Jump to content
IGNORED

Jana Duggar 15: Paying her court fine on Duggar time


HerNameIsBuffy

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Bastet said:

 I’m sure you did not intend it as such, but characterizing me as kind and compassionate feels condescending; I view my analysis as realistic. I believe in legally holding perpetrators to societal standards. We should continue to send them to jail. How does that infantilize them?
 

Saying they aren't culpable infantilizes them.  Maybe we're using the word differently, but it means they are to blame and to hold them legally accountable.  Saying they aren't culpable is to say they are not to blame, as if they were children who had no control over their actions, know right from wrong, or ability to form intent.  

I didn't mean to be condescending, btw.  I do see a great deal of compassion in your responses and I think it's a wonderful quality to have.  The ability to feel compassion for others is one of the most important and valuable aspects of our humanity, I don't discount that just because I disagree with you in these specific instances.  I am capable of being condescending, but when that happens it's deliberate and I admit it....it was honestly not my intent with you and I apologize that my wording made it seem so.

4 minutes ago, viii said:

It's ridiculous at any point, tbh. 

Yep.  IIRC they were kind of cagey on the courtship rules with JD and Abbie, perhaps even they knew how weird that would read to the general public given their ages and I'd think if Jana were to court they'd be quiet about the specifics as well.

The married Duggar kids were late teens, early twenties when they married but with the emotional maturity of 6th graders with their first crush so it's not surprising there wasn't more pushback against the rules.  Anyone Jana would court at this point would be over or at least close to 30 and (hopefully) self-supporting for long enough to have enough confidence and independence to balk at JB setting the rules and boundaries for them.

I honestly don't think Jeremy would have tolerated JB and M's rules had their not been a tv show.  I think the silliness might have been a deal breaker had he not seen it as a necessary evil to marry the girl from TV.  

Or not, I don't know these people!  

Edited by HerNameIsBuffy
  • Upvote 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

Saying they aren't culpable infantilizes them.  Maybe we're using the word differently, but it means they are to blame and to hold them legally accountable.  Saying they aren't culpable is to say they are not to blame, as if they were children who had no control over their actions, know right from wrong, or ability to form intent.  

I’m not sure I follow you here. Do you mean that it is infantilizing to suggest limits to their moral responsibility even if they are held entirely culpable legally? Isn’t it true that some adults have less control over their actions than some children? Maybe the fairest thing to say that they are in some ways infantilized by their experience and natural vulnerability, but I don’t see how our attempts to deal with them in a way that is fair  further infantilize them. 
 This is the thing: can any of us be sure that if we inherited the psychopath gene and had a hellish childhood that we would not be monsters? Is it infantilizing to say that there may be limits on culpability in less extreme situations as well?  

Sorry for my fit of paranoia. My son calls me a libtard and it wears on one after a while. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, rosamundi said:

I would honestly think they're out of the habit of parenting, if that makes sense. They must be so used to having the sister mums picking up the pieces that they may not even know what is age and developmentally appropriate parenting for the ones that are still at home.

They never knew (at least, never acknowledged) what was age and developmentally appropriate or they would not have saddled their older daughters (and to some extent sons) with caring for the younger ones.

It is possible that Michelle is more “available” (in the sense of telling stories, putting on bandaids on boo boos etc.) to the youngest ones than she was to the middle ones.  She is not pregnant and maybe has less going on.  I see her as maybe interacting with them more like some grandmothers do than as their mother.  It appears that Jana may be more the mother figure.  But — who knows? It’s all a mystery with these people.🤷‍♀️

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think Jana’s singleness indicates a strong will at all. She has said multiple times publicly that she wants to marry, she’s just waiting for the Lord to bring her the “right one,” and siblings have indicated that there have been candidates. I mean, they all could be lying even to themselves, but I think it is simply the “right one” hasn’t come around. Strong will would be leaving home as an adult, initiating a relationship if she wanted to marry, not playing SAHD hostess as we see in the pictures, or even taking advantage of the small permitted steps to independence we saw her other siblings make (like Jill doing college plus). Perhaps her gardening/interior design work is this, but it still seems very much in the family. I think it’s understandable why she’s still in the cult, but I don’t think there’s some secret rebellion in her singleness.

