Joshley Madison Pt 4: That Pig She Calls Her Husband

[jqlgoblue]

The good thing is that not having a job doesn't mean he won't be sued and found liable for child support. He is not unable to work in any way, he has no excuse for not having a job (I do realize he was fired and it takes time to find a new position). Anna could sue him for child support. Plus, she has a big family, with members who have already said they would help her. And she is not unable to work either. If she lives with a family member with children, they may be able to help care for her children too while she works. But that would all take a little bit of enlightenment and leaving behind the brainwashing crap from ATI. People work at McDonald's, Walmart, and tons of local businesses. Josh and Anna are no worse off educationally than tons of people that have productive lives and jobs.

I was responding more to people saying she wouldn't leave. Yes, it's great her brother is supportive but if that isn't enough to make her go then Josh leaving is the only thing that will divorce her from him. She is too "good" to leave and he has zero value for her. He should man up and leave, especially if he thinks Gothardism is bananas as others have said his behavior indicates. (I actually think that is far from the truth... He has probably seen lots of men do this and be forgiven... Why not him too).

[tcach]

This is what I've been thinking! Part of me wants to go investigate some of the other sites to look around for matching profiles, but honestly I don't have the stomach for it. I really wouldn't be surprised if he had other accounts, usernames, emails, etc.

I wouldn't worry to much, I'm sure InTouch and the others are working on it right now. Especially InTouch - they probably want a trifecta.

[Beermeet]

Google "their is no victim" a review of iblp on Recovering Grace.

That just answered all my questions as to why the Duggars are so bizarre. Their example is gross. The worst of the worst and it's pretty much OK.

This whole cult needs to be locked up.

[Cleopatra7]

I have wondered the same thing about how many women he slept with. I also think it was several one night stands.

On the topic of the profile pics not matching Josh, I wondering if he somehow got called out by at least one woman. Josh was catfishing a bit. He was risking quite a bit by using pics of other men. Let's say that the AM hack never happened, there was always the chance that Josh could have been exposed because someone could have found out about him using other people's pics for profiles.

I also read awhile ago, that Matthew McCarthy is threatening to sue to Josh for defamation because of the OKcupid profile. I don't know if a lawsuit will go anywhere or if Matthew has a good chance of getting something from Josh. But I think it's good that Josh will have to somehow answer for using another man's image for bad purposes.

I'm actually surprised that more people aren't sued or convicted for identity fraud for stealing other people's pics to use in catfishing schemes. I guess something like this would be hard to prove, and there might not even be laws that really address catfishing, but as the guy whose image Josh stole can attest, it can be very damaging to be wrongly associated with a scandal, scam, online bullying, or acts of Muchausen by Internet.

[ElderPrice]

That is never explained in Leviticus. Girls have more cooties than boys is what I took away from it. :angry-banghead:

ETA: Leviticus just states that a woman is unclean for X number of days after a boy and X after a girl. It also says when she is allowed to go to the temple to give her "sin offering". It makes my blood boil reading it. What is her "sin" if she is married and has a baby?

It's because a baby girl will grow up and carry a son herself. So the time is doubled.

[punkiepie]

I couldn't see them encouraging Jill/Jessa to leave BUT I could definitely see JB pressuring Ben/Derrick to leave if they were to do this to one of his daughters.

Don't the wives get a free pass or something if the husband leaves them? And that way his daughters would technically still be the perfectly pure little princesses they've always been.

I posted this on the duggar pastor thread, but to answer your question, no- women never, ever get a free pass. Yes, if their husband commits adultery, they have a free pass for a divorce, but not for remarriage.

In the Fundie biblical universe men can get remarried if their wife commits adultery, but a woman can't get remarried if her husband commits adultery. (Otherwise the new marriage is viewed as an adulterous one; only death can end a woman's marriage.) And to get technical with you about the definition of adultery- a married man does not commit adultery if the woman he screws isn't married- only if that woman is married. But, a married woman, regardless of whether or not the man she screws is married- commits adultery either way. Two umarried heathens doing it well are only fornicators!

