Nathan and Ashley Salyer - Courtship

[HereticHick]

1 hour ago, ElegantMajesticPearls said:

Ok. Im down the with Lawson is obnoxious camp. Good lord he was hamming it up for the cameras. His relationship "advice" to Nathan is odd considering his apparent distaste for dating and women. 

I don't think Lawson has a distaste for women.  He loves having all the young maidens chastely lusting after him on social media. I think he enjoys being an object of adoration & doesn't want to be tied down.

[elliha]

2 hours ago, BeccaGrim said:

So I could be wrong and please correct me if I am because I'm relatively new to watching the Bates family, but I read online that Gil and Kelly met in college, correct? She was his TA in a chemistry class? And the kids often refer to their mother as 'brilliant' when she does her homeschooling at the dining room table.  I actually feel (and maybe its just for tv, again correct me if I'm wrong) that Gil is more respectful of his wife's intelligence and personality than JB is.  He looks to her to be fellow grown up in the house to Michelle's little girl nature. Carlin is certainly allowed to have a lot more personality than the Duggar girls (who of course we now know were victims of sexual abuse.) I'm sure Nathan will be the patriarch he was raised to be but like the others I just think the Bates kids seem happier in their marriages.  Erin denounced Goddard's group publicly and Alyssa is dying her hair and wearing pants. Am  I wrong?

I would not over interpret Alyssa's choices and what Erin said but yes, I don't think Gil sees Kelly the same way JB views Michelle. I think as you say he does understand that she is a real human being. They do still teach wively submission as the ideal but I can't see anything beaten down in Kelly.

[Melissa1977]

I don't see this courtship working. Maybe I'm wrong, but I bet there'll be no wedding. Ashley is in love with country life and Nathan is somehow hot (see mud pictures) but doesn't seem very smart nor very gentleman. I mean, he's not a Chad or even a Zach. Good luck Ashley, but you can do better!

[manda b]

I have a feeling they're engaged already or very close to it...

[19 cats and counting]

Isn't her birthday next month?  Perhaps a proposal is coming then?

I see a lot more love between these two than I ever did between Ben and Jessa.

[justmy2cents]

53 minutes ago, HereticHick said:

I don't think Lawson has a distaste for women.  He loves having all the young maidens chastely lusting after him on social media. I think he enjoys being an object of adoration & doesn't want to be tied down.

Someone asked him on twitter if he'd always be the lone ranger and he said not for too much longer.  Wonder if he has someone in mind.

Anyone find an Instagram for Nathan yet?  Surely he got one by now.

 

[DaisyD]

He's probably holding off to get more mileage out of the "storyline". 

[Diana]

2 hours ago, Melissa1977 said:

I don't see this courtship working. Maybe I'm wrong, but I bet there'll be no wedding. Ashley is in love with country life and Nathan is somehow hot (see mud pictures) but doesn't seem very smart nor very gentleman. I mean, he's not a Chad or even a Zach. Good luck Ashley, but you can do better!

That would make sense if she was so much better, but they seem equal, she doesnt seem to be smarter, or with greater aspirations than him. And also i doubt they would anounce a courship if it wasnt already all settled.

[pnwgypsy]

Guys there's so much sexual tension between these two lol. So many moments where you can tell they would love if they could just kiss.

Poor kids. Wish they could.

When Ashley got home from her concert to the "surprise" of Nathan being there (supposedly pre courtship proposal) there was a serious full frontal hug. There was also numerous times in the ep where he pulled her close or she leaned in, in which a normal couple would kiss.

[LawsonBatesEgo]

7 hours ago, HereticHick said:

I don't think Lawson has a distaste for women.  He loves having all the young maidens chastely lusting after him on social media. I think he enjoys being an object of adoration & doesn't want to be tied down.

Lawson would be a total manwhore if he wasn't a fundie and was off on a college campus or something.

[Mela99]

I think they're obviously attracted to each other but I do think it's going to be hard for Ashley to give up city life but I think - judging from her commentary about needing to learn to be a good cook - she'll tell herself it's what God wants her to do. 

[elliha]

6 hours ago, LawsonBatesEgo said:

Lawson would be a total manwhore if he wasn't a fundie and was off on a college campus or something.

I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't a fundie version of this and he is one already. Sneaking side hugs with girls he is not courting and wispering suggestive things? Or what would he do?

I would not be surprised if he is the kid who has cheated with the rules and just not been found out. "Sure I saved my first kiss for the altar" (with this girl at least).

Lawson would be the type of guy who would not understand what happened any time a girl didn't fall to the floor whenever he looked in their direction. I once gave one of those guys a pretty nasty brush off since I found him rude and irritating and he got so surprised gathered all his friends in another room and started obsessing about why he wasn't successful and then left the party. One of his friends even told me and smirked about him not being used to that kind of thing.

[Formosa]

Amy Duggar seems to be a big Ashley fan. She posted a picture of herself and Ashley a couple of months ago about this sweet and sassy New Yorker being a catch and some other time she commented on Ashley's instagram about loving this spunky New Yorker or something like that. 

[Smchugh1304]

15 hours ago, justmy2cents said:

Someone asked him on twitter if he'd always be the lone ranger and he said not for too much longer.  Wonder if he has someone in mind.

Anyone find an Instagram for Nathan yet?  Surely he got one by now.

 

2 extra girls at the family Christmas. Any ideas? 

http://i1029.photobucket.com/albums/y356/smchugh1304/image_zpsn302yoey.jpeg[/IMG]

[freethemall]

2 hours ago, Smchugh1304 said:

2 extra girls at the family Christmas. Any ideas? 

http://i1029.photobucket.com/albums/y356/smchugh1304/image_zpsn302yoey.jpeg[/IMG]

The one on the left is Courtney, I forget her last name. She's constantly in pictures with the Bates. There was speculation about her dating someone a long while ago but it seems she's just a hanger-on. Probably the same with the right one.

[calimojo]

On 4/8/2016 at 7:32 PM, Palimpsest said:

I'm sorry if I seem testy here but - that has already been done on so many other threads - including some threads where you have been a very active participant.  Rather than asking people to repeat themselves perhaps you could encourage people to read those other threads.

It is quite easy.  You may want to include a warning about potentially upsetting material sometimes.  For example:

Warning: Very difficult material in this thread but it does give a perspective of the evils of Gothardism over the years:  

 

 

 

Ok, I will probably take a beating for this, but I just have to say that I see nothing wrong when a poster politely asks for a quick summary about a topic that has a long history.  I remember being new here and there is a serious depth of content on this site, which is fascinating, but it also requires a time commitment to wade through all of it.  I find it rude when someone replies to a request for some basic info by almost scolding them for not doing their homework.   It isn't like this is a class we are taking and we have set expectations for completing a full review of all the content.  This is large site, with a constant ebb and flow of new and casual members.  As an online community,  we can be welcoming, while we gently remind newbies or casual members that most of their questions can be found elsewhere on the site. 

When someone asks for background information,  anyone who wishes to respond with a few sentences to summarize can do that and others who don't want to do that, can just skip over to the next post down the line. 

 

Or,  you can, as many do, provide a quick link, or even just a quick direction where the inquisitive poster can go do their own digging. 

 

I know there are many who will disagree with me, but I just can't help but cringe when I see a nice, and non-demanding question about some background info, be met with a curt response.  And in this case,  the response even indicates that the responder took the time to look at the  other's posting history.  In the time it took to do that,  why not just kindly respond by saying:

"We don't want to derail the thread with history that has been covered elsewhere, but here is a link to more info",  or "In the interest of not repeating content that is covered really well elsewhere, here is the part of the website where you can find all kinds of background info"

To me it is like being stopped by someone walking down the street who is asking for directions.  I can say:

"Jeesh, I already told people these directions last week,  figure it out yourself"

"If you go to the end of the block, there is a nice map of the neighborhood that can help you find your way"

or

"Sure,  walk 2 more blocks in that direction, Turn left and you see will a gas station with a big red sign.  If you go one more block past that,  you should be able to see the address you are looking for."

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

[Coconutwater]

29 minutes ago, calimojo said:

Ok, I will probably take a beating for this, but I just have to say that I see nothing wrong when a poster politely asks for a quick summary about a topic that has a long history.  I remember being new here and there is a serious depth of content on this site, which is fascinating, but it also requires a time commitment to wade through all of it.  I find it rude when someone replies to a request for some basic info by almost scolding them for not doing their homework.   It isn't like this is a class we are taking and we have set expectations for completing a full review of all the content.  This is large site, with a constant ebb and flow of new and casual members.  As an online community,  we can be welcoming, while we gently remind newbies or casual members that most of their questions can be found elsewhere on the site. 

When someone asks for background information,  anyone who wishes to respond with a few sentences to summarize can do that and others who don't want to do that, can just skip over to the next post down the line. 

 

Or,  you can, as many do, provide a quick link, or even just a quick direction where the inquisitive poster can go do their own digging. 

 

I know there are many who will disagree with me, but I just can't help but cringe when I see a nice, and non-demanding question about some background info, be met with a curt response.  And in this case,  the response even indicates that the responder took the time to look at the  other's posting history.  In the time it took to do that,  why not just kindly respond by saying:

"We don't want to derail the thread with history that has been covered elsewhere, but here is a link to more info",  or "In the interest of not repeating content that is covered really well elsewhere, here is the part of the website where you can find all kinds of background info"

To me it is like being stopped by someone walking down the street who is asking for directions.  I can say:

"Jeesh, I already told people these directions last week,  figure it out yourself"

"If you go to the end of the block, there is a nice map of the neighborhood that can help you find your way"

or

"Sure,  walk 2 more blocks in that direction, Turn left and you see will a gas station with a big red sign.  If you go one more block past that,  you should be able to see the address you are looking for."

