Bates 26: Do Not Attempt This at Home

[rebeccawriter01]

On 6/30/2019 at 6:21 PM, HermioneSparrow said:

I saw that picture/clip and was stunned they let all those kids there without safety, Carson and Allie who are bigger jumping all over the trampoline with Evy and Zoey who are tiny standing there like waiting to be hurt by them. Tbf, they were all in risk of getting hurt.

If they were actually playing, then I would agree it was a safety issue. It was a controlled filming exercise though. They were surrounded by people who were undoubtedly calling out if someone got too rough or wild. 

[nokidsmom]

On the subject of the still single Bateseseses lads well, still remaining single:

On 6/28/2019 at 3:08 PM, rebeccawriter01 said:

It's not the only reason, but I think the job/providing thing is a big part of it. 

On 6/28/2019 at 5:13 PM, formergothardite said:

IMO the reason she has a harder time marrying off the boys is because they are completely unlikable even for fundies. 

I suspect it's likely a combination of these two things.   The boys strike me as unlikeable (except Zach) and they are clearly not demonstrating that they can provide for a family, which will be two big strikes against them for a lot of fundy daddies.   

On the subject of providing, however, their dad didn't set the best example.   On the subject of being unlikeable, both parents set a strong example. 

[WiseGirl]

Kelly has a selfie with Kade on Instagram. Notable only because she is babysitting him and she mentions not having makeup on.  Which IMO shows how carefully cultivated the social media presence is. I also saw a nicely written note to Joy and Austin on thebatesfam.

[19tacos&counting]

Kelly looks completely different with no make up on! I actually did a triple take. I think she looks great! She looks very young 

[ophelia]

15 hours ago, WiseGirl said:

I also saw a nicely written note to Joy and Austin on thebatesfam.

Was it on their insta? I don't see anything.

Without make-up there is even more resemblance between Kelly and some of her daughters (Carlin, Tori).

[WiseGirl]

9 hours ago, ophelia said:

Was it on their insta? I don't see anything.

Without make-up there is even more resemblance between Kelly and some of her daughters (Carlin, Tori).

I probably saw it on Tumblr because I'm a Luddite that doesn't have Insta and doesn't know how to link to Tumblr things. Wait, it could have been a reply on Joy and Austin's Insta too.

[llucie]

On 6/29/2019 at 2:08 AM, llucie said:

She is listed as 5′ 9″ so its probably that. The Bates are in the short side.

batessistersboutique on insta replied to a comment asking about her and it was just that, they used her as model because she is tall.

They also replied a comment about Chaney (who also modeled for the website) and confirmed she is Traces girlfriend.

[OyToTheVey]

1 hour ago, llucie said:

batessistersboutique on insta replied to a comment asking about her and it was just that, they used her as model because she is tall.

They also replied a comment about Chaney (who also modeled for the website) and confirmed she is Traces girlfriend.

I think they took down the Chaney picture. Unless I'm blind and skipped it.

[llucie]

34 minutes ago, OyToTheVey said:

I think they took down the Chaney picture. Unless I'm blind and skipped it.

Its not on insta, its in the website: https://batessistersboutique.com/product/the-tammi-blue-wrap-maxi/

[Kelsey]

Props to Callie Bates for her brutal honesty. (Season 4, episode 4)

Producer: why is it taking so long to build the fort?

Callie: um, because we don't like to work.

 

Edited July 16, 2019 by Kelsey
Corrected season number

[nausicaa]

16 minutes ago, Kelsey said:

Callie: um, because we don't like to work.

I'm long suspected Callie is the true spirit of FJ implanted into the Bates family like some fifth pillar.

[RosyDaisy]

I hope Callie remains spunky like that and gives Gil and Kelly hell. She is one that I can see maybe breaking away as as an adult. MAYBE.

[nausicaa]

1 hour ago, nausicaa said:

I'm long suspected Callie is the true spirit of FJ implanted into the Bates family like some fifth pillar.

*fifth column. Realized this just outside of my editing window. 

[rebeccawriter01]

16 hours ago, RosyDaisy said:

I hope Callie remains spunky like that and gives Gil and Kelly hell. She is one that I can see maybe breaking away as as an adult. MAYBE.

I used to have such hopes for Johannah, Jennifer, and Jordyn in the Duggar family. The Bates don't seem to stifle the voices out of their daughters quite as much, but I wouldn't be surprised if she becomes more fundy like as she hits those preteen and teen years.

[formergothardite]

3 hours ago, rebeccawriter01 said:

but I wouldn't be surprised if she becomes more fundy like as she hits those preteen and teen years.