I'm not shitting you guys!! These are actual fundie biblical truths that have some rather obscure validity per the Letters of Paul.

[DuggaredOut]

I thought it was just that two vaginas= double the time of uncleanness.

As far as I understand from many years of Bible study (raised fundie lite, now unaffiliated but more like mainline Protestant in my beliefs), any spilling of bodily fluid--blood, ejaculate, pus from a rash, whatever--was seen as "unclean." And, actually, for people who didn't have modern medical care, taking extra precautions to wash yourself and avoid exposure to other people's bodily fluids was really not a bad idea. At the end of the "unclean" period, there was a purification sacrifice to mark that it was over. I'm not completely sure why the birth of a girl required a longer waiting period than the birth of a boy, but I suspect it had something to do with the symbolic nature of the blood that women shed. All bodily fluids were imbued with a powerful mystical significance representing the life force, but this was especially true of blood. Any spilling of human blood, even unintentionally, had to be atoned for.

That's my best understanding of it from the reading I've done. And I agree that the use of the word "sin" and the inequality of it irks me, too, despite my beliefs. But perhaps some of that strong language was used because the people back then needed the, er, fear of God in them to really be careful about hygiene. These kinds of laws didn't just apply to women but to anyone with any kind of bodily discharge, pus from sores or rashes, even ejaculate. Of course, in today's world they're not necessary, and I think it's interesting that the only laws the ATI/IBLP/Quiverfull people have carried over are the ones pertaining to women. So Mechelle is essentially "unclean" during her period and for months after giving birth, but do you think DimBoob is "unclean" like an ancient Jew for a whole day every time he ejaculates? He'd be unclean 24/7! Funny how that works.

[DeFrauder]

It would be 80 days because of the female birth. JD's 40 days would be included in those 80.

This nonsense is from Leviticus, I believe.

If Michelle is REALLY doing this---and I highly doubt that they are. Its either rumor or misinterpretation of what they are doing and the reason behind it---then they are not being "orthodox" in their practice.

Perhaps M and JB like to play "Moses and the forbidden secrets of the red tent" or some bullshit, but waiting a specific number of days based on sex of the baby is not a Christian practice. I read some quoted quote of Michelle on a baby forum somewhere, where she says this is what works for her marriage. That would mean it is some little thing they do for their own kicks.

Neither is it a Christian practice to force women into having sex on a certain day. Any church (and I mean across the vast majority of denominations) would consider a doctrine that calls for forcing a woman into having sex to be heretical.

And as for waiting for sex after childbirth? Sometimes 80 days would not be enough! Never mind 40. It certainly is a safe minimum, however.

[punkiepie]

(Trim)

That's my best understanding of it from the reading I've done. And I agree that the use of the word "sin" and the inequality of it irks me, too, despite my beliefs. But perhaps some of that strong language was used because the people back then needed the, er, fear of God in them to really be careful about hygiene. These kinds of laws didn't just apply to women but to anyone with any kind of bodily discharge, pus from sores or rashes, even ejaculate. Of course, in today's world they're not necessary, and I think it's interesting that the only laws the ATI/IBLP/Quiverfull people have carried over are the ones pertaining to women. So Mechelle is essentially "unclean" during her period and for months after giving birth, but do you think DimBoob is "unclean" like an ancient Jew for a whole day every time he ejaculates? He'd be unclean 24/7! Funny how that works.

You are correct- that's why lepers were viewed as unclean- regardless of being male or female. They were "in sin" that's why they had they were cursed with the affliction and anyone who touched them was viewed In the same way until they had a ritual cleansing.

[DuggaredOut]

I'm actually surprised that more people aren't sued or convicted for identity fraud for stealing other people's pics to use in catfishing schemes. I guess something like this would be hard to prove, and there might not even be laws that really address catfishing, but as the guy whose image Josh stole can attest, it can be very damaging to be wrongly associated with a scandal, scam, online bullying, or acts of Muchausen by Internet.

