Dillards 29 - Teaching Them to Make Piñatas

[MadeItOut]

At risk of putting ideas in someone's head, I'm curious as to how it could affect the younger kids, particularly the lost girls?

 

Someone said they'd need to prove that they've required (& accessed) treatment. If the four are put on the stand and are so fragile that it comes out beyond a shadow of a doubt that they didn't get treatment, or that it was inadequate, does that have a 'failure to protect implication'?

[Front Hugging Fiend]

6 hours ago, Coy Koi said:

True that the names weren't released, but the info that was released made it pretty easy to figure out who some of the victims were. I have no idea if, under the law, more identifying info should have been blacked out or not. But I guess we'll see.

In any case, I think Jill and Jessa's righteous indignation is misplaced. Even if (and that's a big "if") it turns out to be true that less information about them should have been released, they seem to direct ALL of their negative feelings about the entire situation at the records being released and published, and none of it at the person who sexually assaulted them or their parents who repeatedly failed to protect them and then thrust them into the public eye, knowing it could become public. But I just don't want to criticize them too harshly for that because it's not the responsibility of the victim to react to their victimization in any particular way.

I think if the family wasn't 'famous', it would've been harder to identify the victims. But if you come from a show called '19 kids and counting' and everyone knows your parents are Jim Bob and Michelle and you live in Arkansas, all it took was basic mathematics to figure out who the victims were based on the details still visible in the report. (sorry for the run on sentence)

I do think their energy is grossly misplaced but I do believe that they have *some* credibility when they say the report was under-redacted. I will agree that this caused unnecessary revictimisation in the sense that the report release did not give them a choice as to whether or not they would be identified by the public. 

The scandal killed the show, which was (I'm sure) their only real source of income. I think they have *some* right to go after lost income? IDK. It sucks to me that these girls didn't choose to be molested, and they didn't choose to lose their income because of it. I don't agree with their values or lifestyles but why isn't Josh being as penalised as they are? Josh gets to hide and keep his family. Why is JB making these girls do this? Why isn't he protecting them? Why wasn't he protecting them in the beginning?

I don't disagree with their choice to go on Megyn Kelly and talk about it, either - if a story like that came out about me, I'd do everything in my power to reclaim ownership over the story and tell it the way I felt most comfortable. It's just a shame we're talking about the Duggars here who have limited education, dangerous beliefs, and a skewed sense of 'forgiveness' and displaced blame. They're putting too much energy into suing Bauer and In Touch to protect Josh.

 IDK. Too many thoughts. I don't even know why I care, tbh.

[VelociRapture]

@Front Hugging FiendI agree with a lot of what you said. Even not blaming them for giving that interview to Megyn Kelly. The choice to reveal this was taken from them, but it's still their right to decide whether or not they want to address this publicly at all.

I will, however, blame Jill and Jessa for publicly spewing those false facts regarding molestation in families. And I absolutely hold them responsible for minimizing the assaults in the interview, then turning around and stating it was sexual assault in the lawsuit. I sympathize with them, but they don't get to have it both ways. 

(And yes, I'm aware they likely got all that info from their parents. But they're grown ass adults now and they have access to additional sources of information. It still pisses me off that Kelly either didn't push back on that or that it was edited out. That misinformation could be incredibly harmful to victims who viewed the interview.)

[snickers34]

1 hour ago, Front Hugging Fiend said:

IDK. Too many thoughts. I don't even know why I care, tbh.

Lol. This pretty much sums up my feelings on the Duggars. No need to post again ever.

[Incognito22]

Yeah I think Jim Bob's ego got in his way of thinking this one through.  He's not going to be able to control the questions or the climate that they are questioned.  This could be deeply painful and confusing for these women.  And yes, they are adults now and have the ability to say no or make their own choices but they are so steeped in the  koolaid that even if they did breakaway immediately enough time hasn't passed for growth and understanding of all this in my opinion.  

   Of course he will use it to reinforce how horrible the media and heathens are but it's going to cause much dissonance if they go through with a trial.  

[sawasdee]

  I share Mike Huckabee's b'day. but I also get Stephen Fry and Rupert Grint!

[choralcrusader8613]

New thread here: