Josh Harris Announced "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" Was Discontinued

[Howl]

1 hour ago, Spinosaurus said:

*Why couldn't he have called that film 'I Kissed I Kissed Dating Goodbye Goodbye'?  Talk about a missed opportunity.

That crockumentary from a guy who is running 

1 hour ago, Spinosaurus said:

my own marketing and brand strategy company, Clear & Loud, and use the power of story to help businesses connect with customers.

makes you realize his ability to spin and indulge in selective amnesia. 

Again, I do hope that he and Shannon will be able to co-parent well and live close enough to each other so the kids have access to both parents.  How old are the kids now? 

[Spinosaurus]

His IG has a picture of him with his youngest daughter, with a caption along the lines of 'I can't believe she's 13 and off to secondary school already.'  His eldest daughter was born while he was writing 'Boy meets Girl,' which iirc was 2000.

I am honestly surprised that they stopped at three kids.  I thought you were supposed to splurt out a new one every 18 months?

[Howl]

1 hour ago, Spinosaurus said:

I am honestly surprised that they stopped at three kids. 

Shannon probably knew where that was going and decided to stop at three.   Did Josh ever opine on letting god determine the size of their family?  
 

Or, sometimes, women have to have an early hysterectomy, so you never know. 

[Spinosaurus]

I don't remember Josh saying that thou shalt not wear a condom, just that it was good to have children once you get married.

[louisa05]

1 minute ago, Howl said:

Shannon probably knew where that was going and decided to stop at three.   Did Josh ever opine on letting god determine the size of their family?  
 

Or, sometimes, women have to have an early hysterectomy, so you never know. 

In my area, the eschewing of birth control only came into vogue among evangelicals in the mid-00s and even then it was limited. When I worked at Christian school with a variety of evangelicals, fundamentalists and neo-pentecostals/charismatics, no one had issues with birth control in general (some wouldn't use the pill, though) and believed firmly in controlling family size. We had a family with eight children and the staff rolled their collective eyes when the impending arrival of #8 was announced. The people I worked with there are all have 2-4 children. Most of the students I taught there have 2-3 kids. I don't know of any who have more than 4 (and the youngest ones are hitting their mid-30s, so it's not that they are just  getting started/not done yet). 

These people were Josh Harris's prime audience. The book came out smack in the middle of the six years I worked there and they were all talking about it. Some of the kids I taught courted. By the last year I was there, half the seniors were too holy to have a date for the (not) prom. 

[hoipolloi]

3 hours ago, louisa05 said:

it replaces the courtship formula with a very specific dating formula. I can't remember the details but I do remember that the author is enamored with the idea that his grandparents went out with different people all the time and advocates some form of constantly dating different people--from day to day even--rather than having very committed relationships.

OMG. This is straight out of the old malt shop books I used to read back in the 1960s. The major theme was always that going steady was a BAD IDEA, and that it was always better to date lots of people but not get too serious about anyone.

Plus ça change and all that, I guess.

Re: Josh's current description of his university career in BC. I could have sworn that he previously said that he went there to enroll in theology school so that he could acquire the credentials for being a pastor that he'd never had.

Edited July 20, 2019 by hoipolloi
Clarity

[Rinny512]

https://sojo.net/articles/questioning-faith-after-purity-culture-conversation-joshua-harris?fbclid=IwAR00oBebS-2lQMEDfqBEqHehVzuLS1qjfFYilhm2-NMeVv_TzbnBD9mUcEo

[Hane]

@hoipolloi, when I was a teen in the late ‘60s/early ‘70s, dating different people during the same time period was pretty common, as it had been in my parents’ and grandparents’ generations. There was no assumption that casual dating=sex, or that someone who dated a variety of people concurrently was being promiscuous. This was even my experience in the early ‘80s, when I started dating again after my first divorce.

[JermajestyDuggar]

1 hour ago, Rinny512 said:

https://sojo.net/articles/questioning-faith-after-purity-culture-conversation-joshua-harris?fbclid=IwAR00oBebS-2lQMEDfqBEqHehVzuLS1qjfFYilhm2-NMeVv_TzbnBD9mUcEo

Thanks for posting this. I read through it and this part caught my attention: 

“With my book, I keep wanting there to be this moment where it's like it's over and it's done and I don't ever have to think about this again. I guess I'm realizing that part of truly being sorry for the ways my book harmed people is that I just need to be able to sit with that. I need to be able to sit with people still hurting and keep listening to them, and try to facilitate dialogue and conversation that will be helpful for people to move forward and move beyond those things.”

I think some people on FJ basically said they got this impression from him when they watched the movie. It did seem like he just wanted to say, “yeah I messed up now let’s move on.” But you can’t do that. That’s now how harming people works. And I guess it’s good he’s realizing that now. 

[louisa05]

I just read that interview as well. This quote jumped out at me: 

Quote

I think that one of the mistakes of people like me who have come out a very conservative, legalistic environment is [they can] just adopt a new legalism in a completely different way, and be very dismissive and critical of people who are still in that way of thinking. 

I know so many people who have left those groups who have done just that. They trade one set of black and white rules for a new set. 

What I read in this whole interview is someone whose entire faith was based on making and following a set of rules and who doesn't know how to function as a person of faith without that. 

[louisa05]

2 hours ago, Hane said:

@hoipolloi, when I was a teen in the late ‘60s/early ‘70s, dating different people during the same time period was pretty common, as it had been in my parents’ and grandparents’ generations. There was no assumption that casual dating=sex, or that someone who dated a variety of people concurrently was being promiscuous. This was even my experience in the early ‘80s, when I started dating again after my first divorce.

Seeing teens as a teacher, I honestly think there is some merit to this for them. When I was student teaching in Catholic school in the 90s, a priest who taught there was lamenting that so many kids as young as 14 years old were basically "prematurely married". He was talking about how they plan their social life around a bf/gf, had to consult them in order to be free to do things with other friends, parents included teen bf/gfs in family outings and holidays with all the resulting family tensions that in-laws bring, etc... and it's not always healthy at 14-18 years old. Those seriously committed relationships can maybe wait--and not because of sex, but because kids that age need to be finding themselves. 

And, yes, I know that many of you are going to come tell me you married a high school sweetheart and it's all perfect. But it isn't always perfect. It's often a lot of drama and hurt and there is also an upswing of domestic violence in teen relationships with it occurring in as many as 1 in 3 teen relationships. 

All of that said, though, forcing college age people and people past college age into that mold isn't so reasonable. If I recall correctly, the book I was talking about (whose author appears in the JH documentary) advocated that single people just keep dating around casually until they suddenly know that one of these people is the one and then on to engagement and wedding asap. That's not much better than courtship. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

15 minutes ago, louisa05 said:

Seeing teens as a teacher, I honestly think there is some merit to this for them. When I was student teaching in Catholic school in the 90s, a priest who taught there was lamenting that so many kids as young as 14 years old were basically "prematurely married". He was talking about how they plan their social life around a bf/gf, had to consult them in order to be free to do things with other friends, parents included teen bf/gfs in family outings and holidays with all the resulting family tensions that in-laws bring, etc... and it's not always healthy at 14-18 years old. Those seriously committed relationships can maybe wait--and not because of sex, but because kids that age need to be finding themselves. 

And, yes, I know that many of you are going to come tell me you married a high school sweetheart and it's all perfect. But it isn't always perfect. It's often a lot of drama and hurt and there is also an upswing of domestic violence in teen relationships with it occurring in as many as 1 in 3 teen relationships. 

All of that said, though, forcing college age people and people past college age into that mold isn't so reasonable. If I recall correctly, the book I was talking about (whose author appears in the JH documentary) advocated that single people just keep dating around casually until they suddenly know that one of these people is the one and then on to engagement and wedding asap. That's not much better than courtship. 

I never had a boyfriend in high school and I was always annoyed by my friends who basically ditched all their friends for a guy. Then 6 months later when they broke up, the girl wanted to hang out with her friends again. It was just a shitty way to treat your friends. My kids are young but I would not be happy if my sons suddenly ditched all their friends to constantly hang out with their significant other. 

[refugee]

On 7/18/2019 at 2:11 PM, acheronbeach said:

It's such a sad situation.  Shortly after he was married, I remember reading where he wrote about how he never expected to fall for a girl like Shannon with a past.  He really sounded like he was struggling to reconcile his love for his wife with the awful misogyny he'd been taught about "good versus bad" women.  I felt for him, but I felt far worse for Shannon.  She looked like such a vibrant young woman with a lot of talent.  

This situation has no winners.  There are three children that I'm sure are very hurt.  I truly hope that Josh has gained wisdom, compassion, and tolerance for others.  He seemed to struggle with the ability to put himself in others' shoes.  I blame that squarely on Gregg Harris - a "stage dad" who turned his sons into a brood of egotistical, trained-seal proselytizers.  

Just another family business. His mother, too, was a forceful speaker. In retrospect, I have the feeling she was as controlling as her husband.

[Giraffe]

Regarding appearing non-quiverfull - Many of the fundies around me* are not quiverfull and yet are every bit as fundamentalist as the Duggar/Anderson etc types. It’s the same idea as Jill Dillard now having a nose ring & wearing pants. There doesn’t seem to be evidence showing she’s eschewed fundamentalism but she just does it looking more “hip.” 

 

* I live in an area of the US where the average house costs well over a million USD and even those with uteri often work full-time. They’re still religious fundamentalists. (My experience has been those who work would be SAHM’s if they lived in cheaper areas of the country)

[hoipolloi]

3 hours ago, Hane said:

@hoipolloi, when I was a teen in the late ‘60s/early ‘70s, dating different people during the same time period was pretty common, as it had been in my parents’ and grandparents’ generations. There was no assumption that casual dating=sex, or that someone who dated a variety of people concurrently was being promiscuous. This was even my experience in the early ‘80s, when I started dating again after my first divorce.

This was the point of all of those malt shop books. Very, very few dealt with actual s-e-x happening until maybe the later 1960s, but the heroines often skated close enough to peril for it to be an object lesson in why "going steady" was a bad idea. 

IOW, one of the meta-messages of those books was that teenagers dating many people and having lots of friends were good things. Going steady & restricting one's social life to a committed, exclusive relationship, conversely, were not good if not actually dangerous.

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by hoipolloi

[JermajestyDuggar]

38 minutes ago, Giraffe said:

Regarding appearing non-quiverfull - Many of the fundies around me* are not quiverfull and yet are every bit as fundamentalist as the Duggar/Anderson etc types. It’s the same idea as Jill Dillard now having a nose ring & wearing pants. There doesn’t seem to be evidence showing she’s eschewed fundamentalism but she just does it looking more “hip.” 

 

* I live in an area of the US where the average house costs well over a million USD and even those with uteri often work full-time. They’re still religious fundamentalists. (My experience has been those who work would be SAHM’s if they lived in cheaper areas of the country)

I would personally love for all fundies to just stop being quiverful. It’s just so damaging to so many people. We mostly talk about Quiverful fundies on FJ for a reason. Fundie beliefs are damaging as well but being quiverful just adds so much to an already pretty big dumpster fire.

[OhNoNike]

I have been thinking about it.  I think if you are religious and only have two kids (as just an example), you have opportunity to really spend more time with them, etc. The more kids, the less time, and the more often it happens that several of the kids drop the fundamentalism and may even drop religion altogether.  If the idea of Quiverfull is to have more kids so they will spread the gospel, it seems to me that having more kids with concentrated religion would be statistically more unsuccessful, as many would drop altogether.  

Edited July 21, 2019 by OhNoNike
Fixed for clarification

[Lgirlrocks]

12 minutes ago, OhNoNike said:

I have been thinking about it.  I think if you are religious and only have two kids (as just an example), you have opportunity to really spend more time with them, etc. The more kids, the less time, and the more often it happens that several of the kids drop the fundamentalism and may even drop religion altogether.  If the idea of Quiverfull is to have more kids so they will spread the gospel, it seems to me that having more kids with concentrated religion would be statistically more successful. 

There hope is if you raise your kids right they will put populate other religions. Most don’t think about their kids leaving the cult. That’s why there is so much isolation and lack of critical thinking skills. 