This is one of the fundamental problems with the Wild West Web right now. There aren't enough protections against cyber crime for people whose images are used for any reason without their permission, whether that's for identity theft, porn, or "just" catfishing. There are also too few laws governing online interaction in general, and people who are stalked, harassed, and threatened online often can't get any help from law enforcement.

[Curious]

I have been reading and lurking on FJ for 2 years. I never felt I had any thing to contribute to the community until the questions I posed.

Oh OH! This just makes it all that much better. I didn't see the first post, just a quote. Now, I actually see that not only did you jump someone's shit, DeFrauder, but you jump a freaking FIRST TIME POSTER.

The very thing you have been endlessly harping against, you do yourself? I don't want to EVER see you say a freaking word again about "veterans vs newbs." I am absolutely serious!

Notice what happens if you lurk and read? You actually know things like pesky facts about the people you are posting about.

OMG, I'm SO angry right now that you jumped a first time poster!

Welcome theilnana!

Have a ferret :)

[DuggaredOut]

If Michelle is REALLY doing this---and I highly doubt that they are. Its either rumor or misinterpretation of what they are doing and the reason behind it---then they are not being "orthodox" in their practice.

This is what Michelle herself said they were doing. Someone quoted her upthread. She was very clear about it. And of course they're not Orthodox in their practices. They pick and choose what they want to practice.

Perhaps M and JB like to play "Moses and the forbidden secrets of the red tent" or some bullshit, but waiting a specific number of days based on sex of the baby is not a Christian practice.

Right, it's not a mainstream Christian practice. It's an Old Testament practice, which some Christian cults, including the Duggars, have adopted.

Neither is it a Christian practice to force women into having sex on a certain day. Any church (and I mean across the vast majority of denominations) would consider a doctrine that calls for forcing a woman into having sex to be heretical.

Again, you're right that it's not a mainstream Christian practice. But I think everyone here knows that the Duggars are not mainstream Christians.

[LovelyLuna]

So, does this mean that she'll be pressured to have sex on October 7th? Will she be a bad helpmate if she refuses him in October? Will she be told that she has to sleep with with him as part of her forgiveness process? Will the people around her tell her that Joshy has been under so much stress and that sex would be healing for him and that as a good forgiving wife she as to submit?

I think I will celebrate my birthday a day early this year. thinking about what J&A may or may not be doing and why has ruined it for me this year. :ew:

[Curious]

I always believed that People magazine and the other gossip mags read FJ. Now I know it. We had the Daniel Keller stuff way before them. They even did the screen grabs just like on this forum.

http://www.people.com/article/anna-dugg ... n-facebook

They should give credit where credit is due.

We had this info yesterday. Radar Online put up a "Breaking" story about it today. I called them on it on twitter for not giving us credit as a source.

Most places that follow us do give us some kind of credit these days.

[unforgiving]

Wow. Thanks for the explanation. These people are seriously.....WTF?!?!

[HeLaidItOnMyHeart]

If Michelle is REALLY doing this---and I highly doubt that they are. Its either rumor or misinterpretation of what they are doing and the reason behind it---then they are not being "orthodox" in their practice.

Perhaps M and JB like to play "Moses and the forbidden secrets of the red tent" or some bullshit, but waiting a specific number of days based on sex of the baby is not a Christian practice. I read some quoted quote of Michelle on a baby forum somewhere, where she says this is what works for her marriage. That would mean it is some little thing they do for their own kicks.

Neither is it a Christian practice to force women into having sex on a certain day. Any church (and I mean across the vast majority of denominations) would consider a doctrine that calls for forcing a woman into having sex to be heretical.

And as for waiting for sex after childbirth? Sometimes 80 days would not be enough! Never mind 40. It certainly is a safe minimum, however.

