Duggar-related Shitstorm on Vyckie Garrison's public Facebook

[blessalessi]

I saw that and thought it might be a coincidence as her posts are usually pre-planned.  Good catch on the 2009 original date.

Not sure it counts as strictly passive aggressive, as Calulu seems to live and breathe plain old agresssion these days!

I find it really odd that she and Vyckie take an "older and wiser than you" stance, when they still behave like impulsive teenagers in their speech and actions.  The next generation bloggers who are challenging them clearly went through an age-appropriate stage of questioning, and have come through that as thoughtful adults in their mid-teenties, while Vyckie and Calulu are still lying, evading the truth and screaming profanities in public, as though they are still emotionally underdeveloped adolescents having a tantrum.

[Palimpsest]

14 hours ago, Et Moi said:

I'm guessing no. She made it pretty clear what she thinks about the whole thing from the post the other day about not speculating about sexuality.

I doubt Libby Anne will say anything more.  That dignified post, which did not name any names, and asking for her content to be pulled is what sparked this shit storm, IMO.  Along with people like Cynthia Jeub from HA telling Vyckie off on FaceBook.   What did Suzanne call them -  ferocious?  Oh, please!

I think Vyckie is one of those people who can't brook any criticism, constructive or not.  You know the type:  You either stand with me or against me! If you don't tell me everything I do is wonderful you are the enemy! How dare you question me because I am a survivor and any criticism of survivors  is persecution!!!!!!11111eleventy!!!!!111

I'm not sure I believe Calulu when she says that she was shifting the focus at NLQ to the older generation throughout 2015.  Perhaps that is true, but I can't be bothered to sift through all the NLQ posts last year to find out.  I do know that I spent far more time last year reading SSB, HA, Libby Anne, and Cynthia's blogs. 

Good catch on the 2009 article @Et Moi.  I wonder which side Cindy K. will choose on this?   I'm a card carrying fan of the writing of both Libby Anne and Cynthia so I know where I stand!

[Et Moi]

12 hours ago, Palimpsest said:

I'm not sure I believe Calulu when she says that she was shifting the focus at NLQ to the older generation throughout 2015.  Perhaps that is true, but I can't be bothered to sift through all the NLQ posts last year to find out.  I do know that I spent far more time last year reading SSB, HA, Libby Anne, and Cynthia's blogs. 

I'm too lazy to go look at the moment but I swear that Calulu wrote a similar post at the very beginning of 2015. In retrospect, that was probably just as passive aggressive as this time.

[louisa05]

On 1/8/2016 at 0:58 PM, Walking Cat Bed said:

I'd just discovered NLQ when Libby was writing the short version of her story. If I remember right, Libby Anne wanted her story to be available, so she let NLQ be a venue, but she was posting it on her own. And she had a few different locations before she was picked up by Patheos. But aside from linking to NLQ, Libby Anne didn't dwell on the connection. 

Libby Anne also declined to participate in the argument about Razing Ruth (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/07/new-survivor-blogs.html), but quietly removed Ruth from her blog list when there was sufficient evidence. 

I'll keep reading Libby Anne -- one significant reason is that her posts are carefully written with strong sources. (And she doesn't have creepy, angry Bruce in rotation.) She's enough of an academic that she doesn't see all blogs/bloggers as "equal" in reliability, nor equally topical. I'm not a leghumper or fangirl (for example, I usually skip the parenting posts), but I definitely appreciate good research and writing skills. And her more active and diverse readership is valuable and noticeable. 