I think the likeliest ticket out for SAHD (and the older boys eventually) is marriage, and all of her sisters and brothers took that chance. She hasn’t, so something about her current situation is working better for her than the other alternatives presented. 

I also don’t think it’s helpful to judge injury based on who had the worst abuse/parenting. First, it doesn’t matter. Abuse is abuse. Maybe Jana had it “worse” or “better” in some ways, but it’s all irrelevant. Just because someone doesn’t have the most horribly abusive childhood possible, doesn’t make it “better” that they were whipped with a belt or something. Secondly, each child is different. No sibling perceives their childhood as the same or responds to input the same, even if it were possible for parents to parent identically. All of these kids were raised in a toxic and abusive environment. If any of them break free in any way it is a victory, though much more likely they will all propagate some form of the abuse they received, if even in lesser ways.

As to parenting, JB and Michelle haven’t done it in years, and the fundie mega family way isn’t to actually parent or perceive children as individuals, so less kids would give them no reason to treat the youngest six differently. That would only come with deconstruction, which they show no signs of ever considering.

 

  • Upvote 10
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I think Jana isn’t married and tending a brood of her own because she likes her life and lifestyle. Some people, even fundies, remain single their entire lives and are happy doing so. In the world outside of fundiedom, an unmarried 32 YO wouldn’t be considered unusual, but in her fold it stands out more. I think at this point, it could be considered an active choice on her part. Plus what would be the parameters for a 32 YO dating? 12 YO Chaperones? Daddy monitoring your texts and phone calls? How would she navigate that? Frankly, it’s ridiculous at this point.

I agree that the only thing that makes Jana’s remaining unmarried at 32 is that in her culture she was expected to have married by her mid -twenties at the latest.  It’s not a big deal in the ordinary way, but because of her circumstances, it causes remark.  I do think that her choice not to marry so far may be one of the few choices she has been able to make, and that it may be a quiet sort of rebellion.  I don’t thinks she really wants to marry, but the reasons are open to speculation…

  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Bastet said:

I’m not sure I follow you here. Do you mean that it is infantilizing to suggest limits to their moral responsibility even if they are held entirely culpable legally? Isn’t it true that some adults have less control over their actions than some children? Maybe the fairest thing to say that they are in some ways infantilized by their experience and natural vulnerability, but I don’t see how our attempts to deal with them in a way that is fair  further infantilize them. 
 This is the thing: can any of us be sure that if we inherited the psychopath gene and had a hellish childhood that we would not be monsters? Is it infantilizing to say that there may be limits on culpability in less extreme situations as well?  

Sorry for my fit of paranoia. My son calls me a libtard and it wears on one after a while. 

You raise really good questions.  It's an interesting discussion and not nearly as black and white as I'd like it to be.  You've given me a lot to think about.

  • Upvote 2
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, just_ordinary said:

It’s not that people can not or should not be sympathetic to the victim Jana. But to me it seems people love to come up with lots of completely speculative (at best) theories to make her more of a victim, having the best work ethic, the protector of her little siblings, the secret rebel that doesn’t want to have a husband and children….. just because this CinderJana narrative is so strong.  …..

….

And  there can be many options as to why Jana the individual has become like that. She might be more broken. But there is just as good of a chance she is just a bigoted asshole. But it just seems as if in Jana’s particular case the first instinct for most is the first option. Interestingly, the male or more “uneasy” women (Jessa, Lauren) don’t get the same privilege.

FWIW,  I find the fact that Jana hasn’t married (mildly) interesting because she is the only one that hasn’t.  I do not see her as more of a victim than any of the others,  I don’t, in fact, find her particularly interesting.

