Hypocrite of the year award Goes to...

[AngelGirl8811]

Let me get this straight. Josh molests his sisters, and his parents send him to a child - molesting cop; Jill wants to be a midwife, and is sent to apprentice under a woman who had her license revoked for negligence. Jim Bob gets into politics, telling himself it's God's will, and his political career is an abysmal failure.

Sounds like all that wisdom he prayed for has really come through!

Mmm hmmm. God has listened to FJ.  

[foreign fundie]

I've thought it over a bit. Imagine a cop sees a lot of violence. He wants his son to grow up a decent man. So he does not allow toy guns or violent video games while growing up. However his son ends up in jail for armed robbery. Would the dad be crazy to hold on to his belief it was right to raise his son like that or advice others to do the same? 

Second example. A staff member of a rehab center decides to ban all alcohol from his house while his kids grow up. However his son becomes an alcoholic. Does that mean that he was wrong not to drink in front of his kids? And if he lobbies for age restrictions in alcohol, does that make him a hypocrite?

So I think, though JB may be a terrible dad for many reasons, removing sexual temptation from the home may not be a bad idea. It obviously was not sufficient to hold back Josh, but it does not automatically follow that it had no helpful effects at all  for any of the boys or girls. 

Of course in his position giving advice is ridiculous and I also would not suggest I'd want to go as far as he does. But removing unsuitable sexual content in a family with growing kids does make some sense. Even if this idea comes to us in the rather surprising shape of a blog of an unsuccessful parent. 

What makes people a hypocrite is if they don't follow their own advice (like Josh). In this case JB is not a hypocrite, and not even necessarily wrong. Just very dumb.

[MyMilkshake]

JB and Michelle are nothing more than a sideshow act trying to make money off how many kids they have. Probably the last people I'd chose to take parenting advice from. They try to act as though they are above so many sinful and "worldly " things, but they clearly love money and will not hesitate to pimp their family and themselves to keep bringing that money in. Imagine if they put half the time they put into protecting their brand into protecting their kids.

I wish TLC would scrap these shows following megafamilies or any other families that seem bent on exploiting their children for some kind of payback. Kate and her kids comes to mind, and Toddlers and Tiaras is HORRIBLE- show dogs get treated better than those kids, and I guess there's a megafamily band now on the air. TLC should just stick with shows about cakes or gasp!, something educational for a change.

 

[KSmom]

I've thought it over a bit. Imagine a cop sees a lot of violence. He wants his son to grow up a decent man. So he does not allow toy guns or violent video games while growing up. However his son ends up in jail for armed robbery. Would the dad be crazy to hold on to his belief it was right to raise his son like that or advice others to do the same? 

Second example. A staff member of a rehab center decides to ban all alcohol from his house while his kids grow up. However his son becomes an alcoholic. Does that mean that he was wrong not to drink in front of his kids? And if he lobbies for age restrictions in alcohol, does that make him a hypocrite?

So I think, though JB may be a terrible dad for many reasons, removing sexual temptation from the home may not be a bad idea. It obviously was not sufficient to hold back Josh, but it does not automatically follow that it had no helpful effects at all  for any of the boys or girls. 

Of course in his position giving advice is ridiculous and I also would not suggest I'd want to go as far as he does. But removing unsuitable sexual content in a family with growing kids does make some sense. Even if this idea comes to us in the rather surprising shape of a blog of an unsuccessful parent. 

What makes people a hypocrite is if they don't follow their own advice (like Josh). In this case JB is not a hypocrite, and not even necessarily wrong. Just very dumb.

I grew up in a home with no alcohol at all. When my sister and I got older we were told that our grandfather had been an alcoholic and that is why my mom would never touch alcohol. However, I never once heard my mom make a disparaging comment about anyone who drank. In fact, the rest of my father's family had alcohol at family get togethers and it was never a problem. 

I think the difference was that for us it was framed as a personal decision and not "this is the only godly way to live." I think this is where the real problem sets in, the kids were never given a means to deal with anything other than, "good Christians don't do this." They have no critical thinking skills, no compassion for those who make different choices, and really no tools to deal with real struggles other than just pray it away (which doesn't work, and I say that as a Christian myself).