I read Libby Anne occasionally. I find that she, like many former fundies, has still retained the black and white thinking she was brought up with. It seems that is the hardest thing for them to get past. Her parenting methods are the one and only proper way and her kids are the models of brilliant character that prove it--how is that different from what all the fundie parenting methods claim? Or her views about marriage and sex...the black and white she grew up with was that premarital sex is evil and will destroy a subsequent marriage. So she has flipped it for a new black and white conclusion that premarital sex is great and necessary and the lack of it will destroy a subsequent marriage. I'm pretty sure neither of those are true at all. There is this immense gray area in there where it really comes down to the individuals and couples involved, because (surprise!) everyone is different. I don't think this is unusual. I have a couple of friends who were raised in very religious homes with very black and white thinking and they both struggle to see things in other terms as well. One of them has kind of flipped everything the other way around in the same way, but we are much older and she catches herself quite frequently. 

Libby Anne still has the fundie sort of "the whole world is waiting for my opinion" tone, too. Notice how many of her blog topics are introduced with a "you need me to explain this" tone. And maybe that isn't fundie, maybe it is a function of being in her 20s. I don't know. But it is pretty off putting and I sometimes wonder if the wisdom of age will make her shudder a bit at it in 20 years of so. 

Her fundie growing up experience is also only her one family, but she seems to view it as representative of all of them rather than as one experience. I'm a bit surprised that a graduate student doesn't adequately understand that anecdotes are not evidence. 

[onlyme]

This is very true. I've noticed it too. When I left I walked around for quite a while just meditating on the fact that I don't know and I don't have to know. Ambiguity is very uncomfortable for them, and it was for me, until I found freedom in it. 

[elliha]

I think the critique of Libby Anne is a little harsh. Yes, I agree that she has some sides that are rather black and white but that she also actively tries to work on being balanced and seeing things from more than one perspective. She seems to be the most black and white about the things her parents are the most critical of, believing in evolution and her choices with regards to working and using daycare and school. To me this is fully understandable, she probably feels this must be defended almost constantly.

[Palimpsest]

1 hour ago, elliha said:

I think the critique of Libby Anne is a little harsh. Yes, I agree that she has some sides that are rather black and white but that she also actively tries to work on being balanced and seeing things from more than one perspective. She seems to be the most black and white about the things her parents are the most critical of, believing in evolution and her choices with regards to working and using daycare and school. To me this is fully understandable, she probably feels this must be defended almost constantly.

I agree that the critique was a little too harsh and also that Libby Anne still has a tendency to think in black and white terms. 

On the other hand, she has accepted constructive criticism, and has been known to modify her positions.  If memory serves, it was @2xx1xy1JD who contacted Libby Anne with serious concerns about one post and found her very responsive.  Libby Anne (with 2xx's permission) published her email critique.  I've also had positive interactions with her over more minor criticisms.

[older than allosaurs]

I've put Libby Anne's black/white aspects more to youth than to basic world view. (Most people seem young to me at this point.) I remember how doctrinaire I used to be, and I'm seeing my own kids move past that thinking as they get to 30. Time will tell.

When it comes to Vyckie, I've been thinking of Sirius Black's excellent reminder: The world isn't divided between good people and Death Eaters. Just because a person is No Longer Quivering doesn't make her a saint.

 

[Walking Cat Bed]

Eh, I can't fault Libby Anne some rigidity. I have a few things that I'm very definite about that are the opposite of my childhood/teen opinion, but most aspects of life require a bit of nuance. 

I think that the thing about Libby Anne that I like best is the academic approach; when she sets up a post about social issues and their relationship with culture, I recognize her methods. Even when I don't agree with her conclusion, I get how she got there. I respect the process, especially the process of examining the evidence. 

[DaisyD]

Anytime someone who was raised not to think is using critical thinking skills, it's a good thing. Even if you don't agree with where they end up, at least they got there on their own. They weren't led there by someone who's motives are questionable at best.

[roddma]

I have to agree with the assessment on Vyckie, and glad some others see this. I think some people are black and white thinkers regardless of how they get raised. She obviously married a man who wasnt suited for the role she 'assigned' him, and I wonder if he had been would they still be QF? . Not that I think Vyckie will ever go back QF or even moderate Christian, she seems to be for whatever makes her $$$ at the time. She still has several kids to feed.

