[CW: Child Sex Abuse] Josh & Anna 30: LaCounting On to His Trial Date

[Galbin]

13 hours ago, formergothardite said:

The closest IBLP has gotten to addressing it is making a post on the Family Conference FB page about how believers are caught off guard when it comes to dark forces. They link to a video from 2020 where Gil Bates rants about how phones and computers are a way to bring evil into your life. I didn’t actually watch the entire video since Gil is painful to listen to, so he could have said a lot more.
 

I am so tired that I read that as "Bill Gates" and was super confused about why he of all people would be ranting about computers. Since it's 2021 though nothing surprises me anymore. ?

[JenniferJuniper]

8 minutes ago, Jencendiary said:

That's not how that works. The theory of escalating porn addiction has been overturned by sex researchers. You don't slowly ramp up to wanting to watch child sexual assault material or material that involves non-consenting parties after just watching regular videos from Brazzers or whatever.

And Josh was "curious" about a five year old when he was 15.  This has been with him a very long time. 

[Jencendiary]

26 minutes ago, Freejin said:

Two unrelated comments.
 

First - I know there has been question about whether WOACB is legit. Just curious what people think about this -Amy Duggar just put a story on Instagram thanking her for a gift of two mugs. 

First off, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that Katie Joy is without credibility along with without a crystal ball. She's also without two brain cells to rub together, if the way she handles her defamation lawsuit is any evidence. It also doesn't surprise me that Amy is tattling to gossip YouTubers. This is the most relevance she has had in years.

[Jasmar]

38 minutes ago, AussieKrissy said:

Just curious, do you think you could change your mind set into thinking not of praying for them but kind of sending good ju ju their way. Surrounding them in the light that they need. Or does being an complete non believer mean that you can’t rationalise this? 

At this point, it just feels like self-delusion, but I’d love to get to a place where I felt on some kind of solid ground spiritually - not evangelical Christianity, just something bigger than myself that I could kind of rest in. I haven’t posted much about my life here, but the last seven years have been (and continue to be) really tough, including things like divorce, losing my faith, disability, serious health issues with my kids, and other stuff. I really wish I could believe in something: God, the universe, a spirit realm, idk. But I just don’t.

[neuroticcat]

I also wonder how Anna’s role in her own family and those sibling interactions relate. For instance, did she watch the other siblings leave or divorce and judge them or vow never to do that? Did that strengthen her resolve to stay in the covenant of marriage no matter what?

If so, even though she’s seen others get out it may only underscore in her mind that leaving is failure and divorce is not really an option.

Its all speculation, of course, but, whatever else it is - I think none of it is clear cut. Those of us outside QF can’t really grasp it, even if we’ve suffered betrayal. Maybe there are other QF women or betrayed QF women or QF women who’s husbands accessed CSA, but Anna is really the only one with the Duggar brand/show/publicity as well so I think we really can’t know how everything factors in. Which makes it interesting discussion, but I truly wish it was just academic, as in “let’s theoretically discuss...” It’s horrible that this is real life for this family.

[molecule]

Joy has a statement out now. 

[Jasmar]

I find it so interesting that two of the Keller sisters are married to compete patriarch asshat losers (John S. and Josh) who seem to be able to sink to no low too low for their wives, another is deeply into the ATI koolaid (Pris), yet two of the sisters left the cult completely. 

What gave the two who got out the inner strength/backbone/whatever to escape, while two others are resolutely devoted to two of the worst of the fundy men we discuss?

ETA: Joy and husband’s statement is crafted expertly. The final sentence about wanting the truth to come to light, can be interpreted to mean they hope Josh is exposed, or that they hope that false accusations are cleared. Win-win, whoever the audience,

Edited May 9, 2021 by Jasmar

[CyborgKin]

So I thought that "Ana shouldn't divorce him even though he deserves life in prison, because duty" was the worst possible take (source) but then I found the even more despicable take "innocent until proven guilty means the court has no constitutional right to punish Josh by keeping him from seeing any other minor child" (source). But the account behind the second tweet is babbling about DoJ overreach and trumped up charges and in general seems quite incoherent.