[elliha]

I think removing everything that might be sensual is taking it too far. Not letting your children have access to porn or very explicit sexual stories sure but removing everything that might make their blood pound a bit I don't think is healthy. What is wrong with reading a book about a couple kissing being in love for example? From my perspective, nothing.

[grandmadugger]

If you are going to remove everything that might be sensual in your home you probably shouldn't dry hump your wife on a mini golf course. 

[EmCatlyn]

What makes people a hypocrite is if they don't follow their own advice (like Josh). In this case JB is not a hypocrite, and not even necessarily wrong. Just very dumb.

JB is a hypocrite because he lied about the seriousness and extent of Josh's molestation.  He is also a hypocrite because he presents himself and his family as models when they clearly have a lot of things that they are hiding.

He is also totally self-deluded about what does/doesn't give kids ideas about sex.  Allowing porn in the house is not a good idea.  Allowing kids to read novels, history books, essays, etc that might make them think is a good idea.  Talking about how much fun sex is for married people and telling the kids that they can't even hold hands until they are married is insane.  All this talk about purity is the opposite of encouraging kids to keep their minds off sex.

 

[foreign fundie]

JB is a hypocrite because he lied about the seriousness and extent of Josh's molestation.  He is also a hypocrite because he presents himself and his family as models when they clearly have a lot of things that they are hiding.

He is also totally self-deluded about what does/doesn't give kids ideas about sex.  Allowing porn in the house is not a good idea.  Allowing kids to read novels, history books, essays, etc that might make them think is a good idea.  Talking about how much fun sex is for married people and telling the kids that they can't even hold hands until they are married is insane.  All this talk about purity is the opposite of encouraging kids to keep their minds off sex.

 

Agreed. That's why I used the words 'in this case'. In this case he is not a hypocrite because he does what he says and I even am prepared to believe he does it with the best intentions and that his advice is not 100% crazy.

That is not saying I believe the general Dugger attitude on sex is healthy. It's about as healthy as a flower in a vase, looking good but cut off from the possibility of normal growth. Because all spontenaity gets removed, both before marriage (everything is sin) and after marriage (everthing is a right or a duty). And I think healthy human sex needs boundries but also space for exploring, surprise and above all, freedom to say 'no' or 'not now'.

[foreign fundie]

I think removing everything that might be sensual is taking it too far. Not letting your children have access to porn or very explicit sexual stories sure but removing everything that might make their blood pound a bit I don't think is healthy. What is wrong with reading a book about a couple kissing being in love for example? From my perspective, nothing.

Yes I too think there is nothing wrong with kids read novels in which not everyone behaves fundie.

I grew up in a deeply Christian home, where attitudes on sex were traditional though in now way Duggar style oppressive. For work reasons my father would read a lot about sexuality related topics. Our house was full of books and magazines that had explicit content (words, not so much pictures). I was a great reader as a child and innocently read a lot of the stuff laying around. Some books on child sexual abuse for example were probably really not helpful readings for a young person. And some stories I read in magazines just grossed me out. No, it did not change my own conservative believes or tempt me to experiment. I think there are just things that kids don't have to know or should have to deal with. 

[WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?]

I fully agree with your points about protecting children. I believe in keeping childhood a safe time for children to only deal with and experience age appropriate ideas. Removing inappropriate material from kids' access seems good to me, too.

But I'm don't believe that's exactly all that the Duggars do. If I understand it correctly, girls are taught (not sure starting how young?) that they are responsible for mens' arousal. An immodest outfit (and the girl wearing it) can be blamed for inflaming male passions. And boys are taught that to even look at a woman who is showing her knees or shoulders will overcome every good thing they have learned and turn them into slavering beasts. (I really hope I exaggerated on both of those.) That is way too adult of a burden to place on any child. Totally inappropriate, in my opinion. At our house, we are trying to teach our kids to be modest by emphasizing that some places on their bodies are private, and not for everyone to see. (They still like to run around semi-naked at Grandma's house when we are trying to get them in their jammies, though.  )

[HarryPotterFan]

JB and Michelle are nothing more than a sideshow act trying to make money off how many kids they have. Probably the last people I'd chose to take parenting advice from. They try to act as though they are above so many sinful and "worldly " things, but they clearly love money and will not hesitate to pimp their family and themselves to keep bringing that money in. Imagine if they put half the time they put into protecting their brand into protecting their kids.

