Jill Duggar Dillard Part 8: They Call Him Choo Choo?

[lascuba]

41 minutes ago, Rachel333 said:

Maybe, but there has been research that suggests that people who use a lot of filler words tend to be more conscientious.

http://jls.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/26/0261927X14526993.abstract

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/06/i-mean-its-just-thoughtful-you-know.html

I'm not saying this is or is not the case with Jill, but saying "like" a lot doesn't necessarily indicate poor language ability.

I tend to give a pass on verbal tics like um and like, especially on camera. But one thing I noticed with Jill specifically is that when she's saying some trite, Gothard approved cliche like "we will come out this fire..."she's fine, no tics, speaks clearly.  But as soon as she has to say something that's not a talking point, she flails. The umms and likes aren't the problem, it's all the words in between. She really can't express herself well at all, which is just bizarre considering she was the family cheerleader for years and probably has more experience talking in front of the camera than all her other siblings except Josh. I can believe that she's conscientious,  but she also just not bright.

[EmCatlyn]

2 hours ago, Rachel333 said:

Maybe, but there has been research that suggests that people who use a lot of filler words tend to be more conscientious.

http://jls.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/26/0261927X14526993.abstract

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/06/i-mean-its-just-thoughtful-you-know.html

I'm not saying this is or is not the case with Jill, but saying "like" a lot doesn't necessarily indicate poor language ability.

Thanks for the links.

You are right that just using like isn't always a sign of linguistic poverty.  But in this case I think it is.

"Like," as Jill uses it isn't an ordinary "filler word."  It is usually (from what I have seen) the preface to explaining something incoherently or, at best, inadequately.

The point that women are more likely to use filler words than men--which the abstract makes but the article doesn't pay much attention to--is worth noticing.   The use of many filler words is linked to insecurity about one's status and/or success in communicating-- as does finishing statements with question marks.   Jill, I think, is fairly insecure about her ability to communicate.  She may well be more conscientious also, but I think, "like" is not just an ordinary filler word in her case.

Jill's use of "like" suggests more than that she gropes for the right word or tries to connect with her listener.  She is groping for the concepts that the words she can't find represent.

"It is like..."  or "She was like..." etc. are phrases derived from using comparison to explain (or elaborate).  The dangling "like" usually leaves the expected comparison incomplete.

"We were like . . . You know . . . Sad?"   is an example of someone not being able to find the right words to express her feelings.   I will grant that it may not all be ignorance, but I think in the case of "like," it is.

 Jill doesn't have the words she needs nor does she have the ease and freedom to use the words that are in her limited active vocabulary to express her life and concerns.  She uses "like" to give the impression(to herself as much as anything else) that she is communicating.  

IMHO, a habit of thoughtful reading (of the Bible or anything else) would have made her less dependent on "like."

[HarryPotterFan]

3 hours ago, sockinshoe said:

The guy waltzed into the common area of my dorm building, where my bf and I were sitting on the couch, and asked us if we'd all repented for our sins in time for Easter. We said "ummm what?" And be explained that where he's from, his congregation repents for not standing up for Jesus when he was being tortured and crucified because Jesus only died due to their inaction. I told him I was Jewish and would like to be left out of this discussion, to which he replied "well you're extra-guilty! You voted against saving Jesus!". My boyfriend was not expecting any of this, and doesn't think of me as a violent person, so he had less than a second to pull me into my seat and drag me out of there.

 But if his congregation was there they would have been Jewish, right? So isn't it double his fault? I also wasn't aware Jews had a vote in saving him or not. Huh.

The guy in my class had clearly just seen "The Passion of the Christ" (thanks Mel Gibson, you fucking tool bag). He came to school the next day full of, well, passion for Christ and anger at Jews for killing him. I couldn't argue facts, logic, or reason with this guy. I tried arguing "it was the Romans who crucified him." Nope, it was me. "Well if he hadn't been crucified there would be no Christianity." No, he would have found a way - he would still be alive it weren't for me. Well, fuck then. I simply said Jews don't believe in hell, and the guy said if I'm standing in a street and a truck is coming at me, it doesn't matter if I believe in the truck or not, it will still hit me.

I got so fed up I sarcastically apologized and promised not to do it again.

And then he accepted me apology and dropped he subject. That still astounds me. 

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I *think* she is still taking lessons, but the teacher comes to her home as opposed to Jill going out to attend class.

 

Oh, I thought that was what she was doing all the time.  If the report was that she couldn't keep up with the class work and the baby, I can see that.  I have taught in 5 days a week immersion programs, and they can be grueling.

