Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Recommended Posts

gustava
Just now, Whoosh said:

In your opinion.  I would have to say I believe she is placing at least a considerable amount of emphasis on that goal, yes.

Whoosh.... I should have clarified that although I'm quoting, it is my opinion that she's in it for the 15 minutes of fame.  Such has been my opinion from the onset.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 580
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Whoosh

    115

  • justoneoftwo

    31

  • JenniferJuniper

    26

  • HerNameIsBuffy

    23

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Worst.  Bucketlist item. Ever.

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

Posted Images

Just now, gustava said:

Whoosh.... I should have clarified that although I'm quoting, it is my opinion that she's in it for the 15 minutes of fame.  Such has been my opinion from the onset.

I was really pretty much meaning to mock myself there - I should have used an emoticon or said so.  I think your opinion is shared by many.  To be honest, I think a person can have a goal of gaining notoriety and fame AND actually be a victim deserving of recovery, but I can't see easily convincing a jury of that.

  • Upvote 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
gustava
2 hours ago, RootBeerFloat said:

has been being

Gotta say that as a retired professor of English with a deep love of grammar and sentence diagramming, I am almost orgasmic over the use of this verb tense.

  • Upvote 27
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why must people continue to call the "the porn star" or "stripper". Yes she has engaged in sex work. She is not trying to hide that. I engage in art work. No one would call me "the artist" who did this or that..

These types of work are legal. It is her choice to engage in them, by engaging in them she signed no form that forfeited her right to not be protected by all the same laws that protect everyone else. Even if taken to the extreme you are still not responsible for causing yourself to be harmed. Yes we all should be careful, however we also should be able to be careless without the end result being an unwanted sexual encounter of any type.

I don't care if she agreed to the encounter, I don't care if she was paid for the encounter, I don't care if she agreed to another encounter after the 1st, I don't care what other things that she did prior or after, I think that if she says she was hurt by the encounter she should be allowed to proceed to prove her case.

Do I like her? I don't know, I think that she has made some bad choices. I also think that when we start looking at the person who is claiming to be the victim instead of the person who is accused we open up a slippery slope for all women. We step by step take ourselves back to women on the stand having to prove their virtue in sexual assault cases. 

For all I know she is a big fat liar, however until i know that for sure I am never going to be #team perpetrator 

  • Upvote 34
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
CorruptionInc.
On 1/25/2016 at 5:00 AM, Fundie Bunny said:

I bet he throws his parents under the bus if the molestation issues are mentioned during the trial

I couldn't blame Josh if he chose to throw his parents under the bus. It is these dickheads after all that have caused the problem in the first place that ended up snowballing and getting worse.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad Wolf

@HerNameIsBuffy. Thanks for the cool head. I used to be on a knitting forum that got heated like this from time to time. Knitting for heaven's sake. 

  • Upvote 21
Link to post
Share on other sites
Curious
Just now, Bad Wolf said:

@HerNameIsBuffy. Thanks for the cool head. I used to be on a knitting forum that got heated like this from time to time. Knitting for heaven's sake. 

Knit vs purl  AND GO!

I have no dog in this fight and frankly this is the first time I've even looked at these threads, but I will add one thing.

once you file a suit like this you are at the mercy of other people (judges, lawyers, places providing records) and you don't stop living your life just because that stuff is going on.

Is Danica supposed to sit in her home and do nothing because she claims that almost a year ago she was harmed and for several months she was not able to do her usual work?  

  • Upvote 18
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Curious said:

Knit vs purl  AND GO!

I have no dog in this fight and frankly this is the first time I've even looked at these threads, but I will add one thing.

once you file a suit like this you are at the mercy of other people (judges, lawyers, places providing records) and you don't stop living your life just because that stuff is going on.

Is Danica supposed to sit in her home and do nothing because she claims that almost a year ago she was harmed and for several months she was not able to do her usual work?  

To drive home the point as to why I think the conversations happening here are so incredibly damaging (even though no one had ill intent), here's the question stuck in my head from today's discussions - how long would people say that the victim of a violent sexual assault needs to avoid any public appearance of "being busy" "working" or "having fun" in order to be believable as having been harmed and/or suffering actual losses from that violent sexual assault?  I mean, it has been 9 or 10 months.  Not long enough?  Should I send a memo out to all survivors of sexual assault explaining this rocket surgeon conclusion?  What IS the time frame before they can smile in public again?

