Updating The Duggars – Day 9

Updating The Duggars – Day 9 May 28, 2015

joshannaHave you read R.L. Stollar’s comparison of how two different Joshes, Josh Duggar and Josh Komisarjevsky, raised in ATI and both committing criminal behavior, are being treated by the media and the Christian Community? You should. At Homeschoolers Anonymous – A Tale of Two Joshes

Last night there started to be many outlets reporting that TLC was on the verge of retooling Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar’s show “19 Kids & Counting” into a show that features almost exclusively just Jill & Derick Dillard and Jessa & Ben Seewald and various coming children. Is anyone really interested in watching that because it seems that would be one very dull show. TLC just needs to end all the Duggar shows and allow the family to heal from what has happened.

People magazine is quoting a ‘Duggar Insider’ that the new retooled show will go forward, while TMZ says to bet on cancellation.

On the bright side Hulu has now officially pulled off their service all episodes of “19 Kids and Counting” From TMZ – Pulled From Hulu

From Salon – The Duggars and TLC’s exploitative reality TV cash cow: How much lower can one network sink?

TLC has for several years now made clear its commitment to going all in on individuals and behaviors that can answer to the description “extreme,” as in extreme poodles. And it’s made it blatantly clear that it gives no damns about whether you watch or hate watch, whether you care about who gets hurt along the way. The network isn’t the only one with a pile of human suffering in its roster, of course. “Bachelor” contestant Gia Allemand’s suicide two years ago didn’t make a dent in the franchise — and the competition genre itself is littered with a long line of dangerously not well-checked out characters and other suicide victims. But TLC has a particular consistency to its dysfunction that makes it outstanding, even in the wasteland of Lifetime’s “Born in the Wild” and everything on MTV. Don’t expect that to change. As the Hollywood Reporter notes Wednesday, “19 Kids…” “can still pull as many as 3.3 million to a telecast. And it’s one of the contributing factors to the network’s ongoing success,” with ratings “currently stronger than ‘Honey Boo Boo’ at its peak.”

From Buzz Feed – How Evangelical Churches Protect Abusers Like Josh Duggar

The Evangelical church is a closed system that values its own governance over the American judicial system. In fact, the church, structured by the laws of God, often finds itself at odds with “the laws of man.” These conflicts are reconciled through a practice referred to as church governance, where many churches espouse a system found in the Bible in Matthew 18. The offended Christian is to first approach his “brother” with the fault in private. If there is no resolution, then the offended party should approach again with witnesses. Ultimately, he should tell the church. While instances of church governance are on the decline, many mainstream pastors defend the practice. In a 2014 article, John Ortberg, influential pastor of Menlo Park Presbyterian Church, noted that church discipline can be effective if practiced correctly. But all too often church governance puts itself in between abusers and the law.

Salon finally discovered NLQ’s favorite Holocaust denier who’s husband tricked Holocaust survivors into appearing on his film about how the Holocaust didn’t happen. Took them long enough.  Zsuzsanna Anderson is still jealously verklemping about the Duggars plus winning friends and influencing folks. From Salon – Wife of Holocaust-denying Arizona pastor slams Duggar clan as too “Liberal”and “Worldly”

The wife of controversial Arizona Pastor Steven Anderson — who has, in the past, demanded women remain silent in church and tricked Holocaust survivors into appearing in his anti-Semitic filmweighed in on the Duggar family travails over the weekend, claiming that she always secretly believed them to be “liberal” and “worldly.”

 On her blog, Zsuzsanna Anderson wrote that even though the Duggars claimed to be “fundamentalists,” the version of their faith and belief system presented on their TLC show was “weak and anemic.”
Gawker has discovered the unscientific jaw-dropping horrible that are ATI Wisdom booklets, the very thing that makes up the bulk of the Duggar children’s education. Gawker – Semen Causes Cancer: Bad Science From The Duggar’s Homeschooling Cult.

The Duggars’ homeschool curriculum is full of wisdom, if by wisdom, of course, we mean a phrenetic preacher screaming in tongues about hell. Now, imagine that raving, holy lunatic wants to teach you about cervical cancer and gangrene as it directly relates to lust.

The Advanced Training Institute’s Wisdom Booklets—designed by noted bachelor and octogenarian sex offender Bill Gothard—has a lot to say about cervical cancer. And medicine in general. And it makes for just about the worst, most impractical first aid arsenal you ever did see.