For reasons I have explained, I do think that speculations that her parents may have been harder on her than the others may be on target.  As an oldest daughter myself, I know that a lot of pressure can be put on us (albeit unconsciously) even by good, sensitive parents.  It may be that any innate independence was stifled in her.  Or it may be that she channeled her energies to become a bossy sister and her parents’ enforcer and echo.  Who knows?

Whatever may be the case, I don’t think she is more (or less) a victim than any of her siblings, and speculating on why she has made some choices and not others is not making excuses for her.  It is just as interesting to wonder why Jessa made her choices.  

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, viii said:

It's ridiculous at any point, tbh. 

I can see being overprotective of 17 YO Justin or Joy, but not of a 32 YO woman whom you have relied on to provide adult duties (caring for medically fragile Josie while her parents galavanted to MX, as an example) her entire life. JB should have no say in Jana”s dating life-

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

I agree. But I really wonder about the dynamics today. They now have z as small number of children again. Only 6. Are JB and Michelle actually parenting them? So they get to know them now? Or are they largely ignored most of the time? 

The parental attention over the last few years has mainly been taken up by kid number 1.  After the In Touch article, parental attention went on managing image and working out what legal steps could be taken.  Mere months later, he publicly went off the rails with Ashley Madison and needed to be managed plus he now came with a wife and small babies.  The last 6 months, he's been taking up lots of parenting attention with managing him and Anna and Ms and lawyer fees.

They've also been arranging marriages.

There won't have been much energy for the littles (who are now not little).

With Jana doing more hobby time (and she's earned it), I suspect that the current minors are running feral with input only when they mess up/annoy people/ sufficiently suck up.  I think its been that way since the howlers were small children, and even though the Howlers are getting married and the lost girls are teens, I don't think the principles of child rearing those kids have changed.

You get attention if you are the squeaky wheel (difficult),  if you suck up or if there's a court ship to be had.

If you are Josh and are the squeaky wheel and golden boy, you get the most attention.

  • Upvote 1
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine the 4 youngest girls get farmed out a lot…Anna’s, Jessa’s, Kendra’s. I am concerned for J’Tyler. He’s Jenny or Jordyn’s age, right? Who is watching over him?

  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the simplest answer as to why Jana isn’t married is that her parents need someone to take care of them as they age and she’s been tapped as it. Not fundie, but my mother was the child my grandparents tapped to care for them and she simply couldn’t even fathom doing anything other than being at their beck and call - even when they were working and healthy - until after they passed on. Broke up my parents marriage because she couldn’t live states away and caused her to postpone her desired career, again while they were healthy and in their 50s. She didn’t break out of it and live her life as hers until they died. That level of dependency - I’ll take care of you, but you have to take care of us/you owe us isn’t that uncommon. Having the money to make it happen with a SAHD is the anomaly, though.  

  • Upvote 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I can see being overprotective of 17 YO Justin or Joy, but not of a 32 YO woman whom you have relied on to provide adult duties (caring for medically fragile Josie while her parents galavanted to MX, as an example) her entire life. JB should have no say in Jana”s dating life-

I think there may be slim pickings for aging (in fundie time) debutantes like Sarah Maxwell, the Botinkettes and Jana. Any sensible prospective suiter may flee from their obnoxious parents.

 

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Someone Out There said:

If it helps, in general Casseroles and Stews are basically the same thing, except Casseroles are cooked in the Oven while Stews are cooked on the Stove.  I think most if not all cuisines have some sort of Stew type recipe (I could of course be very wrong).

It’s true that casseroles are cooked in the oven and stews are usually cooked on the stove, but that’s not the main difference. Stews are thick, chunky soups. You  use a spoon to eat a stew from a bowl. Casseroles are mixtures of meat, vegetables, and starches that are baked and eaten from a plate with a knife and fork. Some casseroles from different cultures include shepherds’ pie (Britain), lasagne (Italy), and enchiladas (Mexico).