Yeah, I am being dramatic, but that line of reasoning is just incredibly damaging not only to survivors of sexual assault and women in general, but also to those who suffer from mental health issues and disabilities.  It is pretty horrifying if you ask me and unless this thing settles soon, that nonsense is just going to multiply like Duggars all over the internet.  I think it needs to be called out for what it is.

Edited by Whoosh
  • Upvote 20
Link to post
Share on other sites
justoneoftwo

Unless I missed something (entirely possible) the question about her being active wasn't about if she had been harmed but if she was suffering loss of income.  We ask the same questions of people requesting payment from car accidents.  If she can do other things (I haven't seen evidence one way or another) then can she work?  Someone also asked if she could still get loss of income if she could work in another related field.  I get why these are emotional questions given the accused actions but in a car accident case we would ask the same ones.  (As a side note, yes she could get loss of income if she can't do her specialty, imagine a plastic surgeon who now can only do general surgery, there would be a huge loss of income, I don't know the pay scaled for BDSM porn v. regular but it could be similarly large, also sometimes you can do things like travel but not work, it can make proof harder but its totally possible that even if she can do a lot of other things she still can't work).  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, justoneoftwo said:

Unless I missed something (entirely possible) the question about her being active wasn't about if she had been harmed but if she was suffering loss of income.  We ask the same questions of people requesting payment from car accidents.  If she can do other things (I haven't seen evidence one way or another) then can she work?  Someone also asked if she could still get loss of income if she could work in another related field.  I get why these are emotional questions given the accused actions but in a car accident case we would ask the same ones.  (As a side note, yes she could get loss of income if she can't do her specialty, imagine a plastic surgeon who now can only do general surgery, there would be a huge loss of income, I don't know the pay scaled for BDSM porn v. regular but it could be similarly large, also sometimes you can do things like travel but not work, it can make proof harder but its totally possible that even if she can do a lot of other things she still can't work).  

She is not claiming disability from all forms of work - she is claiming specific lost earnings as far as I know.  That is a huge difference.  There really is just not much similar between the two.  So, I am not sure why anyone would be questioning that.  Further, I don't feel like looking back, but I am fairly certain that at least one poster DID imply if not flat out state that this was evidence if not proof that she had not been harmed in any way or at least not "enough".

I totally get what you are saying, but I don't think we need to discuss issues of "was she disabled from all forms of work" or "what were her earnings at xxx time" in a case where there is no reason to believe she is claiming anything of the sort.  Again, though, I do get what you are saying and I believe it a very valid point - just not in this instance unless someone knows something about her claims for damages that I don't know.

Edited by Whoosh
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
justoneoftwo
1 minute ago, Whoosh said:

She is not claiming disability - she is claiming specific lost earnings as far as I know.  That is a huge difference.  There really is just not much similar between the two.  So, I am not sure why anyone would be questioning that.  Further, I don't feel like looking back, but I am fairly certain that at least one poster DID imply that this was evidence if not proof that she had not been harmed in any way.

I totally get what you are saying, but I don't think we need to discuss issues of "was she disabled from all forms of work" in a case where there is no reason to believe she is claiming anything of the sort.  Again, though, I do get what you are saying and I believe it a very valid point - just not in this instance unless someone knows something about her claims for damages that I don't know.

I was not discussing her getting disability, I agree she is not claiming anything of the sort (to my knowledge).  But even for loss of income if the defense can show that she could have been working (and facebook is often used for this) it hurts a plaintiff's case.  Similarly, if for some reason she made more from her new non BDSM work (which I would guess is unlikely, but I don't know the market) it would hurt her loss of income claim.  I hope I am being clear, and I will add as you say I know nothing about her claims for damages other than what is in the complaint, and nothing at all about the alleged work or fun she may or may not have been doing since.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, justoneoftwo said:

I was not discussing her getting disability, I agree she is not claiming anything of the sort (to my knowledge).  But even for loss of income if the defense can show that she could have been working (and facebook is often used for this) it hurts a plaintiff's case.  Similarly, if for some reason she made more from her new non BDSM work (which I would guess is unlikely, but I don't know the market) it would hurt her loss of income claim.  I hope I am being clear, and I will add as you say I know nothing about her claims for damages other than what is in the complaint, and nothing at all about the alleged work or fun she may or may not have been doing since.  