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

I tend to give a pass on verbal tics like um and like, especially on camera. But one thing I noticed with Jill specifically is that when she's saying some trite, Gothard approved cliche like "we will come out this fire..."she's fine, no tics, speaks clearly.  But as soon as she has to say something that's not a talking point, she flails. The umms and likes aren't the problem, it's all the words in between. She really can't express herself well at all, which is just bizarre considering she was the family cheerleader for years and probably has more experience talking in front of the camera than all her other siblings except Josh. I can believe that she's conscientious,  but she also just not bright.

I don't think it is that she isn't bright. I think it is that she has not been taught to use language to express thoughts, ideas, feelings.  If she had been taught to look at the only well-written text in her surroundings with attention to the language and the way it is used, she might have learned to explain herself more effectively.  But she can only repeat by rote or report things. 

IQ is partly a product of learning, of the stimulation in the environment.  In Jill and some of the other Duggars, the IQ has not had much stimulus.

[EmCatlyn]

3 hours ago, Mercer said:

The level of disrespect Jill is showing to the people of Guatemala with this is mind-boggling to me.

First she and Derrick made a huge show of going to Guatemala claiming to be on a mission of salvation, with no clear goals or plan to help people but just a very self-important attitude that their mere presence will be enough.

Now Jill is saying she doesn't even have time to learn the language of their host country? She's not going to bother to take the basic steps she will need to communicate with the people they are claiming to be "ministering" to?

What was the point of any of this if the "ministry" doesn't even make it onto her priority list?

I realize it's not easy to adjust to life with a new baby, but that's where some better planning would have helped, and some commitment is needed to see it through.

Totally agree about the need for "better planning," but I don't think the whole missionary thing was thought through.  

Someone noted above that the Dillards talk about Central America and don't name the country they are in. I think it is because to them it doesn't matter.  They are in Gustemala now, but before that they were in El Salvador.  Derrick talks about being posted somewhere when their training is completed.  They see themselves as just passing through. They are not where they plan to stay.

I may be wrong, but I suspect Jill may half-regret that they left on their "mission" when they did.  I think one of the reasons she came back so often was that she was homesick.  She could have skipped Amy's wedding just as she skipped Jessa's giving birth.  The filming for TLC aside, she must have found it to be so far away, in a foreign country with a small baby.

I wonder if she really plans to give birth to child #2 in "Central America."  I could see the pregnancy as a good face-saving reason to come home.  Maybe, to protect that hypothetical child and the unfortunate Catholics of "Central America" we could allow the TLC Sponsors to do a special on "Jill Comes Home to Have her VBack in the Hospital"?  (Just kidding, of course.;) )

[Whoosh]

5 hours ago, Mercer said:

I think this may vary within the Episcopal Church. I'm Episcopalian too, and I was taught that confession is not required but is available if it will help you feel better. It does not affect whether or not you get into heaven, but if you want to basically get it off your chest to someone, or if you feel bad about what you did but don't quite know where to start on repentance, confession to your priest was presented as a good option.

Thanks for saying this.  This is something that really interests me and I always wonder about - what parts of my knowledge of various religions (including the one I was raised in) are true of the faith of a whole vs true of some but not others in the faith vs true of the particular person that taught me about the faith vs just stuff I made up in my head.  While we were members of the Episcopalian Church in my smallish town, we went to the Episcopalian Church in the next town over at least a few times a year (my aunt, uncle and cousins belonged to the church).  I also attended Catholic mass on a very infrequent basis with friends, etc.  I totally recall noticing that some things were done somewhat differently in my cousin's church and I specifically remember thinking that her Church seemed "more Catholic" to me in comparison with our own church.  That whole thought process seems pretty funny to me now that I have greater awareness and perspective and can somewhat place Episcopalians and other types of Protestant Churches on some kind of continuum from most similar to Catholicism to least similar.  On the other hand, people in their church made the sign of the cross and people in my church didn't.  I always got nervous about that in their church, as I never remembered which direction to cross myself in - and in my head that seemed to be really, really important.

[Imagine20]

In Christianity, didn't Jesus have to die to save sinners and conquer Satan?   It was the main reason he was sent here.  He knew it based upon his speech at the last supper where he gave instructions on communion and his prayer at Gethsemane, although being part of the trinity he would've always known.  That's why I don't get the blaming of Jews for a predestined occurrence. They were never going to vote to free Jesus over Barrabas because it was part of what needed to happen. 

