Josh - back to selling used cars in plain sight -Part 17

[EmCatlyn]

2 hours ago, amendgitan said:

This is a good post. And I agree that it is intrusive to speculate about their sex life. So is the Duggar family when they campaign and lobby to take away my right to decide what happens with my body and fertility, or to take away or deny basic, fundamental rights to me and my spouse, or to determine who gets to use what bathroom, based on genitalia, all while smiling and purporting to be moral role models with healthy and happy marriages, when in actuality there is a high level of sexual dysfunction and abuse in their lives and culture.

I feel empathy for Anna. But I don't give a damn about Josh's privacy rights and I think the evil hypocrisy of a family that lobbies hard to intrude in the personal lives of others and to deny other humans autonomy, privacy and freedom, while obsessively making public insinuations or outright declarations about their own sex lives, fertility, child bearing and marriages, some of which are outright lies, makes speculation on this site about what really goes on behind closed doors in that family, totally appropriate. 

You make a good point about the Duggars and their disdain for the rights of others.  I agree that trying to dictate other people's sexual and reproductive choices is offensively intrusive.

Personally, I have very little interest in protecting the "privacy" of any adult Duggar.  Where I am concerned about being too intrusive in private lives it is for my own (or the FJ community's) sake. 

It seems to me that when we start speculating about whether or not a specific couple have sex, or whether the sex is pleasant, or painful, etc. for an individual person, we are crossing from snarking to prurience.  This makes me uncomfortable.

I don't disagree that it would serve them right, but I am thinking about what it does to to us...

[ksgranola1]

Well, clearly the FJ board overall is in a pissy mood tonight. I'll just go over here in the corner & wait for the bateseses to come on.

[CorruptionInc.]

1 hour ago, EmCatlyn said:

You make a good point about the Duggars and their disdain for the rights of others.  I agree that trying to dictate other people's sexual and reproductive choices is offensively intrusive.

 

The worst thing is that they persecute in the name of Religion. If your Religion requires you to hate someone, you need a new one!

[lizzybee]

On 7/6/2016 at 2:46 PM, EmCatlyn said:

However, in a general sense, I doubt that most fundie wives find it "easy" to be "joyfully available" all the time.

I have thought about this a lot lately. Since I got pregnant, I have not been "joyfully available" at all (this baby took 4 years to come and we were terrified we might do something to jeopardize it). I know a lot of women enjoy sex while pregnant, but that's not been my experience. Particularly in the beginning, I just wanted no part of it. Nope nope nope. Now I'm in my second trimester, I'm thinking maybe my interest may spike again soon. But we will see. There's already so much going on with my body though, the idea to add more stuff going on feels too much to me right now.* 

I couldn't imagine though, having a husband who was greedily persisting on and expecting daily and/or frequent sex. The few times I have been "joyfully available" to myself since I became pregnant left me feeling crampy and as though it wasn't really worth it. I couldn't imagine submitting to lots and lots of sex right now. Now, if I had to add a layer of several small children taking up my energy and ramping up my stress? Nah, just nah. 

In other words, it's probably not easy at all some times and maybe even miserable at others to have to just be ready to fall on your back and lift your skirt anytime hubby gets to wanting some hey, hey, hey. 

*I know this isn't everyone's experience. Some people say pregnancy sex is the best of their lives, I'm just adding another perspective from my experience. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

On July 7, 2016 at 1:55 PM, amendgitan said:

This is a good post. And I agree that it is intrusive to speculate about their sex life. So is the Duggar family when they campaign and lobby to take away my right to decide what happens with my body and fertility, or to take away or deny basic, fundamental rights to me and my spouse, or to determine who gets to use what bathroom, based on genitalia, all while smiling and purporting to be moral role models with healthy and happy marriages, when in actuality there is a high level of sexual dysfunction and abuse in their lives and culture.