I wish TLC would scrap these shows following megafamilies or any other families that seem bent on exploiting their children for some kind of payback. Kate and her kids comes to mind, and Toddlers and Tiaras is HORRIBLE- show dogs get treated better than those kids, and I guess there's a megafamily band now on the air. TLC should just stick with shows about cakes or gasp!, something educational for a change.

 

Educational content?? What is this, some sort of learning channel? Preposterous!

[MyMilkshake]

 

"But I'm don't believe that's exactly all that the Duggars do. If I understand it correctly, girls are taught (not sure starting how young?) that they are responsible for mens' arousal. An immodest outfit (and the girl wearing it) can be blamed for inflaming male passions. And boys are taught that to even look at a woman who is showing her knees or shoulders will overcome every good thing they have learned and turn them into slavering beasts. (I really hope I exaggerated on both of those.) That is way too adult of a burden to place on any child. Totally inappropriate, in my opinion. At our house, we are trying to teach our kids to be modest by emphasizing that some places on their bodies are private, and not for everyone to see. (They still like to run around semi-naked at Grandma's house when we are trying to get them in their jammies, though.  )"

 The Duggar teachings take accountability off the boys and dump it entirely on the girls. So messed up. Girls should not be made to be responsible for the feelings/responses of boys. It's ridiculous to expect anyone to be able to control/regulate someone else's feelings and behaviors ffs! Boys need to learn to behave appropriately and the job of that falls on the individual boy.
 

"I fully agree with your points about protecting children. I believe in keeping childhood a safe time for children to only deal with and experience age appropriate ideas. Removing inappropriate material from kids' access seems good to me, too."


I totally agree!

[CorruptionInc.]

My mum always says that telling someone not to do something will make them want to do it. I'd say there's definitely some mistakes I've made, but with every mistake I've always learnt from it. JB is not keen on learning, nor is mullet.

[unforgiving]

On 11/26/2015 at 1:00 PM, foreign fundie said:

I've thought it over a bit. Imagine a cop sees a lot of violence. He wants his son to grow up a decent man. So he does not allow toy guns or violent video games while growing up. However his son ends up in jail for armed robbery. Would the dad be crazy to hold on to his belief it was right to raise his son like that or advice others to do the same? 

Second example. A staff member of a rehab center decides to ban all alcohol from his house while his kids grow up. However his son becomes an alcoholic. Does that mean that he was wrong not to drink in front of his kids? And if he lobbies for age restrictions in alcohol, does that make him a hypocrite?

So I think, though JB may be a terrible dad for many reasons, removing sexual temptation from the home may not be a bad idea. It obviously was not sufficient to hold back Josh, but it does not automatically follow that it had no helpful effects at all  for any of the boys or girls. 

Of course in his position giving advice is ridiculous and I also would not suggest I'd want to go as far as he does. But removing unsuitable sexual content in a family with growing kids does make some sense. Even if this idea comes to us in the rather surprising shape of a blog of an unsuccessful parent. 

What makes people a hypocrite is if they don't follow their own advice (like Josh). In this case JB is not a hypocrite, and not even necessarily wrong. Just very dumb.

Yeah but these examples are totally not the same as what JB has done. If that cop banned guns and violent video games in his home whilst constantly bragging to his son about how he could use guns at work and go to the shooting range with his buddies, but his son was not allowed to, that would be similar to what JB did.

If the rehab staff member banned alcohol in his home, but went out to a bar with friends every night and came home to tell his kids what a great time he'd had, and how alcohol is the best thing on earth, but they can't have it because he said so, so there  then this would also be similar to what JB has done.