[sockinshoe]

In Christianity, didn't Jesus have to die to save sinners and conquer Satan?   It was the main reason he was sent here.  He knew it based upon his speech at the last supper where he gave instructions on communion and his prayer at Gethsemane, although being part of the trinity he would've always known.  That's why I don't get the blaming of Jews for a predestined occurrence. They were never going to vote to free Jesus over Barrabas because it was part of what needed to happen. 

You're absolutely right. The whole point of Jesus is that he is wholly man and wholly God. What makes him distinct from God is that, as a man, he can suffer and die. It was necessary that he die in order to intercede on behalf of human souls. Because time is a creature to God, Jesus is always on the cross and always suffering. He does this to absolve humans of SIN and to suffer in their place. (I just finished rereading Martin Luther's polemics and Dante's Commedia, so I am up on my theology)

However none of this is good enough for the anti-semites of the world who take it very personally that the people didn't love Jesus enough to free him. Never mind the facts. Never mind that it's been literally 2 000 years.

[Dutchie]

As an atheïst, I find it kind of funny how a lot of people (so not everybody) who are replying. Are sounding kind of condescending. Mainly in regards to the catolic church. I'm 34 and wasn't raised in any religion, and my grand parents left the protestant church before raising their kids. So I don't feel a connection to any church or know a lot about it. Nor do I know almost anyone who is religious.

PS I have had religious education in highschool which was of all religious (equal amount of attention to jews, christians, hindu's, boedhistsz

[Marissap]

8 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

Oh, I thought that was what she was doing all the time.  If the report was that she couldn't keep up with the class work and the baby, I can see that.  I have taught in 5 days a week immersion programs, and they can be grueling.

She's probably pregnant so she Can't do all this at once . Ugh. 

[ksgranola1]

Quote

 

The habit of using "like" in speech is one to be broken early. Recently, the contentious Judge Judy had a teen in her court and he could not make his case w/o the continuous use of the word, 'like.' He was struck dumb, struggling to string together words. She turned to his parents & shouted, "Nice job teaching your son language, parents!" Embarrassing. JB&M of course claim no ownership of this oversight.

 

[OnceUponATime]

16 hours ago, Timetostoplurking said:

I think the whole point is.....you don't have to agree, disagree or understand all the fine points/dogma of the Catholic faith to recognize that it is a legitimate Christian denomination.  (It has been around for a couple of millennium after all.). The fact that other denominations don't think RC is "Christian" really annoys me!  Who's that hanging on the cross then??

So just to blow your mind: I'm currently living in a country when where they refer to 'Christian' they mean Catholic. If they aren't meaning Catholics they say protestant. I have yet to hear a moment when it is clear that they are meaning all Christians. It took me a while to get used to that. Especially when a lecturer was talking about Christians/Christianity and everything he said was quite the opposite of any christian activity I knew growing up.

 

11 hours ago, AlysonRR said:

I see it more in the young - my 13-yo daughter does it, as do most of her friends. "Like" is the linguistic "um" for the teen generation.

That is how I understood it, although my understanding is 'like' became um through MTV/TV/socializing at school. How did the Duggars ever manage to pick up saying 'like' all the time?

 

17 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Is this a thing?  Kind of like a magic 8 ball?

pointing at a verse and it being "exactly what God was wanting to teach you at the time": yes it exists! There are even people who claim that God miraculously puts certain scriptures on particular days in their devotional because He knew exactly what they would be dealing with that day. I have heard many a sermon/message preached about how the speaker/pastor was struggling to come up with a theme/passage and prayed. They opened their Bible and miraculously their eyes fell on the passage that they talked about that week. I now think it is really weird - but growing up found it so normal :/
 

16 hours ago, EmmieJ said:

Thanks for adding some clarification, although I am still puzzled overall.  Why would confessing sins be looked down upon, or is it the confessing to a priest who then dispenses forgiveness on behalf of God?  Is that the problem - the use of a middle man?  Same question re penance?  Is the act of doing penance looked down upon, or is it that the priest tells the parishioner what penance to do?

All the legalities about religion and how one should practice it "correctly" play a large role in why I have no interest in any organized religion.  It all seems so petty in the end. 

Yeah, what the person said on the earlier page. How 'bad' people find those aspects is very variable I have heard everything from 'Catholic priest are sinning by taking confession' (which I don't understand but it probably steams from priests 'putting themselves in God's shoes) to 'going to confession may make you less likely to go directly to God, so it shouldn't be done least you never go directly to God again'.

About penance - it depends and I'm not sure what the mainstream reasoning is. I know that my mother finds it wrong because 'you can't fix your sins by doing anything a priest says' and 'God forgives you, you don't need to do anything for it'. I have no idea if that would make any sense to a Catholic though.
I grew up with a mother spouting Catholic-hate and never understood it and found it weird. I tried to censor her in my head because it was so annoying/damaging. That's the same mother who told me I should leave my job because I had colleagues who are homosexual. She is a lot weird and I try to keep my distance as much as possible.

