Nathan and Ashley Salyer - Courtship

[Kelsey]

2 hours ago, ven said:

Will there be a levendusky-bates wedding in the works? 

They only have one child. A son but I don't know how old he is.

[formergothardite]

3 hours ago, Palimpsest said:

I don't think Gil Bates was pressured by other members of the board.  I think he got on the board because Paine pushed for him and it was an alliance of York, Paine and Bates who ousted Gothard - and continue the cover-up.  York and Paine are steeped in IBLP and have been on the board for years.

Gothard never saw it coming.   He really thought that these men worshiped him. 

Gil is good, though, he can convince people that he is just a bumbling fool who doesn't have a clue, which is why even people here want to think that he is some sort of victim in this. But he is cunning and manipulative and he raised his children to do a better job at hiding the crazy than the Duggars did. 

[Kittikatz]

As someone of multiethnic heritage, the concept of race has always been interesting to me, and I just want to say that this has been an illuminating conversation about race in the US.

I've traveled quite a bit, but have never been able to understand how people in the US define themselves and others, and this just shows how subjective and fluid the concept can be.

[calimojo]

Something has loosened up in that Bates home.  Remember when they first appeared on19Ks?  They were very backwards, dressed all in prairie dresses or neatly pressed pants, and quiet.  Even during United Bates of America they were different than now. 

 

I think they have better PR advice,, but something else has changed as well.  I think that Gil realized his grifting was running dry, and he and Kelly paid attention to the public perception of the oddball duggars.  I think they made a deliberate decision to appear to loosen up.  They definitely loosened up on the modesty standards and the courting/dating rules.  And I think they started to loosen up a bit on the discipline and extreme indoctrination of the kids. 

 

I don't think they did this out of a change of heart, I think they did it because this was their best chance to get a show and make enough money to pay for the rest of the family.  It was just another con by Gil and Kelly. 

 

But,  and this is a big but,  it is possible that this has had a ripple effect with their kids in a positive way.  Perhaps they loosened up just enough, that there was enough for light to come through.  I hope the kids will gradually find their way out.  No, I don't think that Alyssa wearing pants is proof of much, but there might be some baby steps that some of the kids are taking, possibly without even realizing it. 

 

I have hope that some of those kids will modify their beliefs more than I think the duggar's will.  If one of the Duggars does it  it will be messy, a la Josh.  But I think the bates kids could gradually move away from the tenets. 

 

 

[trustworthy]

Can Nathan really support a wife?  EMT, some tree pruning ... he's going to have to go out and buy a little house as there can't be a big daddy gift a la JB.  Could he possibly have savings?  He seems so young. Imagine having to support the first girl you were ever allowed to hold hands with, simply because you did hold hands and once you do that you have to get married 'cause otherwise it would be promiscuous or something.

I think the worst part of all is that there can never be a single private conversation prior to marriage.  How can you possibly ... I mean, imagine never being able to talk about all the pre-marriage things you need to talk about privately, and never knowing what your spouse is actually like when no one else is watching.

 

 

[JingerSnaps]

22 hours ago, calimojo said:

Nathan and Ashley are cute together, but I think they are naive in thinking that she can give up the big apple.  She really seems to love New York and all if offers.  She might enjoy the south and the country for a long visit, but I think moving there will be hard for her.  Nathan could consider moving to NYC.  There are cowboys in NYC, in fact famously there is the naked cowboy who sings up and down Times square.  Perhaps Nathan could give that a try to earn some money,  He seems fairly fit!!

I really thought I must be the only one thinking about the NYC naked cowboy that entire episode.  I would have given anything to have a naked cowboy cameo ... see people in NYC wear cowboy boots too!

[jas]

7 hours ago, trustworthy said:

Can Nathan really support a wife?  EMT, some tree pruning ... he's going to have to go out and buy a little house as there can't be a big daddy gift a la JB.  Could he possibly have savings?  He seems so young. Imagine having to support the first girl you were ever allowed to hold hands with, simply because you did hold hands and once you do that you have to get married 'cause otherwise it would be promiscuous or something.