[neuroticcat]

58 minutes ago, Jencendiary said:

That's not how that works. The theory of escalating porn addiction has been overturned by sex researchers. You don't slowly ramp up to wanting to watch child sexual assault material or material that involves non-consenting parties after just watching regular videos from Brazzers or whatever.

I don’t think it necessarily escalates in that way but I do think it has been shown that if a user stumbles across darker or more violent material that can begin a dopamine cascade. So, no, it’s not a natural inevitable progression - as if everyone who uses porn on the reg ends up on the dark web. But it’s also not true that the only people who end up on the road of CSA always had that latently in them. Sometimes it’s exposure that creates the appetite. 

I think the most obvious proof of this is when young children develop addictions when they accidentally see porn at the age of 6 or 7 or whatever. It’s obviously not about their latent sexual desire. It’s exposure +graphic content + dopamine cycle. And addiction. 
 

I also call BS on the authenticity and authority of this new wave of sexual research. Like how exactly are they all of a sudden coming to these conclusions? What methodology are they using? I’ve known people with sex addiction. I’ve heard their stories. It’s real. Anecdotal or not, that’s pretty much all we’ve got for any conclusions. 
 

ETA: I know that many of us have come out of oppressive environments and want to be sex positive. OK, fine. And obviously it’s not my business if people opt in, but I hate all the clamor to exonerate porn as though there is definitive proof. Some people anecdotally like and enjoy it. Others don’t. There’s no “research” to “prove” anything except maybe how brain chemistry responds in different situations. In my experience, Porn is universally destructive - I know many relationships, families, and sexual development destroyed by regular porn use - and the younger regular use starts the more destructive it is.

Edited May 9, 2021 by neuroticcat
Oh I guess I had more to say

[Not that josh's mom]

2 minutes ago, molecule said:

Joy has a statement out now. 

It seems more personally worded than others we've seen. At least they acknowledge the children who are victims in CSA. I think I'm proud of them. Jim Bob probably isn't though, but I really don't know that Austin and Joy care 

[amaznmom2u]

Go Derrick go! 

Derrick is speaking out

 

I am dumb. That is all

Edited May 9, 2021 by amaznmom2u
Don't click, old article. Got too excited, bless me Rufus

[nelliebelle1197]

3 hours ago, Lurker said:

I don’t think she will divorce him.  She likes being the superior Mrs Josh Duggar, wife of the oldest boy, the first daughter in love, mother of the first grandkids.   In her mind, she is the HBIC.  She outranks Jana because she is married.  Doubt she will leave that to go home to live in her parents double wide.  She won’t leave to live in her secular sister’s mansion in Houston because that would demand she would have to listen to some plain reality based speaking from her siblings. She will still have a place with a comfortable lifestyle with the Duggars if for no other reason they would be afraid of what she might say if she leaves.  She hasn’t had concern over her kids lack of safety while living with Josh,  their lack of education, lack of a normal childhood.   She only laments that they didn’t get enough  screen time. 

But I think she doesn't really care what Josh did, as the damage to other people’s children that were abused doesn’t register with her.  They weren’t fetuses, or fellow religious cultist, Q supporters or part of the Trump sedition caucus so she doesn’t have it in her heart to have any compassion for them.  This is a woman that is politically active,  their whole political movement is obssesed with fetuses, child abuse and porn with a special delight in accusing  LBQT persons of all kinds of depravity.  I don’t buy that she didn’t know what Josh was up too,  but she didn’t care are long as they were on the show.

I doubt that she will ever allow the M kids to be examined.  Too many negatives for Anna and Josh.  Why allow her children to have a team of compassionate professionals listen to them.  From blanket training, corporal punishment, to educational neglect, they have more problems in their home than just Josh.

 

She won’t have a choice about forensic examinations on the kids. 

[amaznmom2u]

1 minute ago, nelliebelle1197 said:

She won’t have a choice about forensic examinations on the kids. 

Interviews. Interviews first, then exam IF medical documentation is needed. 

[nelliebelle1197]

3 minutes ago, amaznmom2u said:

Interviews. Interviews first, then exam IF medical documentation is needed. 

I understand this. I am responding to the poster who said that Anna would not allow the children to be examined. She will not have a choice in the matter.