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SassyPants said:

I imagine the 4 youngest girls get farmed out a lot…Anna’s, Jessa’s, Kendra’s. I am concerned for J’Tyler. He’s Jenny or Jordyn’s age, right? Who is watching over him?

This question about Tyler raises the question of who found it better to leave him with the Duggars than any other choice they had.  How bad must the other alternatives have been that the Duggars were the best?  As far as I know, this was a family arrangement, but would there be some oversight by the state before the Duggars got guardianship?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Cults-r-us said:

I think there may be slim pickings for aging (in fundie time) debutantes like Sarah Maxwell, the Botinkettes and Jana. Any sensible prospective suiter may flee from their obnoxious parents.

 

I think her being older (for fundie standards) might be appealing to some fundie men - especially those who don't want many children. She is still young enough to have two or three, but probably not more. If they moved a couple of states away, her husband would not have to deal with her parents much.

I

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am horrible for thinking this, but here goes:

I hope the Duggar family has different rules for married vs unmarried kids and that Jana isn’t an exemption to the rules. And I hope that Justin is being a little snot nose and lording his marital state and preferential treatment over her. Something needs to truly break her brain for her to change and I hope it is a brother that much younger being a douche than anything sinister. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe any courtship candidates for Jana have been wanting a really meek girl, and Jana has come across as too strong-willed/bossy (not necessarily a bad thing). It might not have aligned with the type of spouse the men would have wanted. I am sure men are drawn to or stay in fundamentalism because they get to be the headship and hold all the power, maybe Jana came off as too "headshippy" or opinionated herself, and the men didn't want to bother with that. 

I don't think she is not married because she is expected to take care of her parents. They have 19 other kids (counting Tyler as well), who could help take care of them. 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dharmapunk said:

I think her being older (for fundie standards) might be appealing to some fundie men - especially those who don't want many children. She is still young enough to have two or three, but probably not more. If they moved a couple of states away, her husband would not have to deal with her parents much.

I

It made sense that Stephen was likely interested. 2 of his sisters married in their early 30s and they both seem happy currently with 3 and 4 kids. 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

It’s true that casseroles are cooked in the oven and stews are usually cooked on the stove, but that’s not the main difference. Stews are thick, chunky soups. You  use a spoon to eat a stew from a bowl. Casseroles are mixtures of meat, vegetables, and starches that are baked and eaten from a plate with a knife and fork. Some casseroles from different cultures include shepherds’ pie (Britain), lasagne (Italy), and enchiladas (Mexico).

this I think is a uniquely American definition - in the UK we don't have an umbrella term for foods baked in a shallow-ish pan like lasagne, enchiladas or shepherd's pie. To us those are all distinct dishes, not part of one group, and 'casserole' means something more like the stew as you describe it. You would usually expect it to be cooked long and slow in the oven, but these days of course you could do it in a slow cooker too. The dish takes its name from the French cooking pot, which is deep, lidded, and usually made from cast iron. If I said 'can you get the casserole down from the shelf?' I'd be talking about the cooking pot not the food.

Spoiler

15147123_31844951_2048.thumb.jpg.2bf0cf61910a890cc10417047a407499.jpg

Just noting that this is a regional differentiation and so @Someone Out There's definition is also correct and might have been helpful to the OP.

  • Upvote 5
  • I Agree 2
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

This question about Tyler raises the question of who found it better to leave him with the Duggars than any other choice they had.  How bad must the other alternatives have been that the Duggars were the best?  As far as I know, this was a family arrangement, but would there be some oversight by the state before the Duggars got guardianship?

Generally, the states encourage kinship care as the first option before placing a child in the foster care system. And I think it’s fair to say Rachel was in the dark about what went on in that house like other extended family members. Legally, there was nothing that made the Duggars ineligible for kinship care.

