(CW: CSA) Josh & Anna 50: Anna Breaking the Opposite of News about the Whodunnit of the Century

[HerNameIsBuffy]

7 minutes ago, Marshmallow World said:

Am I completely misremembering? I don't recall Anna/Josh following JillandCo at all in the first place - just JillandCo unfollowing Anna/Josh. 

Also, why the heck am I talking about JillRod in a Duggar thread? I guess Anna is related. Out of curiosity, I checked Anna insta (I'll have to take a shower now, thanks) and she only follows 50 people. I don't know if she always followed that few people, but I just don't think JillRod would make the cut? 

While you were there did you notice if anyone from either family besides David and Pris likes her latest post about his appeal?  Just curious and I don't have Insta.  if there is a way for me to check myself without creating an account I'd do it myself, someone please let me know if that's the case.

[Marshmallow World]

@HerNameIsBuffy I didn't notice but I went back to check. There are a little over two thousand likes, but the order of who liked it appears to be in no particular order. I searched for "Duggar" and "Keller" for the users who liked the post, and didn't see any results on the users. It's hardly foolproof, but unless I scroll through each individual one, I am not 100% sure.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

15 minutes ago, Marshmallow World said:

@HerNameIsBuffy I didn't notice but I went back to check. There are a little over two thousand likes, but the order of who liked it appears to be in no particular order. I searched for "Duggar" and "Keller" for the users who liked the post, and didn't see any results on the users. It's hardly foolproof, but unless I scroll through each individual one, I am not 100% sure.

Thanks - that's all I would have done, too.   I appreciate you checking.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

1 hour ago, Marshmallow World said:

Am I completely misremembering? I don't recall Anna/Josh following JillandCo at all in the first place - just JillandCo unfollowing Anna/Josh. 

Also, why the heck am I talking about JillRod in a Duggar thread? I guess Anna is related. Out of curiosity, I checked Anna insta (I'll have to take a shower now, thanks) and she only follows 50 people. I don't know if she always followed that few people, but I just don't think JillRod would make the cut? 

Now that you mention it I do remember now it was Jill that unfollowed Anna, not the other way around.

It's really hard to keep these human mess machines straight sometimes.

[noseybutt]

On 2/6/2022 at 12:14 PM, EmCatlyn said:

Some random comments in response to points made in previous thread:

1. Speculating about people’s sex lives is generally gross.

 

 

 

Yeah, I would agree. Sort of. The speculation is weird but the actual sex lives can be fascinating (and disturbing).

I work as a forensic psychologist and often take psychosexual histories not just for sex crime cases, but for other cases where the defendant may be highly defensive. Sometimes who people who are very defensive but also glitchy (for example, on the schizophrenia spectrum or autism spectrum) may not know how to be defensive when talking about sex. It's sort of a back door for me to get insight into how the person is thinking and feeling. Get the sex life pieced together and I can start to piece together the personality (or vice versa).

That said. I am pretty sure I have mentioned on here that for a time I did a stint treating spouses and significant others of individuals charged with the CSAM.  Kind of the Anna's of the world--only not like Anna at all in that they were in treatment voluntarily. Some planned to stand by their man, others were in the process of leaving. Some were highly religious, others not at all. 

Not a single one reported anything close to a satisfactory sex life.

I have discussed this with other professionals in close contact with this population (eg attorneys, social workers) and they report the same experience. The women who stay, stay in spite of the sexual dysfunction. We all have theories as to why that is, but my point is that a highly sexually satisfied wife of a CSAM offender would be statistically rare. 

Where the spouse/significant other population varies dramatically is their ability to put into words what is happening in the context of the sexual relationship. That takes some insight and some language/verbal skills.  And that is the piece that I will freely speculate about Anna:  My guess is that she lacks basic language to talk about intimacy, whether sexual or emotional.



 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

40 minutes ago, noseybutt said:

Yeah, I would agree. Sort of. The speculation is weird but the actual sex lives can be fascinating (and disturbing).

I work as a forensic psychologist and often take psychosexual histories not just for sex crime cases, but for other cases where the defendant may be highly defensive. Sometimes who people who are very defensive but also glitchy (for example, on the schizophrenia spectrum or autism spectrum) may not know how to be defensive when talking about sex. It's sort of a back door for me to get insight into how the person is thinking and feeling. Get the sex life pieced together and I can start to piece together the personality (or vice versa).