[neuroticcat]

I think this captures my frustration with the quick dismissal of porn’s toxicity as if it’s really clear and we can definitively say “regular” porn isn’t addictive or problematic. I’m not only just replying to the above comment but I’ve seen it come up on these threads a lot as though consensus has been reached scientifically or something. It’s much more complicated and even the psych community is deeply divided. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/porn-addiction-is-ruining-lives-but-scientists-arent-convinced-its-real/

[NancyDrewFan1989]

2 hours ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

It is a big risk in these types of communities (it's sadly far too prevalent in all communities) and discussing how this mindset can increase the risks is an important thing to do.  But the way the original post was worded it seemed like you were wondering about specific people.

Increased risk doesn't mean everyone and if someone has never given any indication of being a sexual predator they shouldn't have their name tossed up as a candidate just because they were born into one of these families.  

I think you're right that a lot of abuse is covered up and we don't know, and speculating won't change that.  Sex offenders being held accountable by the justice system will as it will bring these issues to light, in addition to punishing the offender.

 

Yes, one hundred percent. I am not naming any families that are on FJ threads. All I am wondering is if there are other prominent fundies who will be falling from grace like Jerry Falwell and the Duggars because of something like this. When Bill Gothard got exposed he lost his position at IBLP with his ministry being sued (both Gil Bates and Chad Paines father were named as they were on a board at IBLP at the time) and a bunch of fundies claiming it was God's will. David Waller wrote a letter, as he was an admin there at the time, making Bill Gothard sound like a sacrificial lamb to the fundie community (If I find the letter I will post the link). Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar blamed everyone but themselves for covering up Josh's crime. If there is ever a major investigation that results in a police report being revealed where abuse cover up in IBLP is involved, then I wouldn't be surprised if some of the prominent fundies on FJ threads pop up in there. 

Edit: Found the letter. https://homeschoolersanonymous.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/walleriblp.pdf

Edited May 9, 2021 by NancyDrewFan1989
Adding

[onekidanddone]

Does Anna know the details of the CP on Josh’s computer? She comes from a subculture preaching that women in pants is ungodly and practically their version of porn. I’m wondering if she has any clue on what he was looking at and the depths of the evil. 
The gospel according to Gothard is to blame the victim. How in what universe can she believe these poor babies are to blame?

Edited May 9, 2021 by onekidanddone

[molecule]

33 minutes ago, Jasmar said:

ETA: Joy and husband’s statement is crafted expertly. The final sentence about wanting the truth to come to light, can be interpreted to mean they hope Josh is exposed, or that they hope that false accusations are cleared. Win-win, whoever the audience,

I also think it's a good statement. I appreciate their acknowledgement that this news is taking them time to process. It seems more personal than the other statements I've seen.

[viii]

3 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Does Anna know the details of the CP on Josh’s computer? She comes from a subculture preaching that women in pants is ungodly and practically their version of porn. I’m wondering if she has any clue on what he was looking at and the depths of the evil. 
 

She’s not 4. She’s heard the charges and if she is dumb enough to not comprehend, then she’s not mentally mature enough to raise 7 children. 

Joy and Austin had the best statement to date. 

[neuroticcat]

5 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Does Anna know the details of the CP on Josh’s computer? She comes from a subculture preaching that women in pants is ungodly and practically their version of porn. I’m wondering if she has any clue on what he was looking at and the depths of the evil. 
 

Yes. She knows men aren’t arrested with the feds involved for looking at women in pants. If she listened to/read the court transcripts or read a single article about it she does. 

Even if not, fundies do understand what child sexual abuse is, and if she’s politically active on the right as been said here she knows about sex trafficking advocacy. I think without doubt she knows generically if not the details of specific videos.

Edited May 9, 2021 by neuroticcat

[socalrules]

I think Jim Bob and Michelle will pay for a good lawyer to help Josh get a good plea deal and leave it at that. They may say the devil got ahold of him and Josh cannot shake him free but they aren’t stupid enough to argue he was framed or this is a liberal plot. I think they will be fine with him just taking a deal and going to prison because is the child that has brought shame after shame onto their family. They may not like Jill’s new life but they don’t have to worry about her being a child predator. Their other kids have continued to walk the walk. I am sure they are tired of repeatedly cleaning up after Josh. They can move on while he is in prison and wait to deal with him when he gets out. 