Yeah, as soon as they need her to start behaving like a good fundie woman so she can be married off  young and start popping out babies. The Bates let the girls have certain types of voices but I bet independent thought is stifled. They can follow the path of their sisters to either be Alyssa and marry young without college or be Carlin and married young with college. I think Micheal was the exception in that she was allowed to go to a secular college because they were 100% sure she was a solid fundie who wasn't going to stray. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

I still have hope for some of the Bates kids. Plenty of fundies don’t start to question things until they are adults and in their own homes. There is still a lot of time for some of them. 

[formergothardite]

17 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I still have hope for some of the Bates kids. Plenty of fundies don’t start to question things until they are adults and in their own homes. There is still a lot of time for some of them. 

IMO as long as there is a show the chances of them really questioning and truly leaving the beliefs behind are slim. That show is nothing but method to sugar coat Christian fundamentalism, and I doubt UP and the Bates parents want a child who openly speaks out against the the dangers of fundamentalism being shown. If they realize the truth about their family's beliefs and they stay on they show then they will be participating in helping spread what they know is evil. If they drop out of the show because they won't keep sugar coating hate, then it will cause all sorts of family drama. The show is built around showing family events, what happens if one or two kids refuse to participate in this? 

Part of the show is that it keeps all the Bates kids in line. They can't question too much or risk the wrath of the family for messing up the show and lose a chance at some fame and money. Once the show is done I have a bit more hope that some of the kids will leave. 

[VelociRapture]

9 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

IMO as long as there is a show the chances of them really questioning and truly leaving the beliefs behind are slim. That show is nothing but method to sugar coat Christian fundamentalism, and I doubt UP and the Bates parents want a child who openly speaks out against the the dangers of fundamentalism being shown. If they realize the truth about their family's beliefs and they stay on they show then they will be participating in helping spread what they know is evil. If they drop out of the show because they won't keep sugar coating hate, then it will cause all sorts of family drama. The show is built around showing family events, what happens if one or two kids refuse to participate in this? 

Part of the show is that it keeps all the Bates kids in line. They can't question too much or risk the wrath of the family for messing up the show and lose a chance at some fame and money. Once the show is done I have a bit more hope that some of the kids will leave. 

I’m not sure. I think it would depend on why the child in question would leave the show and how vocal they choose to be about it. It’d be easy enough for Kelly and Gil to spin the decision to be a matter of the child wanting more privacy and the family choosing to “respect” that if the child left quietly for any reason. If the child was screaming about abuse from the rooftops then that would definitely be much tougher to spin, but there are probably ways of making it happen - their fans seem to really buy into the wholesome family image and would probably overlook any allegations from one rouge kid. 

That is all hypothetical of course. I agree with you that the show is going to be a big motivating factor that keeps the kids in line for the most part. Maybe Lawson will seriously screw it all up via Twitter. I can hope...

[rebeccawriter01]

35 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

IMO as long as there is a show the chances of them really questioning and truly leaving the beliefs behind are slim. That show is nothing but method to sugar coat Christian fundamentalism, and I doubt UP and the Bates parents want a child who openly speaks out against the the dangers of fundamentalism being shown. If they realize the truth about their family's beliefs and they stay on they show then they will be participating in helping spread what they know is evil. If they drop out of the show because they won't keep sugar coating hate, then it will cause all sorts of family drama. The show is built around showing family events, what happens if one or two kids refuse to participate in this? 

Part of the show is that it keeps all the Bates kids in line. They can't question too much or risk the wrath of the family for messing up the show and lose a chance at some fame and money. Once the show is done I have a bit more hope that some of the kids will leave. 

The show, in some ways, is evidence or proof to the family that their parents' lifestyle and belief system work. It's a case of look how we struggled financially as we struggled with our own faith. But we kept believing and now God has provided us more than we could need by giving us a television show. It would be hard for any of the kids to completely buck the show, their parents, their siblings, their circle of friends, spouse's family, etc. to speak out. One doing that would potentially become the antithesis for the proof of God blessing them with money and a show. Gil and Kelly would probably spin it internally to the family as a crisis of faith. See, sibling X didn't trust God's word and now sibling X is struggling financially, etc. That doesn't even take into account the threat of an eternity in hell. The show has also given the family a fan base, which reinforces the whole belief and lifestyle. In addition to alienating yourself from 18 siblings, two parents, numerous nieces and nephews, etc., you have people on social media and those who even travel to the family church to see them and more who would not be very understanding of a crisis of faith. 

I just don't see any of them going completely rogue and speaking out at this point. Internally, some or even all of them may struggle with rationalizing the way they were raised or even the cultish religion itself. For some that might be a lifelong thing. For others it might be a fleeting phase. But there is a large leap between having internal thoughts of why and speaking out. The way they are raised and indoctrinated tells them that their doubts are weaknesses in their character and something they must correct not answer.  