That said. I am pretty sure I have mentioned on here that for a time I did a stint treating spouses and significant others of individuals charged with the CSAM.  Kind of the Anna's of the world--only not like Anna at all in that they were in treatment voluntarily. Some planned to stand by their man, others were in the process of leaving. Some were highly religious, others not at all. 

Not a single one reported anything close to a satisfactory sex life.

I have discussed this with other professionals in close contact with this population (eg attorneys, social workers) and they report the same experience. The women who stay, stay in spite of the sexual dysfunction. We all have theories as to why that is, but my point is that a highly sexually satisfied wife of a CSAM offender would be statistically rare. 

Where the spouse/significant other population varies dramatically is their ability to put into words what is happening in the context of the sexual relationship. That takes some insight and some language/verbal skills.  And that is the piece that I will freely speculate about Anna:  My guess is that she lacks basic language to talk about intimacy, whether sexual or emotional.



 

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt based on your previous posts and the work you do, so can you please clarify why you used the term glitchy to refer to people on either spectrum?

It sounds like a flip and casual insult for a professional to make and I hope I'm interpreting that incorrectly.

 

[Beermeet]

1 hour ago, noseybutt said:

Yeah, I would agree. Sort of. The speculation is weird but the actual sex lives can be fascinating (and disturbing).

I work as a forensic psychologist and often take psychosexual histories not just for sex crime cases, but for other cases where the defendant may be highly defensive. Sometimes who people who are very defensive but also glitchy (for example, on the schizophrenia spectrum or autism spectrum) may not know how to be defensive when talking about sex. It's sort of a back door for me to get insight into how the person is thinking and feeling. Get the sex life pieced together and I can start to piece together the personality (or vice versa).

That said. I am pretty sure I have mentioned on here that for a time I did a stint treating spouses and significant others of individuals charged with the CSAM.  Kind of the Anna's of the world--only not like Anna at all in that they were in treatment voluntarily. Some planned to stand by their man, others were in the process of leaving. Some were highly religious, others not at all. 

Not a single one reported anything close to a satisfactory sex life.

I have discussed this with other professionals in close contact with this population (eg attorneys, social workers) and they report the same experience. The women who stay, stay in spite of the sexual dysfunction. We all have theories as to why that is, but my point is that a highly sexually satisfied wife of a CSAM offender would be statistically rare. 

Where the spouse/significant other population varies dramatically is their ability to put into words what is happening in the context of the sexual relationship. That takes some insight and some language/verbal skills.  And that is the piece that I will freely speculate about Anna:  My guess is that she lacks basic language to talk about intimacy, whether sexual or emotional.



 

Fascinating.  In that context.  

Thanks!

[noseybutt]

1 hour ago, HerNameIsBuffy said:

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt based on your previous posts and the work you do, so can you please clarify why you used the term glitchy to refer to people on either spectrum?

It sounds like a flip and casual insult for a professional to make and I hope I'm interpreting that incorrectly.

 

No. Not meant to be flip and I am sorry it came across that way. I meant to describe a situation where typical interviewing strategies may not provide the story for reasons other than intentional distortion. 

[GiggleOfGirls]

11 minutes ago, noseybutt said:

No. Not meant to be flip and I am sorry it came across that way. I meant to describe a situation where typical interviewing strategies may not provide the story for reasons other than intentional distortion. 

Thank you for explaining. Your phrasing took me aback, but I’m in the middle of a pain flare-up which makes my communication spottier/less effective than usual (I’m autistic) so I’m glad @HerNameIsBuffy asked for clarification. 

Edited February 9, 2022 by GiggleOfGirls

[noseybutt]

3 minutes ago, GiggleOfGirls said:

Thank you for explaining. Your phrasing took me aback, but I’m in the middle of a pain flare-up which makes my communication spottier/less effective than usual (I’m autistic) so I’m glad @HerNameIsBuffy asked for clarification. 

I spend a lot of time communicating across professions and often rely on non-technical terms to explain my thought process. This is a worthwhile reminder to think carefully about words I use. So yeah. I appreciate it being addressed directly. If something is perceived as flippant or hurtful, then better not to use it regardless of my intention.