[EmCatlyn]

2 hours ago, Coconut Flan said:

Annulment wouldn't be up to "the fundies," but would fall under Arkansas law.  Anna and Josh are WAY passed qualifying for an annulment.

I understood the question to refer to a religious annulment (like the Catholic church has) not a secular one.   You can get an annulment in the Catholic Church at any time, so long as the rather complicated requirements are met.

(A friend of mine has a secular divorce and a Catholic annulment.  The divorce was to get the guy out of her life and to separate their finances.  The annulment was to free her emotionally from the feeling that she was still married. She had no interest in re-marriage, but she likes that she is not married to the guy in God’s eyes.)

[NancyDrewFan1989]

Just wondering out of curiosity, if someone were to create a time machine and take Mr. and Mrs. Keller to now before Josh and Anna got married, would they still let the marriage happen? I know Anna's parents aren't exactly popular here. But, I can't help but wonder if they are wishing they could go back in time and stop the whole union from happening, even if it means seven of their grandchildren not being born. I really to wonder if Mr. and Mrs. Keller are blaming themselves for walk Anna has to go through because of their good for nothing son-in-law. Yes, they did, essentially, arrange the marriage. But, part of me really does wonder if they are wishing they could go back in time and stop the whole union from happening and let Anna marry a good Christian young man from their church or another fundie family they are friends with rather than sit at home and wonder what God's will and purpose is for their daughter and grandchildren now.

[Coconut Flan]

2 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

I understood the question to refer to a religious annulment (like the Catholic church has) not a secular one.   You can get an annulment in the Catholic Church at any time, so long as the rather complicated requirements are met.

"The fundies" aren't a church structure so they have no formal process for ending a marriage.  Even IFB isn't a denomination with leadership structure.  So no there is no "fundie annulment" procedure.  I'm really familiar with Catholic decree of nullity procedures as it's formally called.  

[NancyDrewFan1989]

9 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Does Anna know the details of the CP on Josh’s computer? She comes from a subculture preaching that women in pants is ungodly and practically their version of porn. I’m wondering if she has any clue on what he was looking at and the depths of the evil. 
The gospel according to Gothard is to blame the victim. How in what universe can she believe these poor babies are to blame?

I don't think Anna will know all of the details until they come out in court. For that reason alone I can see Josh pleading guilty in order to stop Anna from seeing him for who he truly is and make himself look like a sacrificial lamb to the whole fundie community (cue the conspiracy theories). Josh did download a browser and, from the looks of it, has been blaming this on someone else (obviously Anna believes him if he is). The only reason why I can see Josh pleading guilty is in order to protect his face and reputation within his family and fundie community. 

As for Gothard, I don't know how the man has managed to brainwash families like the Duggars. When you read up on Jim Bob and Michelle's upbringing they weren't raised "fundie". Jim Bob was raised Christian, but it wasn't as strict as the upbringing they chose for their children. Michelle converted after fretting for her soul. Both Jim Bob and Michelle jumped down the rabbit hole after miscarrying a child while Michelle was on birth control in between Josh and Jana and John David. The two of them fell prey to Gothard quickly either right before or after that.

13 minutes ago, neuroticcat said:

Yes. She knows men aren’t arrested with the feds involved for looking at women in pants. If she listened to/read the court transcripts or read a single article about it she does. 

Even if not, fundies do understand what child sexual abuse is, and if she’s politically active on the right as been said here she knows about sex trafficking advocacy. I think without doubt she knows generically if not the details of specific videos.

The real question is, is whether or not Anna will fully believe the authorities over Josh. Despite all of Anna's flaws, I don't think she knew what Josh was doing because of the hidden browser he downloaded. I really don't think she understood child sexual abuse as Josh was able to use his molestation of his sisters as a story for of Christ's love and forgiveness (blech) and any talk about sex is almost never discussed. This may be the first time Anna learns the true horror of child sexual abuse and how the victims are affected.