I feel empathy for Anna. But I don't give a damn about Josh's privacy rights and I think the evil hypocrisy of a family that lobbies hard to intrude in the personal lives of others and to deny other humans autonomy, privacy and freedom, while obsessively making public insinuations or outright declarations about their own sex lives, fertility, child bearing and marriages, some of which are outright lies, makes speculation on this site about what really goes on behind closed doors in that family, totally appropriate. 

Discussion of the damage their beliefs cause and the danger of their trying to spread those beliefs is absolutely appropriate.  And I agree that the level of control they would like to extert over society when it comes to sexual/marriage/gender issues deserves a giant fuck you from the rest of us.

But speculating about the specifics of what happens behind the bedroom door of two individuals is still invasive and speaks to an unhealthy level of interest in something that none of our business.

It's not only pointless to speculate on things there is no way to know about...and it does take the conversation in the prurient direction of wondering about Smuggar sexy times (gross) from what they do that actually does harm others.

How does taking huge issue with their abhorrent political views give the moral high ground in speculating about their sex life?  

I personally don't care what anyone does sexually as long as it's between consenting adults and unless I'm a participant I don't think it's any of my business...their politic or hypocrisy notwithstanding.

 

[Swamptribe]

They reap what they sow.

The Duggar adults gave up their right to privacy the second they signed on the dotted line.

 

JB and M have always bragged about their sex lives on the show.   They go on and on about righteous sex within marriage.  Even telling women they can’t say no to their husbands. They preached purity while hiding the fact that their own son abused his sisters and other girls and had a thing for porn.  They lied about purity in dating, never mentioning the fact that Derick had dated other woman, not until they feared it might come out on its own. Or that Ben and Jessa had unchaperoned time while courting.  Notice they are being more upfront about this new beau of Jingers. (poor Jinger I worry about the kind of guys this famewhore of a family attracts)

 

If they did not want people speculation on their private lives, then they should have kept them private instead of becoming public figures touting family morality and purity.  The adult Duggars sold their right to privacy. KNOWINGLY.  JB and M sold their minor children’s rights the second they decided to put them on the show while growing up.

 

I honestly have no sympathy for the Duggar adults.  Who I feel for are the minor children and the fact that they were given no choice in giving up their private lives.

[ksgranola1]

Speaking of imposing your sex life upon others...This morning on the news page, Rep. Paul Ryan said he will consider funding for Zika virus research, as long as all forms of birth control including condoms were outlawed. Way to tie up a vitally needed service, Ryan. The SCOTUS has already dealt w/this before this little snake was born. He needs to give it up.

[Jana814]

19 minutes ago, ksgranola1 said:

Speaking of imposing your sex life upon others...This morning on the news page, Rep. Paul Ryan said he will consider funding for Zika virus research, as long as all forms of birth control including condoms were outlawed. Way to tie up a vitally needed service, Ryan. The SCOTUS has already dealt w/this before this little snake was born. He needs to give it up.

That's horrible what an ass. 

[47of74]

Looks like the Ashley Madison owners are copping to using fembots.

money.cnn.com/2016/07/05/technology/ashley-madison-fembots/index.html?sr=cnnmoneybin070916ashley-madison-fembots0900vodtop

Quote

Ashley Madison, the dating website for cheaters, has admitted that some women on its site were virtual computer programs instead of real women.

The company that runs the website, Avid Life Media, noted that detail in a public statement released on the Independence Day holiday.

It means that lots of men who paid for the dating website's features -- such as sending messages to supposed ladies -- were actually spending cash to speak to fembots. They thought they were cheating, but they were actually all alone.

In its statement, Avid Life Media also announced that it has appointed Rob Segal as the company's new CEO and James Millership as its new president to lead the company out of turmoil.

I wonder if young Joshley talked to any fembots at all?

[infooverload]

Does anyone wonder if fundie husbands can tell when their wife is faking being "joyfully available?"

[Thorkim1954]

13 hours ago, ksgranola1 said:

Speaking of imposing your sex life upon others...This morning on the news page, Rep. Paul Ryan said he will consider funding for Zika virus research, as long as all forms of birth control including condoms were outlawed. Way to tie up a vitally needed service, Ryan. The SCOTUS has already dealt w/this before this little snake was born. He needs to give it up.