I think you are being clear and I do think that type of thing is relevant in some instances.  I don't think it is in this particular case, but I may be wrong on that.  However, if someone were legitimately interested in discussing that, I think it needs to be legitimately discussed - not a bunch of nasty and degrading remarks from someone who doesn't even seem to totally understand the issues involved in the distinctions you and I are discussing right now.  Saying "of course she didn't have time for dancing (when we don't know if she is trying to recover for lost earnings from dancing), she was too busy jet setting and having fun" is just ignorant, obnoxious, and degrading to all women IMHO.

Edited by Whoosh
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
justoneoftwo
1 minute ago, Whoosh said:

I think you are being clear and I do think that type of thing is relevant in some instances.  I don't think it is in this particular case, but I may be wrong on that.  However, if someone were legitimately interested in discussing that, I think it needs to be legitimately discussed - not a bunch of nasty and degrading remarks from someone who doesn't even seem to totally understand the issues involved in the distinctions you and I are discussing right now.  Saying "of course she didn't have time dancing, she was too busy jet setting and having fun" is just ignorant, obnoxious, and degrading to all women IMHO.

It may not be relevant in this case, I really don't know (although most loss of income cases include at least some of this type of discussion).  Further you are right in that many people don't understand the distinctions, I suppose I was hoping to explain the issues.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, justoneoftwo said:

It may not be relevant in this case, I really don't know (although most loss of income cases include at least some of this type of discussion).  Further you are right in that many people don't understand the distinctions, I suppose I was hoping to explain the issues.  

Sorry if I seem to be trying to shut you down.  It is a very good point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
justoneoftwo
Just now, Whoosh said:

Sorry if I seem to be trying to shut you down.  It is a very good point.

Not at all, I'm just repeating myself a bit.  

I find these discussions have been very interesting, although I wish we did get to see the discovery and really could know the facts.  

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, justoneoftwo said:

I wish we did get to see the discovery and really could know the facts.  

You want facts? okay, here are all the "undisputed facts" to which both parties have agreed so far, with my alterations shown in brackets. Consistent with the court's scheduling order, Danica's attorney filed them today as Document 21.

  1. [Danica] is a resident of San Diego, California. She is the Plaintiff.
  2. Plaintiff has appeared in several adult (pornographic) films.
  3. On March 12, 13 and 14 of 2015, Plaintiff was employed to make an appearance at The Gold Club, [specific address], Philadelphia.
  4. On April 17 and 18, 2015, Plaintiff appeared at the Creekside Cabaret, in Colmar Township, Pennsylvania.
  5. Defendant Joshua James Duggar, age 27, is a resident of Arkansas.

That's it. I doubt it will satisfy anyone's curiosity, but that's all the lawsuit news today... 

  • Upvote 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
isarhenne
14 hours ago, Mothership said:

Through all of this, I keep reminding myself that as much as I despise Joshley and what he and his family stand for, it doesn't make him a liar.   On the other hand, Danica being a sex worker (with perhaps the need for a strong learning curve on using  social media to her advantage) doesn't make her a liar either.

Both of them have used their attorneys and/or the press to present their cases to the public.  What really happened and what can be proven is yet to be seen and the truth may never be completely revealed.

That is all.

Oh yes he DID lie at least at one instant:

When he was working for the FRC he quoted his lesbian aunt saying that she, too, is not for gay marriage because of the bible and that she is very much against it.

She came forward a few weeks later and told the press that she had never said such a thing.

I'm sorry, I know it has nothing to do with Danica, but here you see he is capable of lying on a big scale, in the media for the whole world to see and then not even apologize for it after his aunt came forward.

I don't think he can feel remorse for anything he did...

Edited by isarhenne
  • Upvote 10
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the update diplomat!  

