do so.

And yes, if they were normal joes I could just keep my doubts with myself, but they aren't. They are public figures and what they say affects other people more. If someone, who is in a position to affect others, says something harmful I reserve the right to contradict and be annoyed. For me, it doesn't matter who that person is. And for god sake it has nothing to do with slut-shaming. No one is saying they are at fault with what happened to them and no one is reacting this way because they told their story.

[Mama Mia]

Ok. I surrender, just keep thinking you're not slut shaming them for not being traumatized enough for being molested - but pat yourselves on the back for throwing a coat of political rhetoric on it. It's still ugly. It's still misogynistic. And it's still really, really sad because it sends a very nasty message to women and girls that the only correct reaction to molestation is to hide away ( ironic given all the cries of cover ups ) or to at least appear permenantly injured by an action someone did to you.

[JenniferJuniper]

Ok. I surrender, just keep thinking you're not slut shaming them for not being traumatized enough for being molested - but pat yourselves on the back for throwing a coat of political rhetoric on it. It's still ugly. It's still misogynistic. And it's still really, really sad because it sends a very nasty message to women and girls that the only correct reaction to molestation is to hide away ( ironic given all the cries of cover ups ) or to at least appear permenantly injured by an action someone did to you.

You should give up. Your straw man nonsense is getting boring.

[Nowyn]

Ok. I surrender, just keep thinking you're not slut shaming them for not being traumatized enough for being molested - but pat yourselves on the back for throwing a coat of political rhetoric on it. It's still ugly. It's still misogynistic. And it's still really, really sad because it sends a very nasty message to women and girls that the only correct reaction to molestation is to hide away ( ironic given all the cries of cover ups ) or to at least appear permenantly injured by an action someone did to you.

It's not about them not being traumatized. I don't think that they should hide or be permanently injured. Like I said before, a person can get over it. I don't think I'm making myself clear enough because you don't seem to understand what I'm saying. I even looked up the definition of slut-shaming, because I might have gotten it wrong. I think the problem is that you think I'm saying they can't feel they are ok as it's against expected female reaction. But it's not the case. I don't doubt them because they say they are ok. I doubt them because they lied. I doubt them because the likelihood of them not believing something they were taught by their parents their whole life is quite small. I doubt them because they have been "trained" to feel and say what they are told. But doubting them doesn't equal saying they are wrong to feel in any freaking way they do. I just doubt that it isn't what they said in the interview. I wouldn't even mind them lying. Their real feelings are for them to share if and how they want to. But I do have right to doubt their words.

And being annoyed with them also has nothing to do with them saying that something worked with their family (wich I also doubt because, see above). It's about endorsing a generally bad way of handling molestation. It's about suggesting what Josh did can't be classified as molestation. It's about suggesting that if it's over clothes and while asleep it doesn't really matter. It matters, if not for every victim, for the issue of sexual abuse. And I would say that's pretty important for feminism and sexual abuse survivors.

ETA: Disclaimer: I'm both feminist and sexual abuse survivor.

[Handmaiden of Dog]

Ok. I surrender, just keep thinking you're not slut shaming them for not being traumatized enough for being molested - but pat yourselves on the back for throwing a coat of political rhetoric on it. It's still ugly. It's still misogynistic. And it's still really, really sad because it sends a very nasty message to women and girls that the only correct reaction to molestation is to hide away ( ironic given all the cries of cover ups ) or to at least appear permenantly injured by an action someone did to you.

Who the hell is slut shaming!?

Jesus, you really are over-reacting here and I have to wonder why. The very nasty message being sent is that if your brother molests you, it's no big deal and nothing really needs to be done about it.

However I think there is a big fat gap between doubting a politicians position on on issues and doubting a woman's description of her own feelings regarding an experience that happened to her

.

The " woman" you are referring to (both the sisters actually) are not just women, though. Bear in mind that they are Reality TV stars who want their Reality TV series back as well as their People magazine covers and their Reality TV star life-styles. That in itself should give you pause. I would guess that they are more willing to lie than politicians because there is a lot riding on their answers. If they can make themselves acceptable to average Americans: money, fame, idolization. Not acceptable to average Americans: ordinary lifestyles with no money and no fame and a scramble to figure out their future. I picture it as living an upper class life style vs. living below the poverty line (when you factor in all of the children they will have.)

I think Jill and Derek will be fine (especially if Derick manages to get his CPA) but Jessa and Ben's future just went in the toilet. At the very least Ben will need to find a nine-to-five job (that will probably bring in $30,000 or less) and Jessa will have to cope with an expanding brood mostly on her own by pinching pennies and slaving away until her first daughter is old enough to help. Probably not the future she had planned for herself.

[LovelyLuna]

Watched the interviews last night. there was a lot of yelling at the TV. J&M are big fat lying liars that lie and didn’t give a wit about their daughters. Jessa and Jill just need to shut the hell up. calling your brother sly and rambling on about how you didn’t really know what going on so it didn’t bother you makes you look like an brainwashed robot idiot. Jessa's lipgloss was really distracting.

My headship wanted to know if they paused in the middle of interview to try for #20 and also whats wrong with JB hair. He was not impressed with Moochelle’s fake crying and kept asking me what was up with her eyes going all bugged out when she talked. :pink-shock: :lol: I really need to record his snark whenever I convince him to watch something. he has me in stitches every time.

the interviews are not going to do them any favors, they made a bad decision that will bring up more controversy then it will to lay anything to rest.