I agree about the legalities. When I was extracting myself from the religious mess I grew up in, I deliberately chose melting-pot churches/non-denominational ones because I hoped they would be the least regulated. It was nice having a place at that time where there was no right or wrong way of Christianity.

[Playagirl]

12 hours ago, AlysonRR said:

I see it more in the young - my 13-yo daughter does it, as do most of her friends. "Like" is the linguistic "um" for the teen generation.

This. I see it a lot in younger folks, and by younger I mean under 30. I work with mostly university-educated people from mid 20s to late 50s and the younger ones can't seem to express a thought without throwing in at least a couple of 'likes.' This isn't meant to be a criticism, just an observation. Maybe it's just a 'thing,' kind of like the use of 'eh' by Canadians (I'm Canadian and use that one far too much). Something else I've noticed lately is beginning sentences with the word 'so' especially when offering an explanation for something. 

[Taters]

19 hours ago, OnceUponATime said:

 

Onto another question for the Catholics amongst us: is the pope well received or is he causing tension within/between the Catholic churches? I'm asking because when listening to what he's been saying in the last year or two I've been very surprised/shocked at things he has said. It sounds so far removed from everything I've ever heard about Catholicism. (I know that my perception will be a bit screwed up, but I was wondering how much)
 

 

Francis is much more popular in the mainstream than Benedict. To paint the situation with a very - very - broad brush, I'd say that he's well received by left-wing/mainstream Catholics and displeasing the more traditional ones. But I don't think he is as polarising as Benedict.

[Taters]

4 hours ago, Dutchie said:

As an atheïst, I find it kind of funny how a lot of people (so not everybody) who are replying. Are sounding kind of condescending. Mainly in regards to the catolic church.  

Towards the Catholic Church or coming from Catholics?

[Mercer]

7 hours ago, Whoosh said:

Thanks for saying this.  This is something that really interests me and I always wonder about - what parts of my knowledge of various religions (including the one I was raised in) are true of the faith of a whole vs true of some but not others in the faith vs true of the particular person that taught me about the faith vs just stuff I made up in my head.  While we were members of the Episcopalian Church in my smallish town, we went to the Episcopalian Church in the next town over at least a few times a year (my aunt, uncle and cousins belonged to the church).  I also attended Catholic mass on a very infrequent basis with friends, etc.  I totally recall noticing that some things were done somewhat differently in my cousin's church and I specifically remember thinking that her Church seemed "more Catholic" to me in comparison with our own church.  That whole thought process seems pretty funny to me now that I have greater awareness and perspective and can somewhat place Episcopalians and other types of Protestant Churches on some kind of continuum from most similar to Catholicism to least similar.  On the other hand, people in their church made the sign of the cross and people in my church didn't.  I always got nervous about that in their church, as I never remembered which direction to cross myself in - and in my head that seemed to be really, really important.

Yeah, it's really interesting to see the differences! It has been my experience that there is a pretty wide spectrum of belief in the Episcopal Church. I have generally attended Episcopal churches that are more Catholic-leaning in their ritual and sacraments (although much more socially liberal,) but those things are definitely not universal.

It has also been my experience that Episcopalians are by and large pretty good at agreeing to disagree, though. Aside from some basic points of doctrine, individual churches and members are pretty free to interpret church tradition as they wish.

[Dutchie]

35 minutes ago, Taters said:

Towards the Catholic Church or coming from Catholics?

Towards the Catholic Church.

As previously said, to me Christianity is kind of everybody who takes the bible to be the truth.

As I always understood it you first had the Catholic Church (or several during the dual papacy) and all other religions are kind of their offspring what to me kind of sounds like kids rebelling towards their parents.

Once again, my look is that of an outsider reading the discussions.

Not affiliated with any church

[sawasdee]

23 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Yeah, it's really interesting to see the differences! It has been my experience that there is a pretty wide spectrum of belief in the Episcopal Church. I have generally attended Episcopal churches that are more Catholic-leaning in their ritual and sacraments (although much more socially liberal,) but those things are definitely not universal.

It has also been my experience that Episcopalians are by and large pretty good at agreeing to disagree, though. Aside from some basic points of doctrine, individual churches and members are pretty free to interpret church tradition as they wish.