[Bazinga]

8 hours ago, fundiewatch said:

Priscilla was in the wedding and I would bet dollars to donuts that Anna passed on the “honor.” Jill wanted Anna in a near-cabbage dress grinning next to her but Anna attended in a shapeless outfit and there were no selfie of them together. Jill was thrilled to feature Josh on her footage of the groom’s dinner. I think that some of Jill’s weird “everyone is against us, and also they are all sinners” includes the very publicly pants-wearing Duggar women. Also, Jill was pleased as punch when they parked there and did laundry— so many pictures! She has clearly not been invited back. She’s not a sister in love, as someone said above. 
 

In Shupe news, Karen is a mama to a beautiful baby living her beautiful and independent life in CA AND recently stopped in to our FJ thread. She is delightful, but not saying much. Which is a beautiful postscript to that long LFOP story that I miss so much. 

Which thread? Glad to hear Karen is doing well 

[JDuggs]

I was always under the impression that Anna felt the Rodrigues family was way beneath her in the fundie pecking order and not worthy of her attention. I would guess that Anna doesn’t have a problem with Nurie, but wants absolutely nothing to do with Jill. I thought it was so interesting that Josh was not as put off by the Rodrigues circus and seemed happy to be the center of attention as the emcee at Nurie and Nathan’s wedding, while Anna seemed to not want to be any part of it at all.

And celebrating the elder Kellers’ anniversary the same weekend? I thought that Nathan and Nurie purposely chose to get married on the same day (or close to it) as his parents so it would be celebrated at the same time. Not the Keller kids fault that they threw a classier party than Jill. The bar was pretty low.

[Beermeet]

10 hours ago, fundiewatch said:

Priscilla was in the wedding and I would bet dollars to donuts that Anna passed on the “honor.” Jill wanted Anna in a near-cabbage dress grinning next to her but Anna attended in a shapeless outfit and there were no selfie of them together. Jill was thrilled to feature Josh on her footage of the groom’s dinner. I think that some of Jill’s weird “everyone is against us, and also they are all sinners” includes the very publicly pants-wearing Duggar women. Also, Jill was pleased as punch when they parked there and did laundry— so many pictures! She has clearly not been invited back. She’s not a sister in love, as someone said above. 
 

In Shupe news, Karen is a mama to a beautiful baby living her beautiful and independent life in CA AND recently stopped in to our FJ thread. She is delightful, but not saying much. Which is a beautiful postscript to that long LFOP story that I miss so much. 

Lmao!   I had forgotten about Jill being crazy eyes doing her laundry at The Duggars.  She posted tons of pictures that had to be deleted, right?  The Duggar humping was such a fun stage!  If anyone deserves Jill and The RodPod, it's the FN  Duggar Family.   Jill is so ready for her break, she's got her barndominium (sp?) and a gaggle.  It's pretty funny if it weren't for the blatant neglect and spiritual torture.  😕

[HerNameIsBuffy]

9 hours ago, GiggleOfGirls said:

Thank you for explaining. Your phrasing took me aback, but I’m in the middle of a pain flare-up which makes my communication spottier/less effective than usual (I’m autistic) so I’m glad @HerNameIsBuffy asked for clarification. 

In this instance your communication is just fine.  I'm sorry you're hurting, I hope it eases up quickly.

[FundamentallyShocked]

I stumbled on FJ for the Nauglers, of all things!

Erika Shupe is probably my favorite. I think that IRL I would have enjoyed her company.

 

[Anne Of Gray Gables]

12 hours ago, JDuggs said:

I was always under the impression that Anna felt the Rodrigues family was way beneath her in the fundie pecking order and not worthy of her attention. I would guess that Anna doesn’t have a problem with Nurie, but wants absolutely nothing to do with Jill.

Arguably no semi-sane person - fundie or not - really wants anything to do with Jill.  She's equal opportunity hideous.

I also think Anna probably looks down on Nurie as well. Which would be rich, given who and what Josh n' Anna are. 

[SPHASH]

2 hours ago, Anne Of Gray Gables said:

Arguably no semi-sane person - fundie or not - really wants anything to do with Jill.  She's equal opportunity hideous.

I also think Anna probably looks down on Nurie as well. Which would be rich, given who and what Josh n' Anna are. 

This.

Anna has no business judging others after what she and Josh have done.  She probably looks down on Susannah, Rebekah, and Daniel for getting divorced and having babies out of wedlock.