I've had a bad day, but this comment just made me spat tea on my computer as I laughed. Thank you! Haha, oh Lord. :lol:

[HarryPotterFan]

The more I learn about the Duggars and their cult the sadder my poor little feminist heart gets.

[DeFrauder]

Here you go:from The Duggars: 20 and Counting

Q: Do you use any birth control method at all, including abstinence or the “rhythm†method?

A: An interesting thing happens when you have seventeen-going-on-eighteen children. Completely strangers start asking you about your birth control practices! It’s okay! By now, we’re used to it. Here’s what we can tell you: In addition to living by the principles in the New Testament, we have learned that some Old Testament practices, including recommended times of sexual abstinence, are still helpful today. For example, one such teaching tells couples to abstain from sex for seven specific days during a woman’s menstrual cycle. Another passage says to abstain for forty days after the birth of a boy and eighty days after the birth of a girl. These teachings are no law for New Testament Christians; but we’ve found them to be a healthy practice, both for our bodies and for our relationship. I (Michelle) feel cherished, knowing that Jim Bob is following these guidelines simply because he wants to do what’s best for me and for our marriage. Plus, after we take these pauses in our sexual life, our coming back together is always a very special time.

Ahah!

Thank you for posting this.

Notice she says:

These teachings are no law for New Testament Christians; but we’ve found them to be a healthy practice, both for our bodies and for our relationship.

She is stating that it is not a Christian practice---but RATHER, that she lets advice from the old testament guide her choices about when to abstain from sex. She is correct that SOME of the old testament practices are healthy.

She is also not saying anything about the importance of length of days or how many days abstention is appropriate depending on the sex of the baby. She is simply referring to some scripture. I doubt that she is literally waiting exactly 80 days after a baby girl.

As dumb and uneducated as Michelle is--I give her a pass on relying on the old testament for health advice---simply because she is dumb and uneducated and the only knowledge available to her are religious materials.

The facts are that bronze age health guidelines had a functional purpose. Having a rest from coitus after giving birth is healthy because the mother's tender bits are tender. Refraining from coitus during menstruation is desired by many women because their bits are tender during that time. Such rules were to the benefit of women even though the religious reasoning behind them is ridiculous.

Religion was the only science they had back then and they came up with crazy ideas about things.

Then there is this:

I (Michelle) feel cherished, knowing that Jim Bob is following these guidelines simply because he wants to do what’s best for me and for our marriage.

JB is following these abstention rules because he cares for her and wants her to be comfortable and feel good about sex---not because of some shit they read in the Old Testament.

Remember that she was giving answers about her birth control method too---I am going with the tender bits reasoning for waiting for a couple of months for resuming coitus. The wait period also ensures that she doesn't get pregnant 2 weeks after giving birth. Another thing that functions to protect her health.

So, suggesting that the Duggars have a firm rule about 40 days for boys and 80 days for girls is a bit stretchy. She didn't actually say that. She said they have an abstinence period.

[lizbeth]

Aside from the spouses and children impacted, the only people I feel sorry for with regard to the AM hack are the people who made accounts out of curiosity or some other purpose but are truly innocent. I honestly can't remember, but I'm pretty sure I made an (unpaid) account back around 2009 when I heard about the site on The View. I never had any intention of using it for its intended purpose, but I was simply curious about what the inside of the site looked like. My email address doesn't come up when searching the data, and I have no one to answer to regardless as a never-married, perpetually single person. But it made me think about how easy it would be for someone innocent to get caught up in the mess.

Other than that, I know it might sound cold-hearted to many, but if some scumbag commits suicide because he got caught cheating on his wife, I have very little sympathy.

[Fascinated]

The Toronto police are looking into two suicides that they suspect are a result of the AM hack.

[DeFrauder]

Why is there such a time discrepancy between times of abstinence, dependent upon whether it's a boy or girl?

The time discrepancy has to do with what the ancient Hebrews believed about sex/gender.

It is my opinion that only ultra Orthodox Jews and possibly groups like the Noahites would follow the number of the days exactly. It is not a Baptist doctrine to do so.