Something being discussed seemed off to me and made no logical sense to me based on what I *thought* I knew.  Rather than just run with what I thought in my head, I did a bit of research on the topic.  

I understand people are very curious as to how Duggar may or may not prove his whereabouts for a few days in the month of March, 2015.  I understand that the human tendency is to hypothetically place one's self in Texas and think "how long would it take me to pose for a photo op in TX, get to PA, hang out at a strip club, hang out at a hotel, and then get back to TX and pose for another photo op?"  I respectfully suggest to everyone that Duggar is NOT you and you are NOT Duggar.  

The Duggar's have friends with private planes and in fact they have their own private plane.  When did they meet their first friend with a private plane?  When did they get their own private plane?  I have no idea, but FJ members were talking about the fact that they did indeed own a private plane by September 1, 2014 IF NOT EARLIER.  So I will just leave the evidence of that which I found doing my research on that issue in case anyone is interested.  I would hate for anyone to spend a lot of time thinking about this issue in totally irrelevant terms given the reality of Duggar's existence.

 

 

Edited by Whoosh
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mothership
9 hours ago, isarhenne said:

Oh yes he DID lie at least at one instant:

When he was working for the FRC he quoted his lesbian aunt saying that she, too, is not for gay marriage because of the bible and that she is very much against it.

She came forward a few weeks later and told the press that she had never said such a thing.

I'm sorry, I know it has nothing to do with Danica, but here you see he is capable of lying on a big scale, in the media for the whole world to see and then not even apologize for it after his aunt came forward.

I don't think he can feel remorse for anything he did...

You are right!  And that was the point I was trying to make:

When I was giving Joshley the benefit of the doubt in the current case, I was doing so knowing that he was a lying liar who lies, but that doesn't mean he's lying this time.   Just as Danica giving an interview in Hustler doesn't mean she's lying either.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2manyKidzzz

I continue to be mystified as to how Danica can make this claim while engaging in prostitution which is illegal in PA without being prosecuted for that. Or at least given a citation or whatever. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
justoneoftwo
3 minutes ago, 2manyKidzzz said:

I continue to be mystified as to how Danica can make this claim while engaging in prostitution which is illegal in PA without being prosecuted for that. Or at least given a citation or whatever. 

Prosecutors can elect to prosecute or not.  Further, there are some ways people claim to not be paying for the sex exactly, which can make the prosecution more difficult and not worth it, if you look at her complaint it skirts the issue.  Lastly, some places have a policy of not charging for prostitution, or only charging the johns, or only charging pimps, because there are many policy reasons to do so.  Basically, by saying you were paid for sex you take a risk, but many people are not charged.   

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
boston2495
5 minutes ago, justoneoftwo said:

Prosecutors can elect to prosecute or not.  Further, there are some ways people claim to not be paying for the sex exactly, which can make the prosecution more difficult and not worth it, if you look at her complaint it skirts the issue.  Lastly, some places have a policy of not charging for prostitution, or only charging the johns, or only charging pimps, because there are many policy reasons to do so.  Basically, by saying you were paid for sex you take a risk, but many people are not charged.   

Exactly. That, plus the fact that many prosecutors and others involved in the system wouldn't want the threat of criminal charges to silence the victim of abuse from coming forward in some way, shape or form. It's a public policy pro and con situation. If women involved in prostitution knew that coming forward with a lawsuit against an abuser would result in criminal charges to them 100% of the time, then they mostly wouldn't come forward, and these abusers would escape with no punishment whatsoever.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
DuggarWatch
21 minutes ago, 2manyKidzzz said:

I continue to be mystified as to how Danica can make this claim while engaging in prostitution which is illegal in PA without being prosecuted for that. Or at least given a citation or whatever. 

Danica has always been quoted as saying Josh's payment to her was "a gift", thus avoiding the accusation of 'payment for sex.'  (She's a professional and knows how things should be phrased.)

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, just generally for many reasons arresting prostitutes just isn't done unless they are caught in the act of exchanging sex for money.  In some countries, selling sex is actually not illegal but BUYING sex is.  Demonizing prostitutes does nothing to reduce prostitution or solve any related issues and it often makes related problems worse.  No reason to make things worse whether you are trying to prevent transmission of disease from mother to fetus or you are trying to make sure that violent sexual predators are dealt with appropriately.