Dan Savage wants to turn the name ‘Duggar’ into the same sort of gross buzzword for sexual things like Santorum. From Huffington Post – Dan Savage Wants To Turn “Duggar” Into The New “Santorum”

Dan Savage wants to do to Josh Duggar what he did to Rick Santorum: redefine the man’s last name.

On Tuesday, the writer and LGBT advocate called on his Twitter followers to help coin the new term based on the “19 Kids And Counting” star who was investigated for allegedly sexually molesting five underage girls, including several of his sisters, when he was a teen.

From Defamer – The Bates Family Is Cable TV’s New Duggars And Just As Toxic  Finally someone in the media realizes that it’s more than just the Duggars living like this and how dangerous it can be.

Many fans of Bringing up Bates believe the Bates family is “better” than the Duggars; Kelly Bates genuinely seems to love her 19 children, Gil Bates actively parents (and can also paint glow-in-the-dark eagles at impressive speeds), minimally talented country-singing son Lawson is more sociable and fun than any Duggar boy, and Erin Paine nee Bates is compelling to watch as she shares everything in her life from makeup tutorials to her struggles with fertility.

But lurking behind the admittedly gorgeous family are the same ugly beliefs that drove the Duggars to keep their child-molesting son hidden from authorities for over a year and in the same house as the sisters he molested for many more. Alongside Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar, Gil and Kelly Bates share a devotion to God, an affection for TV money, and a strict adherence to the ATI (Advanced Training Institute International) homeschooling curriculum.

The Washington Post remarks on the disturbing trend in Josh Duggar’s apology, his constant mention of himself. From The Washington Post – Jesus is quick to forgive, but Josh Duggar’s is still disturbing.

Is it too soon and too horrifying to treat the story with humor? Apparently Funny or Die doesn’t think so. What do you think?

That’s all I got this morning and I’m glad. Seriously burning out from the constant Duggar updating and news. This song by Weird Al is starting to describe my mental state.

If this is your first time visiting NLQ please read our Welcome page and our Comment Policy!

Comments open below

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement by Kathryn Joyce

13:24 – A Story of Faith and Obsession by M Dolon Hickmon

""Make love to him"??? Yeah, cause sex solves every problem. What else woudl you do? ..."

Michael and Debi Pearl and That ..."
"I've been away for a few days. Reading Larry's latest makes me glad to be ..."

Would Larry Solomon Kill Himself if ..."
"That laughter is definitely 9fear/relief laughter. She's probably happy too that, having had kids, Mike ..."

Michael and Debi Pearl and That ..."
"The Pearls are terrible9, but what gets me the most is the audience cheering and ..."

Michael and Debi Pearl and That ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • GreenEyedLilo

    Sadly, Dan Savage seems unconcerned about the survivors who must also carry the name “Duggar.” The Duggar parents and Josh spread a lot of toxic lies against the LGBT community, and I do share Savage’s hope that nobody will accept these people as a moral authority about, say, anti-discrimination ordinances anymore. But healing for Josh’s victims is far more important than scoring political points.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Did you read that Santorum, hideous jerk that he usually is, came out and has been the only conservative to mention how sorry he is for the victims? I never thought I’d see the day when I approved of anything coming out of that man’s mouth. Where is any sympathy for the victims in this from the Religious Right?

  • Anonyme

    I made the mistake of trolling the FOX News FB page to see what the far right is saying about the Duggar situation. They’re now having conniptions because Choice Hotels, Walgreens and Payless shoes will pull advertising if 19K&C continues (good!). God’s forgiveness, he was a kid, prejudice against Christians, blah blah blah. This is one of the “winners”. Apparently molesting your kid sisters is merely “something stupid”.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    Guess my relatives have used it wrong for years now…point taken

  • Joyce

    The Funny or Die video was great.

  • “The Evangelical church is a closed system that values its own governance over the American judicial system. In fact, the church, structured by the laws of God, often finds itself at odds with “the laws of man.” These conflicts are reconciled through a practice referred to as church governance”

    a.k.a. Sharia law?

  • SAO

    He was probably coached.

  • GreenEyedLilo

    Wow. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and it looks like we just heard one of those times for Santorum.

  • Jenny Islander

    The way fundamentalists of assorted denominations and religions copy one another even while consigning one another to the outer darkness has been brought up pretty frequently. It’s morbidly funny and creepy at the same time.

