Josh Duggar Part 11 - The End of Rehab Is in Sight

[Whoosh]

24 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

it is for the administrators to let us know when we have transgressed against the forum culture or rules.

Since I am being an announced ass in this thread, I may as well keep at it, huh?  I am not taking sides on this particular head-to-head at this time, but this is a largely self-policing community.  That means it is largely up to the community to let us know this I think.  Just for the record.

I do agree the ignore feature is an option.  I also don't think people should be afraid to post because the community approves bashing people down left and right for little or no reason.  Again, not commenting on the specifics here, just in theory.

ETA - Admins, please put me in my place if I am off base with this self-policing theory.

[MayMay1123]

2 hours ago, Fundie Bunny said:

I am certain "Barbecue porn" is the title of some movie. It has to be.

i am NOT having that in my google history!

[quiversR4hunting]

20 hours ago, MayMay1123 said:

 

21 hours ago, Trynn said:

And too, the fundy definition of porn addiction is what the rest of the world defines as "likes to watch pork and jerk off on occasion." I speak from experience.

there's a joke about pork and jerk in there somewhere, but i'm too exhausted to find it...

 

 

16 hours ago, Trynn said:

DAMN YOU AUTOCORRECT!

Since they don't eat pork- maybe he does jerk off to pork

[Drala]

2 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

I have a problem with the porn addiction claim because sometimes it seems like just a way to avoid personal responsibility. It wasn't me, it was the addiction, it was the evil porn industry.

"The National Council on Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity has defined sexual addiction as “engaging in persistent and escalating patterns of sexual behavior acted out despite increasing negative consequences to self and others. In other words, a sex addict will continue to engage in certain sexual behaviors despite facing potential health risks, financial problems, shattered relationships or even arrest.""

I would like to know if or how the frequency, the intensity or the quality of his porn consumption differs from some regular guys who may also watch a lot of porn but aren't  in trouble for it because they're not celebrities  and because they live in more permissive environment.  Sure, he has had negative consequences,  but does he watch more porn in more destructive patterns than the average porn watcher who is not classified as a sex addict? It's not like watching just a little bit of porn here and there would be okay in the Duggarworld since they can't even see women in Nike sportswear without getting all hot and bothered.

A fundie could face more negative consequences  if he watches any porn and gets caught than a regular joe whose family does not freak out about it,  even though the regular joe may invest more time and energy in his porn watching.

I guess what I'm trying to say that if you define sex addiction with the consequences, the consequences aren't equal for everybody. One man's fall from grace is another man's great Saturday night for which he gets pats on the back from his drinking buddies. Some people's brothers give tearful interviews lamenting your ungodliness if you get caught watching porn and some people's brothers will borrow the tape. Some people will divorce you if you get busted and some partners will watch it with you.

It may be that Josh Duggar has used the porn addiction label as a way to avoid personal responsibility, unless you count 6 months doing penance in Jesus Jail as taking personal responsibility--which I don't.  

You're absolutely right about the differential consequences for behavior that is viewed as sinful or deviant by one group and relatively harmless by another.  When it comes to whether there's an addiction going on, it's often something a person has to decide for him/herself within a specific culture or social environment.  Within the Duggar world, Josh has a problem behavior with all sorts of negative associations.  Research suggests that the perception of being addicted  or out of control (not pornography use itself) is related to psychological distress.

For reasons you mention (and others) there is a lot of debate among behavioral health experts about whether what is called "porn (sex) addiction" is actually an addictive disorder.  There's a really good discussion of this issue on the addiction.com website called Why Isn't Sex Addiction in the DSM-5?: https://www.addiction.com/expert-blogs/sex-addiction-dsm-5-2/  

 

 

[OnceUponATime]

25 minutes ago, MayMay1123 said:

i am NOT having that in my google history!

it's ok I used Duck Duck Go and there all the links are just to people lusting over bbq'ing ribs and things. Oh wait I had safe search on... I'm not clicking through to those other links

[TheJewAmongUs]

4 hours ago, Charliemae said:

I have no specific problems with Whoosh but have had some "mega posters" get under my skin.  I feel like this thread could use a reminder of the ignore function. I finally used it on someone for the first time and my fj experience is much improved.  

I didn't say anything about Whoosh. I'm referring to EmCatlyn. While I do find some mega posters (most of them are gone now) to be a major deterrent to even attempting to read, follow or join in here, let me recap:

I made a snarky post.

The self-appointed FJ police decided to respond and tell me that:

1. I should read 5-6 months worth of posts before posting.

2. I was beating a dead horse by posting (on a topic that has 10 closed threads with 20+ pages.)

3. That what I suggested in my snarky post wasn't "fact."

4. That fact had been decided through the speculation of others in the previous posts that I was supposed to read before commenting.