It doesn't really make much sense to blame sex workers for the existence of the sex trade industry.  People don't typically grow up hoping to be a prostitute.  If there is a market with a need, that need tends to get served. Get rid of the market - problem solved.

Edited by Whoosh
  • Upvote 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
justoneoftwo
4 minutes ago, Whoosh said:

Really, just generally for many reasons arresting prostitutes just isn't done unless they are caught in the act of exchanging sex for money.  In some countries, selling sex is actually not illegal but BUYING sex is.  Demonizing prostitutes does nothing to reduce prostitution or solve any related issues and it often makes related problems worse.  No reason to make things worse whether you are trying to prevent transmission of disease from mother to fetus or you are trying to make sure that violent sexual predators are dealt with appropriately.

It doesn't really make much sense to blame sex workers for the existence of the sex trade industry.  People don't typically grow up hoping to be a prostitute.  If there is a market with a need, that need tends to get served. Get rid of the market - problem solved.

Many groups and people do think that the model of only buying sex is illegal is not working out as well as hoped.  Although those are usually the same groups who are pushing for total legality, so that may be a part of their opinion, they don't want to eliminate the sex trade.  I am inclined to agree with you that arresting sex workers doesn't seem like a good plan, although to be honest I'm not 100% sure what the best policy would be.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Coconut Flan locked this topic
  • Coconut Flan unlocked and locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Recent Status Updates

    • WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?

      WhatWouldJohnCrichtonDo?  »  church_of_dog

      I just made a lovely discovery! Type a colon, then a ) without any spaces. Then type a space. 
          
      I am ridiculously happy to discover this! (I also have a nagging feeling that I should have figured this out sooner...)
      · 5 replies
    • louisa05

      louisa05

      I’ve got a pack of rude sixth graders this morning. Ugh. 
      · 3 replies
    • HerNameIsBuffy

      HerNameIsBuffy

      Aren't I too old to forget to eat lunch?  
      So now....do eat a late salad and be cranky before bed because I want dinner and it's too late to eat or....do I tough out the afternoon cranky at my desk and eat dinner?  
      The dilemma is real.  
      · 3 replies
    • feministxtian

      feministxtian

      2nd Pfizer tomorrow!
      · 8 replies
    • Workingmom

      Workingmom

      So excited, happy. Finally I got my vaccination appointment. The first on the 26th of May , the second on my birthday.  Staying at home is no option, because I work in healthcare, with very close patientcontact. (I make mammograms). Hopefully I can relax a bit more after my vaccination and let the anxiety go.
      · 1 reply
    • choralcrusader8613

      choralcrusader8613

      I am going to scream or commit a crime. Why is Driscoll still a thing?!
      CW: misogyny, sexual gross, TMI
       
      · 3 replies
    • Maggie Mae

      Maggie Mae

      Where is the lost and found thread? I want to talk about the Wilkersons (simple living ak) but I'm not sure which thread or where to post. 
      · 5 replies
    • HerNameIsBuffy

      HerNameIsBuffy

      I bet no fundy mom every got such a touching Mother's Day tribute...

      Wishing everyone who celebrates a happy Mother's Day...and some extra love to others out there missing their mom's today, too.
       
      · 2 replies
    • Jasmar

      Jasmar

      My uncle just died from COVID. He wasn’t that much older than I am, so I kind of grew up with him. Just ten days ago my mom had been pleading with him to get vaccinated, but he wanted to wait to make sure the shots were really safe. I’m kind of devastated.
      · 6 replies
    • PumaLover

      PumaLover

      I just found out my little bonus kid is in a treatment center on a suicide watch tonight. He and I share a hobby and a couple weeks back he opened up to me that he's severely depressed and was wanting to hurt himself. I let his parents know and thankfully he had also been talking to them. I'm just heartbroken because him being in this center means that his parents had to call 911 and have him admitted and I know that was so hard for them to do. He's a young kid and has his whole life ahead of him but just wants to end it all and I don't know how to help him. 
      · 7 replies
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.