 

 

 

Thank you @calimojo I lurk here a lot and have only posted a few times, but all I have is my iPhone at the moment and there is SO much to dig through and the way I've seen some of the responses by simple questions make me not want to ask where to find something. Threads get derailed and people get lost in the threads. If we could all just post a link as you said or just a simple overview with a link, it would be more pleasant for everyone. I do understand if someone is asking the same question without trying to do the research, but that's a different situation. Just my two cents! 

[eclairaupistache]

Erm, I know it's a very touchy subject but I have a question about this cult and race:

So Nathan now is courting a Latina and Josiah Duggar was courting a half-Latina?

I have also seen people with an East Asian background in this cult (Jennifer and John Hartono who visit the Duggars often) and that girl who gave the interview on youtube on how she escaped the cult.

But where are Blacks? Do you think the cult is especially racist towards black people but less racist towards other races?

Do you think the Duggars or the Bates would allow their children to court someone who is Black? Honestly I am surprised that Nathan is allowed to court her considering she doesn't look like a typical WASP at all! And you would think that it is important to them for their babies to look as white as a marshmallow.

 

[Diana]

1 hour ago, eclairaupistache said:

Erm, I know it's a very touchy subject but I have a question about this cult and race:

So Nathan now is courting a Latina and Josiah Duggar was courting a half-Latina?

I have also seen people with an East Asian background in this cult (Jennifer and John Hartono who visit the Duggars often) and that girl who gave the interview on youtube on how she escaped the cult.

But where are Blacks? Do you think the cult is especially racist towards black people but less racist towards other races?

Do you think the Duggars or the Bates would allow their children to court someone who is Black? Honestly I am surprised that Nathan is allowed to court her considering she doesn't look like a typical WASP at all! And you would think that it is important to them for their babies to look as white as a marshmallow.

 

Latino is not a race, its the way people from latin America is called in the United States whatever their race is. So a latino can be of african, european, native american or asian ancestry, and in most cases a mix of any of that in diferent degrees that may vary a lot depending on the country they are from. Ashelys mom is from the Dominican Republic a country where most of the population is a mix of white and black.

[iweartanktops]

I highly doubt anyone in the Bates family will even consider a relationship with a Black person. The Bateseseses have a photo of a Klan leader framed in their home. Not going to happen. 

The Duggars have had some Black "friends" on their show. They visited their church and were complete ass holes about the music. I looked for a YouTube clip but I couldn't find it and got bored. 

[ladyaudley]

Finally got to catch up on the episode. They definitely have chemistry! there were some real moments of self control to not kiss! And there's definitely a lot more physical contact than any of the other courtships. But it was a bit awkward how Nathan kept saying "I love you" and she only ever replied with "I love the feathers"...

[VelociRapture]

@calimojoand @Coconutwater-

People here tend to be much more willing to help if you (General you) attempt to find something on your own first and the manner in which someone asks. I get that there is a ton of information here - there really is! - but there is also a search bar at the top of the page that can be used to at least try. I've found a good amount of information using it myself.

If someone tries and can't find what they're looking for, then it's fine to ask for a bit of help at that point. I'm not sure if the poster @Palimpsestaddressed tried that first or not, but their request was simple enough that they could have just added the link and a short explanation themself.

I don't see the response from @Palimpsest as being overly testy or rude. Maybe she could have worded it better, but at the end of the day if she didn't suggest that the other poster start doing it herself from now on it could just encourage more people to start requesting information like that in the middle of threads - and as seen in past Quiverfull of Duggars threads, if enough people start doing that it can really derail threads completely.

Just my personal opinion of course.  

[BeccaGrim]

2 hours ago, iweartanktops said:

I highly doubt anyone in the Bates family will even consider a relationship with a Black person. The Bateseseses have a photo of a Klan leader framed in their home. Not going to happen. 

The Duggars have had some Black "friends" on their show. They visited their church and were complete ass holes about the music. I looked for a YouTube clip but I couldn't find it and got bored. 

I think Kelly has at least one Black sister, doesn't she? Can't speak for the Duggars.  

[19 cats and counting]

Since i started this 'fight' I want to clarify things.

AShley's blog is from 2009.  THe history of ATI I was looking for that I was given was about the lawsuit.  That was not what i was looking for.

The history I was looking for was how popular ATI was in 2009 vs how popular it is now (enrollment numbers) and where 2009 was in terms of their popularity (peaks,  valleys, etc).  Maybe they're listed in the lawsuit, but the document (which I'm starting to read through) is 114 pages, and I'm looking for about a paragraph or even a sentence (ie in 2009, ATI had X families, today they have Y).  I thought I asked nicely, but I didn't think the response was very nice and felt like a horse's ass for even asking.  And to be honest the response has made me think twice about asking questions here again.

I was also posting from my phone, and reading 114 pages is not for a phone.

[formergothardite]

I would say that in 2009 is was probably just as popular as it is today. From what I can tell ATI enrollment peaked in the mid-90s and went down from there. It has maybe gotten a little smaller since 2009, but I wouldn't expect it would be a huge difference.