Trust me, I tend to ignore her. But I'm also going to state (until the dead horse I've been accused of beating is resurrected) is that when someone offers an opinion in a thread they should not be referred to six prior months on the topic or 250 previous pages. They should not be solely accused of beating a dead horse when, again there are thousands of posts on this topic. And they shouldn't be told that the people who have already speculated on something are the ones who determine the facts. That is a really, really shitty way to talk to new posters or infrequent posters or posters who aren't the "experts" on a topic that follow a particular fundie's every move. I'm not disrespecting the mods here, but if the community doesn't police the rude and self-important posters, then FJ will again become the cult of two people's opinion. And honestly, after thousands of posts I kind of think that the mods might not be paying attention to some of these threads, but the Duggars are probably where a lot of people first enter the fray.

45 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

As I said, it is for the administrators to let us know when we have transgressed against the forum culture or rules.  I think that since you find my messages so annoying, you should use the "ignore" feature.   

See above. No administrator thinks it's your job to to tell people to read previous posts, that they're the ones beating the dead horse, to tell them that their snark needs to be factual, and most laughably that everyone has already speculated the truth. You're not a mod, you overstepped in your rudeness and it's a repellant to participation.

[EmCatlyn]

Just now, Whoosh said:

Since I am being an announced ass in this thread, I may as well keep at it, huh?  I am not taking sides on this particular head-to-head at this time, but this is a largely self-policing community.  That means it is largely up to the community to let us know this I think.  Just for the record.

I do agree the ignore feature is an option.  I also don't think people should be afraid to post because the community approves bashing people down left and right.

Sorry, but I am not engaging in a "head to head" here.  It is more the case of I stepped on someone's toe, and she now wants my blood.    Heads are not involved.

Seriously, I am naturally sorry to hear that my messages are unwelcome and perceived as obnoxious, but In more than 30 years in online communities  I have learned to recognize that there is nothing I can do about it.  

Personal confrontations between forum members are always uncomfortable for everyone else to watch and generally achieve nothing for the participants.  The attacker always feels disappointed that not enough other people joined the attack.  The recipient of the attack generally ends up feeling that not enough people joined in her/his "defense."  I am not going to play.

I will happily engage in discussions about ideas, exchange information, attempt to clarify my position on a subject, etc.   When the subject becomes whether or not I should be posting X number of messages a week and whether or not I have too many opinions and/or are perceived as arrogant or whatever.... I just don't know what to say.

As you know very well, @Whoosh I am not the only person here who posts a lot. I am not the only person who is knowledgeable about several subjects and who perhaps comes across as arrogant. There are members who have joined more recently than I who have more posts.  

Clearly the attack on me is not just about what I am doing but about how some people see the presence of relative "newbies" who speak up.  It is part of a wider issue regarding which vision of "FJ Culture" should dominate.

Perhaps this is something that someone wants to raise in one of the community forums.  I do not see any point in derailing this thread further.

 

[Whoosh]

4 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

Sorry, but I am not engaging in a "head to head" here.  It is more the case of I stepped on someone's toe, and she now wants my blood.    Heads are not involved.

Seriously, I am naturally sorry to hear that my messages are unwelcome and perceived as obnoxious, but In more than 30 years in online communities  I have learned to recognize that there is nothing I can do about it.  

Personal confrontations between forum members are always uncomfortable for everyone else to watch and generally achieve nothing for the participants.  The attacker always feels disappointed that not enough other people joined the attack.  The recipient of the attack generally ends up feeling that not enough people joined in her/his "defense."  I am not going to play.

I will happily engage in discussions about ideas, exchange information, attempt to clarify my position on a subject, etc.   When the subject becomes whether or not I should be posting X number of messages a week and whether or not I have too many opinions and/or are perceived as arrogant or whatever.... I just don't know what to say.

As you know very well, @Whoosh I am not the only person here who posts a lot. I am not the only person who is knowledgeable about several subjects and who perhaps comes across as arrogant. There are members who have joined more recently than I who have more posts.  

Clearly the attack on me is not just about what I am doing but about how some people see the presence of relative "newbies" who speak up.  It is part of a wider issue regarding which vision of "FJ Culture" should dominate.

Perhaps this is something that someone wants to raise in one of the community forums.  I do not see any point in derailing this thread further.

 

That's a mouthful of not playing right there.

ETA - I know I have done the same myself, so I will lay that out there.

[jacduggar]

1 hour ago, OnceUponATime said:

it's ok I used Duck Duck Go and there all the links are just to people lusting over bbq'ing ribs and things. Oh wait I had safe search on... I'm not clicking through to those other links

I went for it. It's all just porn videos of people at barbecue parties. I have a very vivid imagination, apparently. 

I wish I could say this is the strangest thing I've googled this week, but I had mouth surgery and typing "oral" in front of anything makes for dirty web pages. 