Let's not forget how fucked up JB is.

[SassyPants]

5 hours ago, unforgiving said:

Yeah but these examples are totally not the same as what JB has done. If that cop banned guns and violent video games in his home whilst constantly bragging to his son about how he could use guns at work and go to the shooting range with his buddies, but his son was not allowed to, that would be similar to what JB did.

If the rehab staff member banned alcohol in his home, but went out to a bar with friends every night and came home to tell his kids what a great time he'd had, and how alcohol is the best thing on earth, but they can't have it because he said so, so there  then this would also be similar to what JB has done.

Let's not forget how fucked up JB is.

And at this point, we have no idea if JB has been involved in untoward activities along the way.

I find it quite interesting that if you peruse JB's high school alma mater's website, the school has profiles of some of their students. JB was in the FIRST graduating class from that school, still lives in the area, is obviously well known, and he is not mentioned at all.  Wonder why ???? 

[nana sew dear]

Remember the poster back in the 60's, "Children Learn what They Live"?  Josh didn't grow up in a vacuum, JB!

[xlurker]

Remove everything sensual?  What, exactly is humping your wife in front of the children?  I mean, sure, hugging and kissing in front of the kids is great, its not like getting down and dirty with the kids sittng there.  But humping in front of them?  I think maybe JB should remove himself from the home! LOL

[foreign fundie]

12 hours ago, unforgiving said:

Yeah but these examples are totally not the same as what JB has done. If that cop banned guns and violent video games in his home whilst constantly bragging to his son about how he could use guns at work and go to the shooting range with his buddies, but his son was not allowed to, that would be similar to what JB did.

If the rehab staff member banned alcohol in his home, but went out to a bar with friends every night and came home to tell his kids what a great time he'd had, and how alcohol is the best thing on earth, but they can't have it because he said so, so there  then this would also be similar to what JB has done.

Let's not forget how fucked up JB is.

 

3 hours ago, nana sew dear said:

Remember the poster back in the 60's, "Children Learn what They Live"?  Josh didn't grow up in a vacuum, JB!

Now these are interesting points. In the gun and alcohol example above, the dad would be a hypocrite. But it is not quite the same as what JB does. He does not brag about his sexual conquests, about kinky encounters with pole dancers or some eye popping stuff he saw in a gross video. He brags about having lots of sweet fellowship with their middle aged mum. And as I argued elswhere,  he does it in a way that would turn any teenager off. 

Now I fully agree this bragging is sick and inappropriate. Had I been his daughter it would have turned me into a nun. 

So I still think that his post itself was not hypocritical ( even if it was stupid and it was out of his place to offer advice on the topic).

However, that still leaves us wondering how Josh could turn out the way he did. Was it just his own hormones? But if he was conditioned by his environment to act out sexually, as the second quote above suggests, I highly doubt it was his dad's humping of mum that made him seek a sexual thrill. In that case there may be other things about JB we don't know,  and if that is true, yes his parenting advice blog will make him the hypocrite of the year, possibly the century.

[unforgiving]

6 minutes ago, foreign fundie said:

However, that still leaves us wondering how Josh could turn out the way he did. Was it just his own hormones? But if he was conditioned by his environment to act out sexually, as the second quote above suggests, I highly doubt it was his dad's humping of mum that made him seek a sexual thrill. In that case there may be other things about JB we don't know,  and if that is true, yes his parenting advice blog will make him the hypocrite of the year, possibly the century.

 

I'm no expert in this at all, but I would imagine it might have had something to do with a combination of being the golden child, being very strictly disciplined and having no feeling of control over his own life, his father's constant and prolonged sexual abuse of his mother (and what JB has done to Michelle does constitute sexual abuse IMO), and the toxic religious views that send a message that men are superior to women and can do what the fuck they like and women just have to submit to it.

[Trynn]

6 minutes ago, foreign fundie said: However, that still leaves us wondering how Josh could turn out the way he did. Was it just his own hormones? But if he was conditioned by his environment to act out sexually, as the second quote above suggests, I highly doubt it was his dad's humping of mum that made him seek a sexual thrill. In that case there may be other things about JB we don't know,  and if that is true, yes his parenting advice blog will make him the hypocrite of the year, possibly the century.