 

[formergothardite]

59 minutes ago, VelociRapture said:

I think it would depend on why the child in question would leave the show and how vocal they choose to be about it. It’d be easy enough for Kelly and Gil to spin the decision to be a matter of the child wanting more privacy and the family choosing to “respect” that if the child left quietly for any reason.

If the child refused to be on the show at all, even if they stayed quiet, it would make it very difficult for the show to be filmed. The "I love you day", weddings, baby showers, any family event, would have to stopped being filmed or a fake version filmed. They could film fake versions with some things, but not with events like weddings if a child said that they refuse to be filmed anymore.  Gil and Kelly would have to tell one of their kids they aren't welcome at the family events anymore since they won't be on TV and that would really ruin their wholesome family image. Gil and Kelly could try to spin it all they want, but it would be hard since it will be obvious that they are excluding a child from the family or the events they show aren't the real ones, just ones made for the show. Their fans might forgive them but it would put a big crack in their show. It is hard to be a show about a close and wholesome family if one child is excluded. It would ruin the illusion by making it obvious that the show is fake. 

15 minutes ago, rebeccawriter01 said:

The show has also given the family a fan base, which reinforces the whole belief and lifestyle. In addition to alienating yourself from 18 siblings, two parents, numerous nieces and nephews, etc., you have people on social media and those who even travel to the family church to see them and more who would not be very understanding of a crisis of faith. 

Can you imagine the hell that would rain down on a child who dared to reveal the problems with the family? They would be crucified by fans. These people don't care about the facts, they want to keep believing that the family is wholesome. I remember reading some really nasty comments from fans of Little People Big World when the youngest child spoke out about the reality behind reality TV. People get deeply invested in the lie these shows sell and woe to anyone to lifts back the curtain to show reality. 

[JermajestyDuggar]

I think that if any adult Bates kid had doubts while on the show, they would totally hide it. They would basically know on the inside that they had major doubts but hide it. I think this is sometimes a step before people leave cults. They just go through the motions but don’t believe any of it.

[theotherelise]

I do think the small hypocrisies can be noticed by the younger girls at home. Your parents are saying you have to wear skirts and that is how you're modest, but your sisters and sister in law wear pants and still love Jesus. You're told if you're faithful and submissive, you'll meet a wonderful man, get married, and God will bless you with babies. But Michael was the most faithful and submissive and doesn't have any babies. Meanwhile Zach and Whitney kissed before marriage and they didn't get punished by God. If Trace and Chaney get married, she comes from what seems like a fundie-lite family. Even more potential for the younger kids to see an alternative, more mainstream approach to life. 

I think the same thing could be said for the Duggars. If Jordyn or Josie gets to be 16 or so and Jinger has 3 kids but Kendra has 7, the younger girls might notice the difference in stress. But Jinger isn't any less dedicated to Christianity. Her husband is a pastor! While this might not result in a full-on abandonment of the way they were raised, I think ending the quiverful mandate would be a huge, positive step.

[just_ordinary]

15 hours ago, theotherelise said:

I do think the small hypocrisies can be noticed by the younger girls at home. Your parents are saying you have to wear skirts and that is how you're modest, but your sisters and sister in law wear pants and still love Jesus. You're told if you're faithful and submissive, you'll meet a wonderful man, get married, and God will bless you with babies. But Michael was the most faithful and submissive and doesn't have any babies. Meanwhile Zach and Whitney kissed before marriage and they didn't get punished by God. If Trace and Chaney get married, she comes from what seems like a fundie-lite family. Even more potential for the younger kids to see an alternative, more mainstream approach to life. 

I think the same thing could be said for the Duggars. If Jordyn or Josie gets to be 16 or so and Jinger has 3 kids but Kendra has 7, the younger girls might notice the difference in stress. But Jinger isn't any less dedicated to Christianity. Her husband is a pastor! While this might not result in a full-on abandonment of the way they were raised, I think ending the quiverful mandate would be a huge, positive step.

The thing is: Fundie logic can make reason of whatever they like. And suddenly 

-the skirts at home aren’t the only way to be modest but are about obedience and as ONE way to show modesty and conviction (as the young ones have less opportunities than the married ones in how to be Christian examples).

- infertility is only a punishment for sinners/not believers. So in Michael‘s case God has obviously other plans for her. It’s not her time to glorify him by mothering children but to serve others and her husband. It could also be a test from the Lord or maybe he chose them as examples in how to be strong and faithful even in hard times. And he choose them because he knew they would be good examples and they would pass his test. So it’s actually a reward/distinction.

 - Whitney and Zach repented (at least in the beginning because they felt the need to not only reveal what they did but also apologised for it) so all is forgiven.

-Trace can always lead Chaney to a more (better) Christian life. He is her spiritual headship after all.