What in the holy hell?  Birth control outlawed? I don't like this guy anyway, now it's justified.

[RosyDaisy]

Looks like the Ashley Madison owners are copping to using fembots.

I thought this was a known fact. I heard about it just after Joshgate 2.0. I think it was Dr. Phil. Either his show or one of celebrity news shows he was interviewed on.

[VixenToast]

4 hours ago, infooverload said:

Does anyone wonder if fundie husbands can tell when their wife is faking being "joyfully available?"

Whether he does or does not, I will not be having what she's having. Lol.

 

Oh God, now I want a sandwich.

[Fundie Bunny]

4 hours ago, infooverload said:

Does anyone wonder if fundie husbands can tell when their wife is faking being "joyfully available?"

Like they even care

[Gimme a Free RV]

Out of sheer boredom, I re-watched the engagement and wedding planning episodes of Josh and Anna.  I kept talking to the screen when Josh would say things that we now know aren't true.  He was clearly spouting off what his parents had hammered into him like a parrot with fairly good acting skills.

[nst]

19 minutes ago, Gimme a Free RV said:

Out of sheer boredom, I re-watched the engagement and wedding planning episodes of Josh and Anna.  I kept talking to the screen when Josh would say things that we now know aren't true.  He was clearly spouting off what his parents had hammered into him like a parrot with fairly good acting skills.

out of sheer boredom I watching Jessa giving birth 

I could never watch anything with Josh unless I had a bucket next to me 

[nastyhobbitses]

13 hours ago, 47of74 said:

Looks like the Ashley Madison owners are copping to using fembots.

money.cnn.com/2016/07/05/technology/ashley-madison-fembots/index.html?sr=cnnmoneybin070916ashley-madison-fembots0900vodtop

I wonder if young Joshley talked to any fembots at all?

He probably couldn't tell if he was.

[ksgranola1]

WTH is a fembot?!

[Fundie Bunny]

17 minutes ago, ksgranola1 said:

WTH is a fembot?!

That fucker that says she is all wet thibling about you on websites ads. That bitch could for sure find a better hobbie

[Buzzard]

25 minutes ago, ksgranola1 said:

WTH is a fembot?!

In austin powers they were machines of inordinate beauty who's mission was to kill.  Generally used to describe "too good to be true" women that are up to no good while meeting all the "silly wimmenz" stereotype.

[December]

35 minutes ago, ksgranola1 said:

WTH is a fembot?!

Chatbots (computer programs that pretend to be women and hold conversations) 

In this case, it seems like it was a cheap, efficient way to keep male customers engaging with the AM website (and making AM money) despite there being very few actual women signed up for it. 

[EmCatlyn]

1 hour ago, December said:

Chatbots (computer programs that pretend to be women and hold conversations) 

In this case, it seems like it was a cheap, efficient way to keep male customers engaging with the AM website (and making AM money) despite there being very few actual women signed up for it. 

I have a Duggar-ly comment at the end, but first want to add that the "talk to you" technology has been around for a long time.  I think "Eliza" (the first one) was written in the 1960s for the big MIT frameworks.   We used to have a version of "Eliza," on our old Apple IIe (1984 ish).  Even then while some of the responses were off-key, it was amazing how many of them were pretty "normal."  

By now, the chat-boxes are really sophisticated. Sometimes when you are on a website and they give you an option to "talk" to someone immediately, you may get a chat-bot.  They are programmed to understand a lot and to address specific problems based on key words.  A lot of times, when you get an answer that sounds really "canned," it is because you have a chat-bot, not a real person. (Other times it is a real person who thinks in canned responses. I am not sure which is worse.)

Okay, so back to the Duggars:

We have often noted how knee-jerk and unthoughtful Duggar responses to everyday things can be. In some ways, the Gothard-approved lessons seem to get people talking like chat-boxes.  Earlier in this thread someone remarked that Josh repeated what he had been taught rather than his own feelings/beliefs.  He is a well-programed chatbox in his way. 

