Kaci Lynn is here - Whitney and Zach's 2nd baby

[Palimpsest]

3 minutes ago, actuallyjessica said:

the latter.

I thought so.  So you are being deliberately annoying to upset people and elicit a response.   There is a word for that.

We won't have to rehash the discussion if you could refrain from squeeing whenever some IBLP woman is spotted wearing pants, so I strongly suggest you stop.

 

[Coconut Flan]

I have an alternate solution. The next time Jessica brings up the pants, don't bother discussing it.  Just let me bury her in dead parrots. 

[Palimpsest]

4 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

I have an alternate solution. The next time Jessica brings up the pants, don't bother discussing it.  Just let me bury her in dead parrots. 

It's a deal!  And that cat is seriously scary.

 

[Carm_88]

7 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

I have an alternate solution. The next time Jessica brings up the pants, don't bother discussing it.  Just let me bury her in dead parrots. 

Grumpy Cat does not approve!  

[HerNameIsBuffy]

23 minutes ago, actuallyjessica said:

the latter. we've had this discussion many a time before, so not sure why you all seem to want to rehash it? i'm tired of trying to explain my answers even if i'm not actually disagreeing with any of you. it's like you're looking for people to barrel up and fight or something?
 

So when you keep bringing up the same point it's fine, but responses to it are rehashing...how does that work where your redundancy is fine as long as no none counters you?

im tired of you trying to explain your answers, too, so we're on the same page there.  But accusing people of looking for s fight when you were the one saying you didn't care the reason for the pants...despite the reason being a brainwashing camp...

So you weren't poking the beehive when you posted that?  Even though you just admitted to trolling because you just like to be annoying?  

When the only reason you post this stuff to annoy other people then why the faux above it all attitude about responses?  You wanted to annoy, did, and have proof in the replies.  Looks like mission accomplished to me.

[Coconut Flan]

24 minutes ago, Palimpsest said:

It's a deal!  And that cat is seriously scary

Cat looks like I've felt since mid-day Thursday.  People do NOT want to be near me until I recover from this feverish cold. 

[Palimpsest]

@Coconut Flan, I hope you feel better soon.  Hot lemon and honey is good for colds and virtual chicken soup is heading in your direction.

[actuallyjessica]

25 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

So when you keep bringing up the same point it's fine, but responses to it are rehashing...how does that work where your redundancy is fine as long as no none counters you?

im tired of you trying to explain your answers, too, so we're on the same page there.  But accusing people of looking for s fight when you were the one saying you didn't care the reason for the pants...despite the reason being a brainwashing camp...

So you weren't poking the beehive when you posted that?  Even though you just admitted to trolling because you just like to be annoying?  

When the only reason you post this stuff to annoy other people then why the faux above it all attitude about responses?  You wanted to annoy, did, and have proof in the replies.  Looks like mission accomplished to me.

my original response was not to the posters discussing ALERT, but in general every day wear. many, many times the topic has been discussed and we are all at the conclusion that no, wearing pants does not make horrible beliefs any better. my response was just pretty much a yay for pants, because it's one thing to be raised in an environment where everything is made out to be bad and to also have all fashion choices restricted, so pants is a yay for being able to wear pants. just because they can.

and no, i wasn't trolling by saying 'nah' after i had already said i wasn't interested in further discussion that required my participation.

i'm done now. not clarifying anything any further, so you'll have to make do with what i've written here. enjoy the rest of your weekend... in pants... or no pants. whatever.

[ladyaudley]

and no, i wasn't trolling by saying 'nah' after i had already said i wasn't interested in further discussion that required my participation. [emoji6]

Not much point being on a discussion forum then, is there?

[formergothardite]

1 hour ago, actuallyjessica said:

. my response was just pretty much a yay for pants, because it's one thing to be raised in an environment where everything is made out to be bad and to also have all fashion choices restricted, so pants is a yay for being able to wear pants. just because they can.