- If Jinger or anyone has less children it will not be a problem. They are not stupid. Having 19 is so rare no one expects them to reach that number. They know about miscarriages and infertility and that it sometimes just takes some time. Most families don’t even hit double digits. Michelle and Kelly were blessed with many but maybe because that was their job from the Lord. Jinger’s assignment might be to support her husband in saving others so the Lord will give her less children so she can dedicate more time to it. I don’t think the actual number of kids is that important (as long as there are some). The Lord assigns you as many as he seems fit. Question: do you get brownie points for white souls???

- quiverfull is not the same as being IBL. Outbreeding is an important job but maybe not more important as other jobs. I think you can make up for the lack of children by winning souls. So Jinger and Jeremy are fine. Actually all are as long as they define an activity as their mission. Carlin and Evan are obviously saving souls by their mission “InstaCouple” (and the online shop helps Christian women to dress modest. If that isn’t a great mission what is...). In general it feels as if being quiverfull might become more and more a lip service and the concept changes more to “leaving it up to God” but with no contraception (and we will never no otherwise). 6-10 already qualifies as quiverfull so I don’t think most of them will have a problem in that department.

- there is always the option to pray about something till the Lord lays (whatever you wanted) to your soul/heart. That’s an accepted reason.

I feel we underestimate how modern their cult actually is though. Pants have never truly been a problem even though they weren’t seen as the best option. And now that they got rid of Bill Gothardt they can change many rules and simply say his teachings were flawed. His fall is a big win for them in that department. They can transform and modernise (to appeal to even more mainstream people) without looking like complete hypocrites. Well played Gil, well played...

 

[theotherelise]

Yeah, I'm not saying it's going to happen, but not every person is as likely to just accept the changing standards without noticing they've changed. Jacob Roloff left because of the hypocrisy, the others just dug in. (I know the roloffs are not a perfect analogy, but I'm not super awake yet, so it will have to do!)

As far as quiverful not being IBLP, I get it. I think there are two different things at issue here: 1) what does it look like for someone in these families to be "free" and 2) what does it look like for these families to not be fundie / leave "the cult"

On the first point, if a bates/duggar girl sees that being quiverful isn't the only acceptable option, I think she has a greater chance at freedom. To me, acceptance of family planning going into marriage gives agency to the women (especially if it's a decision made together, or if the husband says "whatever you want"). All of a sudden, they can pursue hobbies or education or jobs and be valued for things outside of birthing. I loved the book "Half the Sky" by Nick Kristoff and Sheryl WuDunn. They explain how when women in oppressed or patriarchal societies start to contribute to the family with an income, their power and standing improves. Equality improves as they are seen as more than sex/birth objects and they are less likely to experience abuse.* My theory is that that can happen in these patriarchal religious cultures too. Women being able to work snowballs into other rights and privileges. That's why I give all my KIVA loans to women. And it's why I see any move away from quiverful as positive, even if it's waved away by these families as not a change. Abandoning quiverful mandates is not the same as wearing pants.

Agency over your body is much more powerful and meaningful than getting to pick your clothes.

On the second point, I think there are many different views of what it could/should look like to step away from fundamentalism. I tend to avoid the word "cult" around IBLP/gothardite families, because I really don't think it's an appropriate term. They can leave. They are not being threatened. They interact with people outside their rigid belief system, leading you to believe they wouldn't cut someone off if they went more mainstream. The economic pressure is significant, but a lot of people face an economic cliff of needing to leave home at 16 or 18 and not having financial means to do so. But they are not limited from communicating with others. The Duggars probably have more abilities here than the Bateseses, but they are not that isolated.

Sometimes it seems like some people around here would consider someone fundie as long as they went to church regularly and believed the Nicene Creed. My bar is lower than some, but I probably haven't defined it even to myself. I think it would have something to do with allowing choices for your children and not mandating your choices and beliefs for others. 

*not that women should have to do anything to not be abused or are at fault for the abuse if they're not contributing an income, it's just an analysis of the outcomes seen 

[rebeccawriter01]

I think one of the things to watch in regard to the addition of pants to the wardrobe is to look at what these married girls wear when at Gil and Kelly's home. It's one thing for them to wear pants to get ice cream or at their own home with their husband. It's another to show up wearing them to a family function.

Alyssa was the first to start wearing pants if I am remembering correctly. While she was all over social media in them, she was back in skirts and dresses for trips home on camera. Even the episode where she was seen on camera in jeans at the playground, it was her own home and the cameras seemed to purposefully avoid long shots of her. I remember only one real shot of her in jeans. She was on a swing with her oldest in her lap. The camera moved so fast people were having to pause it to confirm that it was her and not someone else. 

So far the explanations from the girls have been that they did not wear pants before marriage because they were respecting their parents' standards and wishes. A telling sign of some push back against the parents for their rules and beliefs would be to wear pants or less than modest attire while at the Big House.

That's not to say that pants are the be all and end all of resistance.