Further, to the comment about Josh not knowing the difference between a fem-bot and a real woman, I would say that this is true because most of the people around him have been "programmed" also.  He is used to cliche (stock) responses to everything.   He gives "programmed" responses to everything.  Like many others, he could easily be replaced by a fundie bot, except when he is sinning.  How ironic that when he was sinning, he probably was interacting with fembots.

[RosyDaisy]

I don't think Josh gave a damn as long as he got off on it.

[Cleopatra7]

15 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

I have a Duggar-ly comment at the end, but first want to add that the "talk to you" technology has been around for a long time.  I think "Eliza" (the first one) was written in the 1960s for the big MIT frameworks.   We used to have a version of "Eliza," on our old Apple IIe (1984 ish).  Even then while some of the responses were off-key, it was amazing how many of them were pretty "normal."  

By now, the chat-boxes are really sophisticated. Sometimes when you are on a website and they give you an option to "talk" to someone immediately, you may get a chat-bot.  They are programmed to understand a lot and to address specific problems based on key words.  A lot of times, when you get an answer that sounds really "canned," it is because you have a chat-bot, not a real person. (Other times it is a real person who thinks in canned responses. I am not sure which is worse.)

Okay, so back to the Duggars:

We have often noted how knee-jerk and unthoughtful Duggar responses to everyday things can be. In some ways, the Gothard-approved lessons seem to get people talking like chat-boxes.  Earlier in this thread someone remarked that Josh repeated what he had been taught rather than his own feelings/beliefs.  He is a well-programed chatbox in his way. 

Further, to the comment about Josh not knowing the difference between a fem-bot and a real woman, I would say that this is true because most of the people around him have been "programmed" also.  He is used to cliche (stock) responses to everything.   He gives "programmed" responses to everything.  Like many others, he could easily be replaced by a fundie bot, except when he is sinning.  How ironic that when he was sinning, he probably was interacting with fembots.

I think Josh did cheat, but probably not with anyone from AM, given how few real women signed up for it. He probably had hook ups with Duggar groupies in Tonitown and DC, and possibly run of the mill streetwalker types. Women from the first two groups won't come forward because they are still involved in a conservative Christian millieu and would be run out on a rail if they admitted to infidelity, much less with a Duggar. Streetwalker prostitutes are so marginalized that any hookups would remain anonymous. If the extent of Josh's cheating was just talking to fembots online, I doubt he would have been whisked away to months of Jesus Rehab.

[EmCatlyn]

32 minutes ago, Cleopatra7 said:

I think Josh did cheat, but probably not with anyone from AM, given how few real women signed up for it. He probably had hook ups with Duggar groupies in Tonitown and DC, and possibly run of the mill streetwalker types. Women from the first two groups won't come forward because they are still involved in a conservative Christian millieu and would be run out on a rail if they admitted to infidelity, much less with a Duggar. Streetwalker prostitutes are so marginalized that any hookups would remain anonymous. If the extent of Josh's cheating was just talking to fembots online, I doubt he would have been whisked away to months of Jesus Rehab.

I agree that Josh did more than just talk/e-mail.   But unquestionably he also got e-mail and chat through AM that satisfied him, or he wouldn't have signed up twice, so he must have gotten some fem-bot "action."   

You are right that he almost certainly didn't meet (m)any adulterous women through AM, but he may have had at least one real hook-up through the site. (I believe AM also had call-girls involved, either as subscribers or on the AM payroll.)   Otherwise, even if he had had other affairs, he would not have been as likely to "confess all" after the AM scandal.   I could see him saying that all he had done was watch porn and chat with women through AM but that God had watched over him and kept him from real physical infidelity.

I believe that it was fear that the AM hack would reveal more specifics that led to the larger confession, complete with Satan's fortress in his heart.   

Still, I love the idea of Mr. Canned Christian Response Josh chatting away and getting all aroused by a Canned Response Sexy-Woman computer program.