Amy Jordan Duggar Jordan Duggar King Duggar Wedding Part 4 AKA Amy and Dillon King

[devoutjedi]

On 12/21/2016 at 6:10 PM, The limit does not exist said:

My favorite season was the first one with the Bridezillas. I'm still sad they cancelled that show!

I wholeheartedly agree! It's a tragedy 

[sunshine]

So, who watched the Amy's interview? Anyone? Please, dish. 

[nastyhobbitses]

On 12/21/2016 at 9:10 PM, The limit does not exist said:

I watch a lot of trashy tv and just saw an ad for the new season with Famy so I quickly ran to FJ only to see everyone knew. 

I know we knew that Famy wasn't really like the Duggars but they have to bleep her in the previews which is surprising to me (I don't really follow her so maybe that's common).

Tara Reid was the one that showed up with a fake boyfriend on MBC. My favorite season was the first one with the Bridezillas. I'm still sad they cancelled that show!

My mom once made me absolutely lose it when we were watching Bridezillas and she said, "that broad better give the best head in Georgia or else I can't see why this guy's staying with her".

[Kayleigh83]

5 hours ago, sunshine said:

So, who watched the Amy's interview? Anyone? Please, dish. 

Agree! Someone on her IG commented how they were disappointed she had nothing positive to say (they didn't specify about what but I'm assuming her family). So naturally my interest was piqued!

[GotCaughtDancing]

Oh Famy at it again. Here is a People article where she talks about the person who picked her up by the throat and raised her to the ceiling. Of course she won't say who it was, but she does say it was a family member.

http://people.com/tv/amy-duggar-king-reveals-who-allegedly-physically-abused-her-marriage-boot-camp/

You know this is going to throw a lot of speculation to her male cousins.  This chick is a mess. lol

[Bad Wolf]

Male cousins, father, uncle. Not a good move, Famy.

[socalrules]

Basically, by not saying who it was, it allows the public to blame whoever they hate the most. It gives options to her story. What I don't like about what she has done is that it casts a shadow over the innocent. She knows she is going to be asked if it was her dad, Jim Bob or Josh. She can then play coy and act as though she is taking the higher road by not naming them. 

[SweetFellowshipper]

Man, nobody deserves that. I feel bad for her. 

[Fundie Bunny]

Oh c'mon. I can't believe she is actually using the molestations for her own good.  She is trying to imply she was also a victim or something. Pretty low even for you, Amy

[ClaraOswin]

I haven't read any of the links or anything. If she was a victim of violence, I feel truly bad for her. But using it to prolong her 15 minutes is just weird to me. 

[SweetFellowshipper]

1 hour ago, Fundie Bunny said:

Oh c'mon. I can't believe she is actually using the molestations for her own good.  She is trying to imply she was also a victim or something. Pretty low even for you, Amy

I'm talking about the physical violence...

[Fundie Bunny]

2 minutes ago, SweetFellowshipper said:

I'm talking about the physical violence...

I've read the article and she seems to imply something like it

[sunshine]

To exploit abuse for financial gain seems stupid to me, couldn't she have chosen a career in porn or something?

[ariel9]

It seems like people in the family can do whatever they would like without any consequences as long as they get forgiven. 

[SweetFellowshipper]

I don't know, to me if you can parlay your shitty stuff that happened to you into a profit, that's not offensive, that's just capitalism. People make their unearned privileges work for them in terms of fame, job opportunities, and money, so why not your trauma? It's arguably more morally acceptable than just using your unfairly gained advantages, which most of us do. It IS something you had to live through, and if people enjoy being voyeuristic about it (which they usually do), why not? 

People got upset because Elizabeth Smart made $$ off her book and did media appearances...To me it's like, hey, the girl went through hell, if people will give her money to hear about it why the hell not? It's no different than using whatever else you "have" (education, white privilege, hot body, middle of upper class upbringing, knowing somebody who can give you a great recommendation, wealth) to get what you want.

[Jinder Roles]

On January 4, 2017 at 1:29 PM, socalrules said:

Basically, by not saying who it was, it allows the public to blame whoever they hate the most. It gives options to her story. What I don't like about what she has done is that it casts a shadow over the innocent. She knows she is going to be asked if it was her dad, Jim Bob or Josh. She can then play coy and act as though she is taking the higher road by not naming them. 

On the other hand, if it was someone who is close to her then telling the world who it was may start another scandal which would impact the entire family(not the the abuser doesn't deserve this but it could ruin her relationship with her family; who she obviously cares about). 

I know she went on TV and talked about the abuse, but she's under no obligation to divulge who the person is (even if she's financially gaining from it) We may not like the things Amy does (or the minimizing of abuse for entertainment) but it's her story to tell. 

[NakedKnees]

2 hours ago, SweetFellowshipper said:

I don't know, to me if you can parlay your shitty stuff that happened to you into a profit, that's not offensive, that's just capitalism. People make their unearned privileges work for them in terms of fame, job opportunities, and money, so why not your trauma? It's arguably more morally acceptable than just using your unfairly gained advantages, which most of us do. It IS something you had to live through, and if people enjoy being voyeuristic about it (which they usually do), why not? 