[Idlewild]

I think with Anna it was a combination of snootiness- she did see herself as some sort of fundie hierarchy, despite Josh’s fall from grace (parts 1 and 2)- and knowledge that Jill has a lot of snarkers who would be going over the wedding photos.

 Josh probably enjoyed being centre of attention because he was no longer allowed to be visible at Duggar weddings and because he is the sort of person who enjoys attracting attention.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

14 minutes ago, Idlewild said:

I think with Anna it was a combination of snootiness- she did see herself as some sort of fundie hierarchy, despite Josh’s fall from grace (parts 1 and 2)- and knowledge that Jill has a lot of snarkers who would be going over the wedding photos.

 Josh probably enjoyed being centre of attention because he was no longer allowed to be visible at Duggar weddings and because he is the sort of person who enjoys attracting attention.

Agree.  Although knowing how snarkers would pour over those pics she could have worn something remotely appropriate.  

[Mrs. Kravitz]

On 2/8/2022 at 10:23 AM, smittykins said:

Didn’t Erica spell it “whisps”?

I thought so, but I second guessed myself because my phone kept correcting it to whispers!

[Gottahavedembabies]

Lmao!   I had forgotten about Jill being crazy eyes doing her laundry at The Duggars.  She posted tons of pictures that had to be deleted, right?  The Duggar humping was such a fun stage!  If anyone deserves Jill and The RodPod, it's the FN  Duggar Family.   Jill is so ready for her break, she's got her barndominium (sp?) and a gaggle.  It's pretty funny if it weren't for the blatant neglect and spiritual torture.  [emoji53]

When was she doing her laundry at the TTH? Around what year? I’m just so curious

[Smee]

My speculation on J&A’s sex life was probably mostly projection - I had a miserable sex life in my marriage and felt it was my “duty” to “put out” 2-3 times a week for over a decade. Through pregnancy and babies/toddlers who didn’t sleep and severe (requiring hospitalisation) depression and an eating disorder, his sexual satisfaction was still my responsibility and for many years sex was just another chore that I tolerated for the sake of a marriage and friendship and financial security. By the time I left, I hated sex, and I still have zero interest in fucking anybody else. The Josh CSAM arrest scandal broke around the same time as my separation - a couple of days after, I think, while we were still separated under one roof and I was on my phone constantly either reading fj or trying to find somewhere else to live, realising that he was cyberstalking me and financially abusive, trying to protect my children from his emotional breakdown. The past year as I’ve followed the Duggar scandals I’ve been processing my own religious guilt and expectations of “marriage” and the “hindsight is 20:20” experience of seeing a different side to my ex-husband than I realised during our twelve year marriage. I’m also pretty close in age to Anna (I’ll be 34 in July) and reflecting on how mature I THOUGHT I was at 21 when I was getting married.

So yes, speculating about their unhappy sex life for me was not about picturing it (I’m not a visual thinker anyway) and needing brain bleach, not about searching for “reasons” for Josh being an abusive disgusting turd, nor excusing Anna, it’s just a weird part of processing and empathising with anyone who seems to have a glimmer of something I can relate to. I suppose it really does say a lot more about me than about them.

[Cults-r-us]

38 minutes ago, Smee said:

 

So yes, speculating about their unhappy sex life for me was not about picturing it (I’m not a visual thinker anyway) and needing brain bleach, not about searching for “reasons” for Josh being an abusive disgusting turd, nor excusing Anna, it’s just a weird part of processing and empathising with anyone who seems to have a glimmer of something I can relate to. I suppose it really does say a lot more about me than about them.

For myself, I speculate not for the visuals (ychh),  but in wonder and curiosity that Anna seems to LIKE her Smuggar, however that is possible.

[Cults-r-us]

7 hours ago, Anne Of Gray Gables said:

Arguably no semi-sane person - fundie or not - really wants anything to do with Jill.  She's equal opportunity hideous.

I also think Anna probably looks down on Nurie as well. Which would be rich, given who and what Josh n' Anna are. 

But probably no one would look down on Nurie if they hadn't been so traumatized by Jill's ingratiating, entitled, exhausting and embarrassing nonsense. It's enough to erar the other Fundies out. 

 

 

 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Looks like we now know the infamous letter writer.  The one who left the letter in the homeschooling book about Josh's molestations about the same time as Alice was informing Oprah?

Kayleigh Holt.  It was in the summary judgement issues today dismissing the sister's lawsuit against the last two defendants for improper redaction.