I would suggest that Michelle, when she mentioned the passage in Leviticus about waiting 40 and 80 days was merely saying---see the bible supports the idea that we should abstain from sex for a period after childbirth just like the doctors tell us now.

[lilwriter85]

I'm actually surprised that more people aren't sued or convicted for identity fraud for stealing other people's pics to use in catfishing schemes. I guess something like this would be hard to prove, and there might not even be laws that really address catfishing, but as the guy whose image Josh stole can attest, it can be very damaging to be wrongly associated with a scandal, scam, online bullying, or acts of Muchausen by Internet.

I also think it will be hard to prove and like I said before, I don't know if a lawsuit will go anywhere. At the least, Josh's lawyers are monitoring news articles about the scandal and they might already know about Matthew's threat to sue. They would have to tell Josh and maybe that would make Josh feel bad for using Matthew's picture.

[lascuba]

Death/suicide is an appropriate punishment for cheating? How positively Old Testament!

I'm pretty contemptuous of cheaters overall but a)there ARE people who are in legitimately open marriages, or who are caring for an ill spouse who can't have sex, or a whole lot of other things that make the issue of cheating a hell of a lot more complicated, b)even if they're just straight up cheating assholes who cheat because they want as many women as they can get, they don't deserve to die, and c)unless we're talking about political figures, doxing is never okay, ever (thought I'm majorly side-eyeing people mad at the AM hack when they have zero issues with the way women in all corners of social media get doxxed all the time, though that's a rant for another day).

[DeFrauder]

Oh OH! This just makes it all that much better. I didn't see the first post, just a quote. Now, I actually see that not only did you jump someone's shit, DeFrauder, but you jump a freaking FIRST TIME POSTER.

The very thing you have been endlessly harping against, you do yourself? I don't want to EVER see you say a freaking word again about "veterans vs newbs." I am absolutely serious!

Notice what happens if you lurk and read? You actually know things like pesky facts about the people you are posting about.

OMG, I'm SO angry right now that you jumped a first time poster!

Welcome theilnana!

Have a ferret :)

[attachment=0]welcome-ferret.jpg[/attachment]

Ahem--I did not jump her. I asked where she learned this information. There was no jumping involved.

[punkiepie]

We had this info yesterday. Radar Online put up a "Breaking" story about it today. I called them on it on twitter for not giving us credit as a source.

Most places that follow us do give us some kind of credit these days.

So here's my question- when and when not, do we bring outside attention to inside of FJ? I would shout us from the rooftops if I thought it would have a positive outcome for us a message board and culture. I have no doubt that we are beneficial to current Fundies on the fringe of leaving and former fundies, like myself, looking for a safe haven to sort through the many atrocities they've dealt with. But, as crazy/beautiful/wrong as this sounds- i kinda feel about fj like the all american rejects song- song with me now!! "I'll keep you my dirty little secret..."

And it's not because I'm ashamed, but because I'm always afraid to bring unwanted and unnecessary attention to us. As much as we love our flounces, I know I feel a lot more worried about Emily and dna's kids now that we basically know next to nothing about what's going on with then since she left the blogiverse. However, I am, fully, 100% onboard with bringing the Duggars down in the hopes that those kids have a fighting chance at a normal life. I guess I kind of saw us as the silent Rahm Emmanuel to Obama, haha!

But, I'm super, ridiculously proud of the FJ commentary and the thoughtful, compassionate, investigative, snarky, intelligent, and insightful dialogue we generate. And I will definitely be more open about our group if that's goal.

I guess my current reason for asking this question is that we always see a huge influx of new members with any kind of religious scandal- some are great and give us very well thought out opinions; and others..., not so much. Which is why I feel like I always become even more secretive of us during those scandalous times- not that I want to hide us, but because I feel protective. So I'd love to know what kind of publicity, we, regular longtime members, can and should generate for our venerable group?!