I can see how on a surface level it might seem like wearing pants makes a tiny bit of a better environment, but we can look at lots of fundies who don't have an issue with pants and see that in reality it doesn't seem to improve life at all. Look at Alfred, Gothard's biggest fan. He lets his daughters wear pants, shorts, and tight shirts. Yet that did little to protect them or make their lives better. 

[colors_outside15]

11 hours ago, formergothardite said:

STEP(the female ALERT) has been around for a while now and IBLP has allowed pants on women for over a decade, and guess what? Nothing has gotten better for the IBLP students. It is still the same old cult, except now with pants. So I don't get the "Yeah pants!" like it is some big deal. Getting to wear pants while being brainwashed isn't actually any better. @actuallyjessica can you explain why you think wearing pants somehow makes the abusive brainwashing better or less bad? 

Just to be totally clear here, I'm 100% with @formergothardite and others who hold her views. Wearing pants means nothing in terms of the cult, and was simply a casual observation on my part. I had no intentions of igniting any fires or old debates/arguments/etc.

[Pasta]

Why does it seem like the Bates children have more friends than the Duggars children? I see more evidence of outside friendships in the Bates family.  I know we hope that some day the kids will change their outlook so do you think having more outside friendships means a better future for second generation Bates? I'm just curious. 

[formergothardite]

13 minutes ago, Pasta said:

Why does it seem like the Bates children have more friends than the Duggars children? I see more evidence of outside friendships in the Bates family.  I know we hope that some day the kids will change their outlook so do you think having more outside friendships means a better future for second generation Bates? I'm just curious. 

 A lot of their friends seem to be in IBLP/ATI. I also think that the Bates play up the friendships for television and social media more than the Duggars do. It does seem like the Duggars have people they hang out with and they always have. Even back in the first days of the show they had the Holt(?) family that they hung out with and they played some sport(broomball?) with various people. 

[Pasta]

12 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

 A lot of their friends seem to be in IBLP/ATI. I also think that the Bates play up the friendships for television and social media more than the Duggars do. It does seem like the Duggars have people they hang out with and they always have. Even back in the first days of the show they had the Holt(?) family that they hung out with and they played some sport(broomball?) with various people. 

Oh, ok.  Thanks. I didn't realize they only hung out with other IBLP believers. 

[Carm_88]

54 minutes ago, Pasta said:

Oh, ok.  Thanks. I didn't realize they only hung out with other IBLP believers. 

They really wouldn't know people outside of fundie circles. They do go to Crown, so they would meet friends there. 

[actuallyjessica]

Little Kaci is looking a lot like her big brother in this picture.

[Carm_88]

1 hour ago, actuallyjessica said:

Little Kaci is looking a lot like her big brother in this picture.

Awww sweet! Very much like Bradley! 

[imokit]

Pants and no head band!  Good job!  And completely adorable!!!

[season of life]

She has such a sweet smile. She didn't deserve being born into this mess.

[Lovebug]

In other news - Bradley Bates LITERALLY has got to be the cutest kid I have ever seen in my life.  That kid is GORGEOUS.  And I have 2 boys of my own

 

[LawsonBatesEgo]

Adorable kids.

Shame about the cult. 

[VineHeart137]

4 hours ago, LawsonBatesEgo said:

Adorable kids.

Shame about the cult. 

Every time I see a picture of Bradley I automatically think something along the lines of "God he's so cute, but man his parents are dumb-dumbs!"

[HerNameIsBuffy]

6 hours ago, LawsonBatesEgo said:

Adorable kids.

Shame about the cult. 

Is this a new thing to sarcastically acknowledge that there is more to these people than cute babies and sleeveless tops?

Just wondering.

[RosyDaisy]

Babies and young children are innocents living in a house of evil. They deserve better.

[actuallyjessica]

Babies and young children are innocents living in a house of evil. They deserve better.

This is an opinion that no doubt varies from person to person but I see that your cut off is young children. I'm curious as to the age or circumstances that have lead you to your definition.