 

I'm no expert in this at all, but I would imagine it might have had something to do with a combination of being the golden child, being very strictly disciplined and having no feeling of control over his own life, his father's constant and prolonged sexual abuse of his mother (and what JB has done to Michelle does constitute sexual abuse IMO), and the toxic religious views that send a message that men are superior to women and can do what the fuck they like and women just have to submit to it.

Interesting.... Could you elaborate on how JB sexually abuses M? I'm honestly asking, not trying to start an argument. Maybe I'm just not seeing what you're seeing?

[unforgiving]

16 hours ago, Trynn said:

Interesting.... Could you elaborate on how JB sexually abuses M? I'm honestly asking, not trying to start an argument. Maybe I'm just not seeing what you're seeing?

Michelle seems to be convinced that she needs to be available to her husband any time he wants it. Admittedly, she could have picked this up from the cult they belong to, rather than JB himself, so maybe it's wrong to say that JB is sexually abusive towards her, but I've never seen him argue about it. I think that attitude is very toxic, and I would consider it to be sexually abusive. She doesn't seem to think that saying NO would even be an option. Of course, I'm not in their bedroom, so I wouldn't know how it all goes down.

ETA I think the whole mini-golf humping episode was a prime example where Michelle was in a position of being utterly humiliated, but felt unable to put a stop to. She DID NOT seem to be enjoying what was happening. I would consider that type of humiliation abusive in a sexual way.

[Gossamer1]

I think under a different upbringing Josh would have been just a highly sexed guy. In a more normal environment he would have been taught respect for himself and others. He might have dated earlier and lost his virginity soonr than most but the seeming predator he turned into might have been avoided.

Instead,  he was brought up in a highly repressed and restrictive environment where he was the golden child, the "brand" was important above all else and any real problems (hint - a boy molesting his sisters and babysitter  is a significant problem )  are just prayed away.

 

[ksgranola1]

Quote

 

I remember an episode when  the producers were asking Joy Anna, about 12 then, I think, the significance in "nike." She said so the boys don't get defrauded. They asked her what 'defrauded' meant & she stumbled over , parroting JB&M; "So they don't have feelings they can't righteously....I don't know!" Either she was too embarrassed to go on, or she really didn't know. By 12, I would hope she would know.

Speaking of that, or sort of; my daughter was taking my grandson to cub scouts tonight & said remember when I would drop her off at girl scouts & pick her up later? She said parents are required to stay, now. B/c of "recent developments." I wonder if that means protection from leaders w/an eye for little boys or b/c of the recent decision to accept gay scouts. HTH does a 9yo boy know if he's gay?!

 

[hockeymoo]

When it comes to Josh's upbringing, I think there's something we're not hitting on here - Rim Job and Michelle may espouse various principles by which they claim raise their children, but they don't actually raise their kids at all. They just supply the tater tots and chromosomes for their human factory farm and let the kids raise themselves - the blind leading the blind! Even with all the crap they put in place to stop their kids from molesting each other and god knows what else, herd obedience does not lend itself to the development of reflective thought or moral maturity. 

Most of us assume Jim Bob *hairspray blast psshht* and Uterus Duggar are just massive hypocrites and they know it, but maybe they're actually too stupid and ineffective as parents/teachers/human adults to realize they're utterly failing at the only thing they THINK they're doing - raising kids to be good, productive Christian members of society. Teaching their kids anything would require time, individualized attention and follow-through they clearly don't have the means to provide. Plus, I think its clear that all the modesty/self-control talk is funnelled directly into the Duggar daughers' ears and bypasses the boys almost entirely. 

[47of74]

I think its clear that all the modesty/self-control talk is funnelled directly into the Duggar daughers' ears and bypasses the boys almost entirely. 

I'm guessing they probably think that girls aren't even supposed to know what sex is until their wedding night. And that if the boys run around it's just boys being boys.