[Curious]

Hi Kids!

I'm just driving by to remind people that the ignore feature can make your FJ participation more pleasant if you find someone is really getting under your skin.

We are largely self-policed as it would be impossible for the administration team to read every single thread/post here.   There are a few of us and thousands of you.  @HerNameIsBuffy figured it out at some point and we get like 20,000-25,000 posts per month on average.   That's a whole lot of words for anyone to keep up with.

We certainly don't have a posting limit (except for new members for the first 2 weeks) and people are free to post as many times as they would like.  I'd like to remind people that join date and/or post count do not validate or invalidate any individual member's opinions.   New members are encouraged to post (which has not always been the case).   We'd also love for our lurkers to come out and post more as well. 

Based on my very quick perusal of this thread, it looks like there has been some miscommunication and tempers are a little quick here lately.

Can't we all just get along  

PS: Don't make me turn this thread around and go home.  There will be no ice cream if that happens!

[EmCatlyn]

19 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

That's a mouthful of not playing right there.

ETA - I know I have done the same myself, so I will lay that out there.

I am "not playing" the " X attacks and Y responds" game.  As for the rest, you raised the issue and I took the opportunity to explain my position.  

Now what about them Duggars, eh?   

[OnceUponATime]

20 minutes ago, jacduggar said:

I went for it. It's all just porn videos of people at barbecue parties. I have a very vivid imagination, apparently. 

I wish I could say this is the strangest thing I've googled this week, but I had mouth surgery and typing "oral" in front of anything makes for dirty web pages. 

haha. my imagination might have been a bit too vivid too then. I also tend to expect my computer to get infected by STDs viruses from porn sites so I tend to avoid them. I'm also not sure hoe effective my computer condom virus scanner is.

 

[December]

2 hours ago, MayMay1123 said:

i am NOT having that in my google history!

Incognito mode and a VPN 

[Charliemae]

5 hours ago, Whoosh said:

Just to clarify, the quote you are responding to wasn't addressed directly to me, but to another poster.  

 

Oops my bad. I didn't mean to drag you into the fray. I'm just skimming along and felt the need to point out that handy ignore button. I've only used it once but our feels good.  Highly recommend. 

[Whoosh]

Just now, Charliemae said:

Oops my bad. I didn't mean to drag you into the fray. I'm just skimming along and felt the need to point out that handy ignore button. I've only used it once but our feels good.  Highly recommend. 

I think I can accept full responsibility for being in the fray LOL.  I am actually quite behind on a quilting project that kind of needs to get done, so I think I am gonna follow your sage advice and beef up my ignore list, then get to sewing.

Right after I google barbecue porn, that is.

[ShebrewDefrauder]

2 hours ago, quiversR4hunting said:

 

Since they don't eat pork- maybe he does jerk off to pork

He wouldn't be the first! Warning: spoiler contains extremely regrettable, albeit hilarious, material.

Spoiler

I'm so sorry.

 

[HarryPotterFan]

Regrettable, hilarious and DISTURBING material. 

[Curious]

What the heck did I click on that for?  Today I am thankful for the blurry vision!

[Imagine20]

She dropped the suit and admitted to lying. Well, that's something. 

Also, you guys keep it lively. I really enjoy it. You're great distraction when I need a study break.

Also, why did I have to see what I can't now unsee! 

[Kak]

That's some niche pork porn. 

[Whoosh]

3 minutes ago, Imagine20 said:

 

She dropped the suit and admitted to lying

 

If that is true (and I am not doubting you), thank the FSM.

[justoneoftwo]

2 minutes ago, Imagine20 said:

She dropped the suit and admitted to lying. Well, that's something. 

Also, you guys keep it lively. I really enjoy it. You're great distraction when I need a study break.

Also, why did I have to see what I can't now unsee! 

When did she admit to lying?  

[singsingsing]

Good. Hopefully this charade is over now. Josh Duggar is not a great person and it's a terrible thing that he was never really held accountable for his actions, or received the help he so clearly needed, but no one deserves to be falsely accused of sexual assault. Worst of all, false accusations like this also only serve to hurt real victims. 

[jacduggar]

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2016/02/josh-duggar-danica-dillon-drops-lawsuit-case-dismissed/

 

Not the most official article. 

[Whoosh]

9 minutes ago, justoneoftwo said:

When did she admit to lying?  

I just read it the Stipulation of Dismissal.  One of the provisions in it says that Duggar agrees to forgo his right to move for summary judgment and attach documents that "the parties agree would conclusively prove that Northup’s claims are fabricated"

I am just ridiculously excited that this is over.  She is going to take a public verbal beating for this not doubt and it will likely damage at least some aspects of her career.  

***Stipulation of Dismissal is a court document and was uploaded to the Docket just recently.