As an outsider, (RC), we referred to High and Low Church Anglicans (very similar/same as Episcopalians in the US) and felt High was very close to us! I remember going to a High Anglican service as a child, and the only differences I noticed was Our Father was 'which' art in Heaven, instead of 'who', and the bit about the 'power and the glory' which RC didn't say then.*. I was only 7, so may have missed some other differences..

*I was taught that this addendum to the Lord's Prayer was the work of a medieval copyist, and not a part of the original prayer in the gospels - are there any biblical scholars here who can tell me if that is correct?

[paulypepper]

Not sure what is wrong with me, but saw something earlier down the thread about Communion and I remembered those horrible wafers that were like paper and melted in your mouth, then I got off track and found they sell them on Amazon..even gluten free...then I'm thinking how does that work do you give some regular wafers and know who the gluten free parishioners are?

[Mercer]

6 minutes ago, paulypepper said:

Not sure what is wrong with me, but saw something earlier down the thread about Communion and I remembered those horrible wafers that were like paper and melted in your mouth, then I got off track and found they sell them on Amazon..even gluten free...then I'm thinking how does that work do you give some regular wafers and know who the gluten free parishioners are?

My guess is if you knew that was a special need in your congregation, you would just serve gluten-free wafers to everyone. It wouldn't hurt anybody.

[Bad Wolf]

We have a way of indicating if we want wine or grape juice, so I guess you could do the same for gluten free. Although if people dip the bread, it wouldn't help those who are really sensitive. We have a communal cup. Mr. Wolf is a dipper, and I'm a sipper. So far I haven't contracted any weird diseases.

[socalrules]

24 minutes ago, paulypepper said:

Not sure what is wrong with me, but saw something earlier down the thread about Communion and I remembered those horrible wafers that were like paper and melted in your mouth, then I got off track and found they sell them on Amazon..even gluten free...then I'm thinking how does that work do you give some regular wafers and know who the gluten free parishioners are?

What they do at my church is ask that those that need a gluten free wafer to let one of the hospitality members know 15 minutes before mass and we will get them one. If they ask after mass we will get as well. They have already been blessed. 

[EmCatlyn]

7 hours ago, Marissap said:

She's probably pregnant so she Can't do all this at once . Ugh. 

Well, if she is at least taking private lessons it is not so bad.  I don't think they should be in Central America at all, but if they are there she should make an effort to learn the language.  Private tutoring is best for someone like her because she has such a poor educational background.  

I am never going to snark at women who can't carry on normally active lives while pregnant.  My own pregnancies were very difficult and exhausting.  We are all different.

[EmCatlyn]

11 hours ago, Whoosh said:

Thanks for saying this.  This is something that really interests me and I always wonder about - what parts of my knowledge of various religions (including the one I was raised in) are true of the faith of a whole vs true of some but not others in the faith vs true of the particular person that taught me about the faith vs just stuff I made up in my head.  While we were members of the Episcopalian Church in my smallish town, we went to the Episcopalian Church in the next town over at least a few times a year (my aunt, uncle and cousins belonged to the church).  I also attended Catholic mass on a very infrequent basis with friends, etc.  I totally recall noticing that some things were done somewhat differently in my cousin's church and I specifically remember thinking that her Church seemed "more Catholic" to me in comparison with our own church.  That whole thought process seems pretty funny to me now that I have greater awareness and perspective and can somewhat place Episcopalians and other types of Protestant Churches on some kind of continuum from most similar to Catholicism to least similar.  On the other hand, people in their church made the sign of the cross and people in my church didn't.  I always got nervous about that in their church, as I never remembered which direction to cross myself in - and in my head that seemed to be really, really important.

The Sign of the Cross in the Western Church is top-down-left-right.  The Eastern Church (Greek Orthodox, etc.) goes right-left.  If you remember that you write from left to write, it sometimes helps.  As a lefty I had to work at making the sign with the correct hand.  

In the Anglican-Episcopal tradition, "High Church" refers to most like Roman Catholic (in therms of ritual) and "Low Church" refers to least like Roman Catholic (in ritual) with the middle held by "Broad Church."  It is important to think about these labels as referring to ritual. There is often little correlation between high/low and liberal/conservative on social issues because you can be "conservative" about either high or low church practices.   My limited experience is that the "Broad" church tends to be the most liberal socially, but I may be wrong.

As far as crossing oneself goes, I was taught during my adult religious education before my official acceptance into the Episcopal Church that, like confession, it is entirely optional foe Episcopalians.

So far, I find the congregation we are part of very reasonable and tolerant.  As a former RC, I find it easier to cross myself than not, but I don't care if others around me don't.  Confession, on the other hand, is something I can happily leave behind.