[DaffyDill]

On 7 January 2016 at 7:36 AM, Et Moi said:

Well, lookie here. Damage control?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2016/01/nlq-in-2016-some-housekeeping-for-2016/

Well talk about too little, too late.

and as for this:

Quote

...... Vyckie is in no way responsible by what is said by others on her thread.

What garbage. Vicki could have intervened and banned people, at least tried to steer the discussion a certain way, or deleted the post entirely when it became totally out of control.

But she didn't, and as usual, it's everyone else fault, Vyckie is so innocent, and Suzanne scurries about making excuses and trying to keep Vyckie's "good name" intact. 

[Et Moi]

5 hours ago, DaffyDill said:

Well talk about too little, too late.

and as for this:

What garbage. Vicki could have intervened and banned people, at least tried to steer the discussion a certain way, or deleted the post entirely when it became totally out of control.

But she didn't, and as usual, it's everyone else fault, Vyckie is so innocent, and Suzanne scurries about making excuses and trying to keep Vyckie's "good name" intact. 

In the second thread she even claimed she couldn't see the posts by the guy who was stalking and offering to fight people. Which is not how Facebook works. 

[Palimpsest]

15 hours ago, daisyd681 said:

Anytime someone who was raised not to think is using critical thinking skills, it's a good thing. Even if you don't agree with where they end up, at least they got there on their own. They weren't led there by someone who's motives are questionable at best.

Very well said.   Thank you.  There is innate intelligence but critical thinking can be both taught and learned.  It can also be deliberately crushed out.

I find Libby Anne interesting to read, not because I always agree with her, but because I don't.  If you look back over her writings and analyze them you can see her progression as a critical thinker.  As @Walking Cat Bed said, I like her methods.  Libby Anne is also very good at collecting information and finding sources so I don't have to do it!

Libby Anne is on a journey of discovery in a way and she may change and modify her opinions.  You can see a similar journey in Cynthia Jeub's writing as she experiences different things and decides where she stands on issues.  Cynthia's debating experience probably helped her develop more critical thinking skills than others raised in more restrictive and controlling Patriarchal families.  Chris Jeub made a big mistake in letting his children join debate teams, IMO.

 

 

[Curious]

On 1/8/2016 at 2:19 PM, Elegant Mess said:

I started reading the NLQ blog when it first launched, with Vyckie and Laura co-hosting (but I never participated in the forums).  The early articles were quite fascinating to read, especially since I was fairly new to large families outside of the Duggars and the Arndts.  However, after I discovered FJ, I found richer stuff here, so I drifted away from reading NLQ entirely.

I found NLQ when I was searching on something about the Duggars (I can't even recall what now).   I read all of Vyckie's story that she had posted up to that point and I read, I think, all the other people's posts as well.

I found FJ through a comment on NLQ and decided to check it out.   I read both for a while, but then Vyckie pulled her story down and wanted donations to put it back up or something like that and they closed the forum (which I read, but never posted on) to non-members.   I think that is fine, it's their site and it kind of made sense to me that since they sometimes posted about sensitive topics, they wouldn't want the public reading them.  

There was less and less to read there though and eventually I just started spending more time on FJ (yuku) and would only read on NLQ when someone mentioned it here.

Once I became owner of FJ, we still linked to NLQ despite Vyckie's dislike of us, because I thought linking to sources for people trying to escape/escaping was more important than a silly grudge against us.   Once the RR stuff happened, I no longer felt that the pros outweighed the cons and took down our links to them.   I figured if we couldn't even be mentioned there, they didn't want our traffic anyway.

[blessalessi]

9 minutes ago, Curious said:

  I figured if we couldn't even be mentioned there, they didn't want our traffic anyway.

It amuses me to imagine that Calulu might have sent a cease and desist letter to Google Inc, informing them that the words "Free Jinger" were henceforth not to show up in her blog stats reports. 