Sadly, foster care is a crapshoot in terms of the type of families children are placed with. I don’t blame her for selecting the known quantity over a family she didn’t know. 

  • Upvote 11
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AprilQuilt said:

this I think is a uniquely American definition - in the UK we don't have an umbrella term for foods baked in a shallow-ish pan like lasagne, enchiladas or shepherd's pie. To us those are all distinct dishes, not part of one group, and 'casserole' means something more like the stew as you describe it.

I wouldn't consider any of those things you listed as a casserole, tbh. I think they're all pretty distinctive. 

To me, a casserole is food thrown together and bound together with a can of cream _____ soup, lol. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, viii said:

I wouldn't consider any of those things you listed as a casserole, tbh. I think they're all pretty distinctive. 

To me, a casserole is food thrown together and bound together with a can of cream _____ soup, lol. 

just quoting the examples the previous poster gave as being casseroles, so I'm interested you don't think they are either. But that American definition of 'thing baked with cream of X' soup is not something Europeans would recognise as a casserole.

I'm interested in how much Americans (and Canadians? I don't know!) use condensed soups in their cooking, as it's not a tradition in Europe at all. I guess it makes more sense historically as more Americans might have lived remotely and relied on storecupboard ingredients. But we had the same kind of domestic convenience revolution in the middle decades of the 20th century, and certainly my dad's family was wild for any kind of labour-saving food of the future like Angel Delight or tinned stews. But we really don't use soups to bind in the same way at all. I cooked a thanksgiving brisket one year on the very strictest instructions of my American housemate's mother and it was a pain to get hold of the right soup that tradition demanded. I'd never have thought to use it at all.

  • Upvote 6
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Snarkasarus Rex said:

Generally, the states encourage kinship care as the first option before placing a child in the foster care system. And I think it’s fair to say Rachel was in the dark about what went on in that house like other extended family members. Legally, there was nothing that made the Duggars ineligible for kinship care.

Sadly, foster care is a crapshoot in terms of the type of families children are placed with. I don’t blame her for selecting the known quantity over a family she didn’t know. 

Yes, and while there are wonderful foster parents out there who provide loving and safe homes for kids, there are also a lot of very abusive foster homes.  Sadly, it's very possible that the Duggars are safer option than some.

10 minutes ago, AprilQuilt said:

just quoting the examples the previous poster gave as being casseroles, so I'm interested you don't think they are either. But that American definition of 'thing baked with cream of X' soup is not something Europeans would recognise as a casserole.

I'm interested in how much Americans (and Canadians? I don't know!) use condensed soups in their cooking, as it's not a tradition in Europe at all. I guess it makes more sense historically as more Americans might have lived remotely and relied on storecupboard ingredients. But we had the same kind of domestic convenience revolution in the middle decades of the 20th century, and certainly my dad's family was wild for any kind of labour-saving food of the future like Angel Delight or tinned stews. But we really don't use soups to bind in the same way at all. I cooked a thanksgiving brisket one year on the very strictest instructions of my American housemate's mother and it was a pain to get hold of the right soup that tradition demanded. I'd never have thought to use it at all.

Growing up Campbell's soups always had recipes on the cans for these kind of one pot/dish meals.  The very American version of chicken tetrazzini from my childhood was from the back of a cream of mushroom can.  I make my own cream of mushroom soup now so I always make a condensed version to use as the base for my tetrazini, but it's still the same recipe minus the processed soup.

My family's Mulligan stew recipe still uses tomato soup as does another one dish meal called cremettes and steak which is Duggar like in simplicity but the ultimate comfort food.  I've tried using homemade and unprocessed soups for that but nope, needs to be the basic stuff from the can to bring the happiness.  

But that's how it took hold here, Campbell's marketing.  Every church cookbook I've ever seen is filled with such recipes.  