People got upset because Elizabeth Smart made $$ off her book and did media appearances...To me it's like, hey, the girl went through hell, if people will give her money to hear about it why the hell not? It's no different than using whatever else you "have" (education, white privilege, hot body, middle of upper class upbringing, knowing somebody who can give you a great recommendation, wealth) to get what you want.

That's a good point, I hadn't looked at it that way.

I think where it gets tricky though is that there's gotta be some sort of line between capitalizing and exploiting. It is Amy's story to tell, so that's great, but I do wonder how similar abuse survivors would feel about that type of display (bringing these stories to trashy reality TV).

[SweetFellowshipper]

15 minutes ago, NakedKnees said:

That's a good point, I hadn't looked at it that way.

I think where it gets tricky though is that there's gotta be some sort of line between capitalizing and exploiting. It is Amy's story to tell, so that's great, but I do wonder how similar abuse survivors would feel about that type of display (bringing these stories to trashy reality TV).

I agree, it's not necessarily a "moral" choice, but sometimes I get tired of the narrative that abuse survivors are supposed to be like Mother Teresa. Sometimes it seems like a form of silencing. After my rape I talked about it a lot, continue to talk about it. My family asked me not to and said if I just "moved on" I wouldn't feel bad anymore. Really, it wasn't about me, it just made them uncomfortable. We as a society don't like to hear about abuse and violence.

And if somebody can make money from it? Why not? People make money from exploitation all the time. If you're a manager at a big corporation, you're involved somehow in exploiting others. If you work in the music or modeling industry, or pretty much any industry, you've exploited yourself or somebody else. Hell, even a theatre company my husband works with that employs disabled actors exploits disability to some extent (people are interested to see what that looks like onstage). If you write a book about your mental health issues or your disability or the racism or transphobia or sexism you've experienced, or your affairs or addiction, which people do all the time, aren't you "exploiting" it to a degree? People are buying it to read about your suffering or bad choices, or they're watching your show to watch your bad choices (like when we watch fundie TV). We've all done it. That's capitalism. So if your form of capital is an abuse story, is it more or less exploitative than other people exploiting others' bodies or their own, or others' labor or their own, or people's loneliness or their desire to be beautiful, etc.? It's your story to tell, and maybe to make a profit off of. Everybody sells what they've got, whether it's an able body or sexiness or a pretty face or a quick mind or a story. Sometimes what you've got is misfortune, and people like to hear about that.

That's my thought, anyway, as one abuse survivor. Everyone's experience will be different. But also, I question the idea that one's abuse story is for others (like by virtue of being abused, we have to protect other survivors and are responsible for their reactions to our stories and how we tell them). It's only for oneself to do with as one will, IMO. 

This isn't directed at you as a disagreement, btw. It's just my current (evolving) thoughts on the matter as I've wondered about this particular issue a lot myself. I don't know that I'm "right" or that there's one answer or correct narrative. 

[sunshine]

8 hours ago, ariel9 said:

It seems like people in the family can do whatever they would like without any consequences as long as they get forgiven. 

They will experience consequences for their actions whether we hear about it or not.

[socalrules]

My problem with Amy is that she is discussing this abuse on marriage boot camp where they don't let you on the show unless you bring the drama or make a fool of yourself. That is what makes it all suspect to me. This isn't a serious show. This isn't a special episode of Oprah. People don't watch to learn how to have a healthy relationship,  they watch for the fights and ridiculousness. This is why I find most of what is said by anyone on these shows suspect. She has been on tv long enough to know that anything she said was going to be used as a tease during the commercials to get people to watch, I.e. Making it seem as though Dillion was the one who abused her. This just another reality show where half of it is likely scripted and the drama is armored up. 

I have never had a problem with Elizabeth Smart making any money discussion what happened to her. Yet, she wasn't on a show with Z-List celebrities willing to throw her self-respect away for TV time and a check. She made money without being on a show whose intent is to make her look ridiculous for higher ratings. 

[Londish]

Is anyone else watching marriage boot camp tonight? 

[GreyhoundFan]

22 minutes ago, Londish said:

Is anyone else watching marriage boot camp tonight? 

I can't help myself. Yes, I am. Famy is being an idiot. Big surprise. I don't know any other the other 'campers'. That woman from Mob Wives has had the worsts facelift ever. And the chicklet from the Bachlorette is dumber than a box of rocks.

[Londish]

1 minute ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I can't help myself. Yes, I am. Famy is being an idiot. Big surprise. I don't know any other the other 'campers'. That woman from Mob Wives has had the worsts facelift ever. And the chicklet from the Bachlorette is dumber than a box of rocks.

Agreed! And same, I don't know any of the other couples. I watched last season because of Jade and Tanner, though.

[GreyhoundFan]

LOL, during the fake press conference, Famy admitted to hitting Dillon and she mentioned him "dropping" the cat on the counter. One of the reporters asked if domestic violence was their norm. She looked ticked off.

[Gillyweed]

10 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

LOL, during the fake press conference, Famy admitted to hitting Dillon and she mentioned him "dropping" the cat on the counter. One of the reporters asked if domestic violence was their norm. She looked ticked off.

Did she mean like an actual hit or like a playful smack?