[Et Moi]

On 1/9/2016 at 7:19 AM, Palimpsest said:

Good catch on the 2009 article @Et Moi.  I wonder which side Cindy K. will choose on this?   I'm a card carrying fan of the writing of both Libby Anne and Cynthia so I know where I stand!

I think we've got our answer to that question. Posted by Cindy K. yesterday:

undermuchgrace.blogspot.com/2016/01/guest-post-tommy-first-survivor-war.html

[apple1]

1 hour ago, Et Moi said:

I think we've got our answer to that question. Posted by Cindy K. yesterday:

undermuchgrace.blogspot.com/2016/01/guest-post-tommy-first-survivor-war.html

Gah.

Another internet personality with an overly high opinion of herself (who previously self-destructed right on FJ -- and no, I can't link to it. It was bad enough that FJ admin had to move the thread to a hidden space).

[Palimpsest]

50 minutes ago, apple1 said:

Gah.

Another internet personality with an overly high opinion of herself (who previously self-destructed right on FJ -- and no, I can't link to it. It was bad enough that FJ admin had to move the thread to a hidden space).

I completely missed the self-destruction here but I'll take your word for it.  I used to like Cindy but she's often annoying.  I think she's had spats with NLQ before.

 I did notice the persecuted little me bit here: "Every time I think of it, some survivor has either just gone on some diatribe rampage about me somewhere, and I decide not to fuel the fire. " 

OK then.  Splash a little gasoline on the flames this time, Cindy.

I liked Dwayne's guest post though.  Survivor wars stink.

[blessalessi]

I got lost halfway down the page at Under Much Blathering. I can't work out which side she came down  on, but my God, it turned into another opportunity to write more words than there are...

Please tell me I am not alone in thinking Cindy Kunsman is probably the only person more likely than Vyckie to make an editor cry.

[Palimpsest]

10 minutes ago, blessalessi said:

I got lost halfway down the page at Under Much Blathering. I can't work out which side she came down  on, but my God, it turned into another opportunity to write more words than there are...

Please tell me I am not alone in thinking Cindy Kunsman is probably the only person more likely than Vyckie to make an editor cry.

She's sitting on the fence polishing her halo.  She too has suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous attacks by other survivors but is far too wonderful to respond to them.  Instead she posts someone else's article.

The short version of Dwayne Walker's article is that survivors shouldn't fight publically and no-one should tell anyone else to "get over it."  Plus an ode to Tommy.   I thought Tommy was over-rated.  I agree with him that survivor squabbles are destructive, but NLQ definitely started this one.

Cindy is almost as long-winded as that perpetually pregnant parsnippy Alice person.  However, she has more substance that either Alice than Vyckie.  I suppose that is called damning someone with faint praise.

[Curious]

32 minutes ago, blessalessi said:

I got lost halfway down the page at Under Much Blathering. I can't work out which side she came down  on, but my God, it turned into another opportunity to write more words than there are...

Please tell me I am not alone in thinking Cindy Kunsman is probably the only person more likely than Vyckie to make an editor cry.

I loves me some verbosity as you all know, but I gave up trying to figure out that post about 1/2 through.

It said guest post, but then it seemed like she went on for some time herself.  I couldn't figure out what was her and what was guest post (and by that time I didn't care anymore)

[Walking Cat Bed]

Cindy (and Creepy Angry Bruce) was on my "skip" list well before this mess. 

Cindy strikes me as someone who took a class or two in argumentative writing in college and thinks that makes her a Good Writer. When, really, she's just tedious and (like V and Suz) self-involved.

[Palimpsest]

@Walking Cat Bed Who is Creepy Angry Bruce?

[Walking Cat Bed]

1 hour ago, Palimpsest said:

@Walking Cat Bed Who is Creepy Angry Bruce?

Oh, what's his name. Bruce something-starting-with-a-G. Former fundy Baptist style preacher, now fundy atheist, still sexist but denies it. Here's a do not link to his contributions.