  • Upvote 11
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would differentiate a soup from a casserole and that a casserole has to have layers. My grandmother's casserole had no cream of anything soup and was layered ground beef rice corn bacon and tomatoes or tomato sauce. Her stool was not like a soup either but was ground beef potatoes carrots and onions boiled with gravy and biscuits on top. By this definition I suppose lasagna would be a casserole that I would never have called it one. It may be American Centric but I would only ever call a casserole something that was Anglo based and lasagna is its own thing as are enchiladas 

My husband is also American and insist that my stew is not a stew and he doesn't know what to call it because it is too thick and we eat it on plates with a fork

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think Jana is choosing not to be married at this point. I do think there was a time when she really wanted the fundie dream of marriage and kids. And I think being the oldest daughter of "fundie royalty" (at the time) she had prospects. But I think she was picky (as she should be), or couldn't find the right match. I know the girls hinted at past "getting to know you relationships" for Jana. 

But now, I get the feeling she's happy where she is. I think she enjoys her life galavanting around with her friends, gardening, home decoring, not being tied down to raising a family. I wouldn't be surprised if Jana has a late marriage, few kids if any, a lot of traveling. Who knows.... maybe she's waiting because she doesn't want actually want kids.

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Recent Status Updates

    • Bluebirdbluebell

      Bluebirdbluebell

      I highly recommend Not the Good Girl's Youtube channel. She is making great documentaries about cults.
      · 0 replies
    • BlackberryGirl

      BlackberryGirl

      Ohh jeeze, GrandBerry6 just came to me, snuggled his face in my neck and barfed, all over me. In my neck, in my hair, on my face, down inside my nightie all over the front of my nightie. Ohh FUCK! Bath, washed hair, cleaned sofa. Good times, good times.
      · 2 replies
    • Scrabblemaster

      Scrabblemaster

      I danced through my living room feeling awesome. From time to time I do this. Maybe wine is involved. Good music is definitely involved. It is awesome. I recommend it to you. With or without wine.
      · 2 replies
    • Hazelbunny

      Hazelbunny

      After a few months of trying to decide what kind of new computer to get and my brother telling me a Mac would be the best decision I could ever make and my sister telling me that would be the worst and I ought to stick to Windows.... I now have a used Mac. I am trying to get used to it. Not easy, but the Magnifying program is a lot better than the Windows one (that was the ultimate reason for my decision) and FJ works a lot better than on my 10-year old Laptop, too!!  
      · 0 replies
    • WannabeHistorian

      WannabeHistorian

      Y'all, holter monitors suck. And naturally the palpitations that caused this test to be ordered are remarkably absent today. 
      I'm off to go work out in the hopes that triggers it. T minus 10 hours till I get this thing off. 
      · 4 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      Fuck Fornicate.  Glad I got in to see this place before the world went to shit.
       
      · 0 replies
    • PreciousPantsofDoom

      PreciousPantsofDoom

      I frigging hate the toilets at this worksite. Specifically the door locks. Stupid little knoblet that isn't clear if it is locked or not. Door opens right off the main hallway and the toilet is just far enough from the door that I can't just hold the door shut in case I've got the lock wrong. I mean really people, how hard is it to design this? I just want to pee in private with no anxiety. Apparently that is too much to ask for. 
      · 1 reply
    • 47of74

      47of74

      First thing I'm doing when I get to the hereafter is finding the ancestors who moved to the US in the first place and asking them what the fuck they were thinking moving here in the first place.  Along with giving them an epic the reason you suck speech hopefully in the presence of God and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself to all of them for condemning their descendants to living in a shithole.
      · 0 replies
    • feministxtian

      feministxtian

      Its STILL snowing. Its not like I don't have a million things to do and need to take crap to the dumpster. 
      · 2 replies
    • Chocolate Lover

      Chocolate Lover

      Do any of you play Dyson Sphere Program?   For those who don't know what it is I'd suggest Googling it, because there's no way I could do it justice. 
      There's always just one more thing to do before I turn off.  Blink!  And it's 2 hours later.  
      · 0 replies
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.