I think the worst part of all is that there can never be a single private conversation prior to marriage.  How can you possibly ... I mean, imagine never being able to talk about all the pre-marriage things you need to talk about privately, and never knowing what your spouse is actually like when no one else is watching.

 

 

There is also the disadvantage of never seeing their future spouse on a bad day. I am a big believer in living together before making a commitment, as it gives an insight into how the couple relate to each other when they are not at their best. When one or both are tired, stressed, ill etc. I can't imagine getting married without that knowledge, what a huge gamble.

[SilverBeach]

On 4/11/2016 at 11:31 PM, Diana said:

Im sorry, with US american i wanted to mean they arent latinos but i wasnt sure how to call them, i should have used Anglo-Saxon since they are english speakers and is the equivalent of latino, but i guess i just have this spanish way of thinking where we identify culture and language with nationality, and in the states is actually diferent and more complex, so i apologize if that was not the right word.

Isn't US American kind of redundant? 

[Palimpsest]

27 minutes ago, SilverBeach said:

Isn't US American kind of redundant? 

Apparently not.  US Citizen seems to be the preferred term.

This is all more complicated than I knew. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_(word) 

[HereticHick]

35 minutes ago, SilverBeach said:

Isn't US American kind of redundant? 

Not really. The Americas  are 2 whole continents full of countries. And we aren't the only "US"---our southern neighbor is Estados Unidos de Mexico.

[VelociRapture]

Personally, I refer to myself as an American. If I travel internationally I'll bounce between American and U.S. citizen. The culture I refer to as American as well. But I refer to the nation as the U.S. or The States, not America (even when I'm not traveling internationally.)

I really don't know of a better alternative term for a citizen or our culture here though. Staters sounds awkward to me. And I seriously doubt we'd be able to get people to adopt a term used in another language - because English and Freedom or something. People can be really stubborn about this stuff.

I do get why people in other countries - especially Latin America - get pissed off about the usage. It does seem a bit elitist or presumptuous. But I also don't think there are good alternatives (that I've heard of at least.) You can call someone from Brazil a Brazilian or a person from Canada a Canadian... But what alternative to American is there for a person from the U.S.? 

(And just out of curiosity - is there a reason why people want to be refered to by their continent of origin or residence? Is it because a lot of people are bad at geography and it's just easier to say "I'm Asian" or "African" or "American"? I don't mean to offend, but I've never understood it too well and would appreciate a bit of insight if someone is willing.)

[NotAnIncubator]

9 hours ago, trustworthy said:

Can Nathan really support a wife?  EMT, some tree pruning ... he's going to have to go out and buy a little house as there can't be a big daddy gift a la JB.  Could he possibly have savings?  He seems so young. Imagine having to support the first girl you were ever allowed to hold hands with, simply because you did hold hands and once you do that you have to get married 'cause otherwise it would be promiscuous or something.

I think the worst part of all is that there can never be a single private conversation prior to marriage.  How can you possibly ... I mean, imagine never being able to talk about all the pre-marriage things you need to talk about privately, and never knowing what your spouse is actually like when no one else is watching.

 

 

Years ago either during their 19kac or united bates episodes they talked about struggling and taking loans out from the kids for groceries. In my opinion they deserve to get a big gift.

Does Gil invest in properties like GMa Mary and MB do? If not a house, something of value may help. If Nathan's doing trees helping him set up his own service might be nice or taking over the family business and Gil maybe spend time with the remaining 40 million kids and soon to be 6? 7 grandbabies? Reguardless, those boys worked and invested in the family so its the least they could do. The current unmarried kids are reaping the benefits now. College, cars, girlfriends in NYC. Even in the Bronx NYC is expensive to visit.

[19 cats and counting]

Surely Lawson's lawn business has been taken over by someone (as we all know Lawson's too good to mow lawns and get paid for it).  Did he pass it to Nathan or Trace?  