[raspberrymint]

My parents had two kids in the 1990s and they were/are evangelical with fundie leanings.  Two or three kids was pretty typical in the Christian homeschooling circles we were in back in the day.  My sister and I are both married to women, and my sister's an atheist and I have a bunch of spiritual beliefs that don't adhere to anything strictly.  So, you know, my parents wish they'd raised us Amish.  Two kids doesn't guarantee control.  We were always independent-minded and smart enough to say whatever as long as we needed to, flying under the radar.  I never felt the need to evangelize because I never really believed the stuff. 

[Giraffe]

28 minutes ago, raspberrymint said:

My parents had two kids in the 1990s and they were/are evangelical with fundie leanings.  Two or three kids was pretty typical in the Christian homeschooling circles we were in back in the day.  My sister and I are both married to women, and my sister's an atheist and I have a bunch of spiritual beliefs that don't adhere to anything strictly.  So, you know, my parents wish they'd raised us Amish.  Two kids doesn't guarantee control.  We were always independent-minded and smart enough to say whatever as long as we needed to, flying under the radar.  I never felt the need to evangelize because I never really believed the stuff. 

You hit on the reality fundies refuse to accept: there isn’t a formula for raising kids to become the adults they want. They don’t acknowledge it’s both nature and nurture, with no absolutes.  To them it’s all nurture (where “nurture” is “if I use this formula, I will get my perfect results.”) 

[raspberrymint]

4 minutes ago, Giraffe said:

You hit on the reality fundies refuse to accept: there isn’t a formula for raising kids to become the adults they want. They don’t acknowledge it’s both nature and nurture, with no absolutes.  To them it’s all nurture (where “nurture” is “if I use this formula, I will get my perfect results.”) 

I've known fundie/evangelical women that viewed my mother as reason not to have kids, or at least fear having kids.

[Giraffe]

I’m sorry, I’m out sure I understand. Did women use your mother as “I don’t want to have kids because I’ve seen @raspberrymint‘s mom and because of what her life is, I don’t want kids!!!”?

Because yeah, watching quiverfullers AND those who only became parents because they felt they had to, was absolutely a reason i used to put off having kids. Now I’m strong enough to say, “No, I am not having children!” regardless of others’ expectations of me.

I have no doubt if I had kids I’d regret having them! (Yes, I know there are people who didn’t want kids, had them, and are incredibly happy they have them. However, there is a very real population out there of parents who, even though they love their children and try to give them the best life they can, truly regret having had children)

[Antipatriarch]

6 hours ago, Rinny512 said:

https://sojo.net/articles/questioning-faith-after-purity-culture-conversation-joshua-harris?fbclid=IwAR00oBebS-2lQMEDfqBEqHehVzuLS1qjfFYilhm2-NMeVv_TzbnBD9mUcEo

I guess this answers my question: He's decided not to return to the pulpit:

Quote

Villarreal: So what's next for you?

Harris: Yeah I made the decision not to go back into pastoring. I just have my own business.

As @Spinosaurus said, "Very little Jesusing in that."

They do both seem to be seriously reevaluating what they believed, and seem to be on new paths. I hope Josh continues to really sit and think about the consequences of IKDG, and in time is able to do an even better job refuting it, and the harm that it caused.

[raspberrymint]

10 minutes ago, Giraffe said:

I’m sorry, I’m out sure I understand. Did women use your mother as “I don’t want to have kids because I’ve seen @raspberrymint‘s mom and because of what her life is, I don’t want kids!!!”?

Because yeah, watching quiverfullers AND those who only became parents because they felt they had to, was absolutely a reason i used to put off having kids. Now I’m strong enough to say, “No, I am not having children!” regardless of others’ expectations of me.

I have no doubt if I had kids I’d regret having them! (Yes, I know there are people who didn’t want kids, had them, and are incredibly happy they have them. However, there is a very real population out there of parents who, even though they love their children and try to give them the best life they can, truly regret having had children)

I'm talking about young, usually married women who were friends with my mom and shared her beliefs who saw that she couldn't prevent her kids from turning out as we did and were terrified as a result.

[Giraffe]

18 minutes ago, raspberrymint said:

I'm talking about young, usually married women who were friends with my mom and shared her beliefs who saw that she couldn't prevent her kids from turning out as we did and were terrified as a result.

Good they didn’t bring children into that environment. I’m so sorry for what you & your siblings went through in order for that to happen!