If Lawson fed a HUGE family on that lawn business, and paid for college on it, it has to be a pretty lucrative business.

[bashfulpixie]

31 minutes ago, 19 cats and counting said:

Surely Lawson's lawn business has been taken over by someone (as we all know Lawson's too good to mow lawns and get paid for it).  Did he pass it to Nathan or Trace?  

If Lawson fed a HUGE family on that lawn business, and paid for college on it, it has to be a pretty lucrative business.

Carlin also made a comment on the last episode about how Lawson is the only one of them with money. I wonder if someone else if he's reached the point where he has other workers or if someone else has kind of taken it over (which seems more likely).

[formergothardite]

11 hours ago, calimojo said:

I have hope that some of those kids will modify their beliefs more than I think the duggar's will.  If one of the Duggars does it  it will be messy, a la Josh.  But I think the bates kids could gradually move away from the tenet

I have always felt the opposite of this. The Bates have only changes superficial things and to give the appearance of being less fundie, at this moment, it seems like they followed the formula and life worked out great. Add in that the children are now minor reality television stars, and I suspect the likelihood of them leaving is going down by the moment. Sure most of them won't be as strict with the rules as they were raised, but I'm not sure that there is a lot of incentive to actually leave the IBLP mindset. 

I'm guessing that with the Duggars, the chances of kids leaving are going up because they have seen it doesn't work. Their life is a hot mess and they have been made to look like freaks. For a lot of people, discovering that the "steps" don't work is a shove into leaving the fundie mindset, while as long as things are going great they don't think to question. 

With the Bates everything is running fairly smoothly. Gil isn't really even getting bad publicity for his participation in covering up abuse, but the Duggars, well life as they knew it has fallen apart. And, IMO, having that happen might be the shove in the direction of leaving.

[HereticHick]

I believe that we have no evidence that the Bates own any other properties than the one the live in (they do have at least  couple acres if I recall correctly, but there don't seem to be any other structures on it). I don't even think all of their married kids are homeowners yet- I thought that Zach and Whit were renting.  And I am not totally sure that Cherin & John n Alyssa own, either.

It is a very different situation than the Duggars, who have a couple of extra houses to stash teen husbands in. Plus there are commercial rental properties, and at least one cell phone tower [what a wonderful stream of totally passive income!! wish I had a cell tower!]

I just don't know how the younger Bates boys (Trace on down) are going to support families without going against the Gothard grain & working for someone else, esp. when the tv show is gone (nothing lasts forever!  we don't even know if the UP channel is financially successful). Tree & lawn businesses can only be stretched so far.

 

[Kelsey]

11 hours ago, trustworthy said:

Can Nathan really support a wife?  EMT, some tree pruning ... he's going to have to go out and buy a little house as there can't be a big daddy gift a la JB.  Could he possibly have savings?  He seems so young. Imagine having to support the first girl you were ever allowed to hold hands with, simply because you did hold hands and once you do that you have to get married 'cause otherwise it would be promiscuous or something.

I think the worst part of all is that there can never be a single private conversation prior to marriage.  How can you possibly ... I mean, imagine never being able to talk about all the pre-marriage things you need to talk about privately, and never knowing what your spouse is actually like when no one else is watching.

 

 

Many EMT's have families. Granted not usually families with 19 kids. The Bates family are okay with renting homes as Zach, Michael, and Erin are all renters. Not sure if Alyssa has ever said if they are renters or owners. I would imagine that renting a house in that area of TN is pretty inexpensive. EMT's are employed on ambulances and also in ERs to help with patient care. It's not a super high paying job though- maybe like $12/hour in that area.

He could have some savings. He is somehow paying (or paid or was gifted) flight lessons. I'm sure he will receive money from doing the show. I cannot imagine being married to the first dude that I had a crush on.

The Bates do allow for private conversation. Kelly has said that the chaperones need to be within eye sight but not ear shot to allow the couples the space to have "private talks".

[Dandruff]

Bet Nathan could also get a job at the metal plant that Zach and Chad have worked at.

[19 cats and counting]

Doesn't Ashley have culinary training?  I guess until a blessing pops out, she can work and bring at least some money into the household.  

I also hope that when they're featured on the TV show (presumably a lot next season) that they get separate paychecks.  Milk that reality show cash while you can.

[sawasdee]

6 minutes ago, 19 cats and counting said:

Doesn't Ashley have culinary training?  I guess until a blessing pops out, she can work and bring at least some money into the household.  

I also hope that when they're featured on the TV show (presumably a lot next season) that they get separate paychecks.  Milk that reality show cash while you can.

Sadly, I think there is probably one 'Bates Family' contract, and that  with a company created around the family. All the adult kids have agreed to this, and any distribution is up to the Financial Officer of the Bates Family LLC - ie, Gil.

[19 cats and counting]

Just now, sawasdee said:

Sadly, I think there is probably one 'Bates Family' contract, and that  with a company created around the family, that all the adult kids have agreed to, and any distribution is up to the Financial Officer of the Bates Family LLC - ie, Gil.

And Ashley's not a Bates (yet) so I hope at least she's paid separately for the show.  

Someone on one of these reality TV shows needs to do an expose on how much people are really paid.  Especially minors.

[sawasdee]

3 minutes ago, 19 cats and counting said:

And Ashley's not a Bates (yet) so I hope at least she's paid separately for the show.  

Someone on one of these reality TV shows needs to do an expose on how much people are really paid.  Especially minors.

YES and YES. And we need some legislation to ensure that as adults minors get some compensation for having their childhoods monetized for their parents' benefit.

[Palimpsest]

11 minutes ago, sawasdee said:

YES and YES. And we need some legislation to ensure that as adults minors get some compensation for having their childhoods monetized for their parents' benefit.

All those Reality TV contracts are highly confidential but some leaks have occurred.  Production Companies do seem to prefer cutting a single check for each family.  

People are working on protecting children on RealityTV and improving legislation but it takes time. 

The problem is that existing Child Labor Laws at the Federal level don't cover children in entertainment sufficiently.  Efforts are being made in many states to tighten up on all this and get "Coogan" type amendments put in place.   Like this one - it passed eventually:

 http://www.repmurt.com/NewsItem.aspx?NewsID=21977 

Also see http://aminorconsideration.org/

Arkansas and Tennessee did not have any legislation covering minor children working in Reality TV the last time I looked.  

[19 cats and counting]

I have family members who work in the entertainment industry (Broadway).  There are strict laws (at least in NY) about kids in entertainment.  This includes number of hours worked, education (tutoring), etc. Most major Broadway parts for kids are often split for this reason.   Because these laws are state to state, I know they vary.  In most states, it does not apply to reality TV kids.

Strict laws about minors in entertainment are the reason many teen characters are played by adults (see Pretty Little Liars)

PA is an exception because of the Gosselins.  Because of the politics of AR and TN, I'm sure the Duggar and Bates kids don't have any laws protecting them.

[sawasdee]

@PalimpsestThanks for those links - but unfortunately, they serve to show the inadequacy of protections even when enshrined in law. The Murt law, in Pennsylvania, says that child performers in reality shows are entitled to have 15% of their earnings deposited in an account until they reach the age of majority. For the Gosselins, (at whom this law was aimed) this means that each child gets, at most, one eighth of 15% - unless I have misunderstood the legislation. It can't be 15% per child, because with 8 children, that would be 120% - so one eighth of 15% - less than 2% per child. By any stretch of the imagination, this is ridiculous - it is the children who make these shows marketable - who would watch hours of Kate Gosselin, or of JB and Dairy Queen? So why should these exploitative parents trouser the majority of the cash their children generate?

Getting incoherent again. Shouldn't post when very angry, or when I've been at the beach drinking beer.