  • Jayn

    I know this is OT but…Gil Bates? He sounds like he should be on TV running Macrosoft.

  • Gypsy Rose B

    Naw, Sharia law is foreign and scary and a threat. This is American freedom!

  • Poster Girl

    The cynic in me is leaning towards the theory that he’s doing it to set himself apart from Huckabee in the 2016 primary. After all, the Duggars supported him last time and have since jumped ship for Huckabee. Sour grapes and everything.

  • Baby_Raptor

    We both know that it a Liberal Atheist teenager had molested their siblings we wouldn’t be hearing a moue’s squeak about forgiveness or teenage stupidity.

  • KarenH

    Even if it was just coaching, that he had ANYONE around him who thought it was a good idea to give a thought to the five victims is actually better than I would have given him credit for.

  • Nea

    Leaving Fundamenalism has a fascinating link. If Josh had been turned in, according to AR law, the Duggars wouldn’t be able to legally homeschool anymore.

  • ShaLaLa

    Wish I could say I’m shocked that Dan Savage is willing to ensure that four out of five of the victims of sexual assault in this case will have their last name turned into, to quote the roundup, a “gross buzzword for sexual things,” but this is pretty much par for the course for Dan Savage’s crap :/

  • ShaLaLa

    Dan Savage rarely seems to care for people dissimilar from him if it doesn’t serve his cause. Even amongst the GSRM folk he pretends to speak for, it’s really only a particular subset of gay men (and occasionally women) he actually supports. The rest of us he is more than willing to sling shade at. The Internet is full of toxic crap he has spewed about bisexual folk, trans folk, women, asexual folk, gay men who don’t fit the correct persona, and a host of others.

    He occasionally says or does things that are good or helpful, but most of his time is spent throwing the more marginalized subsets of GSRM folk under the bus.

  • GreenEyedLilo

    Being bi and female, I agree with that assessment.

  • Astrin Ymris

    I know some members of the gay community don’t believe in bisexuality, and I’ve read some hints which imply that asexuals get a lot of pushback from people who don’t believe that’s real.

    But the rest is new to me. Can you tell me where I can find an objective critique of Dan Savage?

  • ShaLaLa

    Yeah, the problems are pretty widespread amongst the more privileged segments of the GSRM “community,” and Dan Savage is right in the thick of it. I don’t have time to dig out a good critique right now, but if I recall correctly, Your Fave is Problematic has a good collection of links that detail some of the most well known examples.

  • Astrin Ymris

    I was Googling, and I found this:


    According to Savage, he was labeled transphobic because the term “tranny” was retroactively labeled hate speech. Is that true?

  • ShaLaLa

    No, but such a response is par for the course for him. I mean, it’s true that he has used slurs like “tranny” and “shemale,” (and in what I would consider a derogatory fashion), and it might even be true that he hasn’t done so in a while (I stopped following his doings beyond what pops up on my blogs or news sources quite some time ago), but his cissexism was never confined to the use of slurs.

    Seriously, if you’re curious, Your Fave is Problematic has a decent roundup, and there are at least two cissexist responses from his column right at the top. His “Bad Tranny” piece, while older (2003) is pretty blatant, right down to using the wrong pronouns.

  • Astrin Ymris

    Sorry– I didn’t get that ‘Your Fave is Problematic’ was a website.

    However, I don’t like the tendency to create new taboo words out of old slang (or in some cases, old official medical diagnoses). Communicating with others is hard enough without adding “Damn, what’s the new politically correct term for that now?” to the mix.

    Emotionally, it feels to me like back in high school and being mocked by the neurotypical kids for using slang that had become passé. Just sayin’.

  • ShaLaLa

    You’ve indicated your distaste for that in the past, but I think there’s an important difference between using a word as a slur and innocently using a word you didn’t know wasn’t acceptable. If the rest of the surrounding words/speech are aimed at hurting or insulting the person the slur is aimed at, we can feel pretty confident the slur was being used as a slur (the same way words that are not slurs in and of themselves can be used as slurs).

    And frankly, if someone is putting themselves forward as an advocate or an ally for a group of marginalized people (as Dan Savage does), a basic first step would be to listen to what those groups are saying they need from their allies, and that will usually pretty quickly make clear that there are some words you shouldn’t be using. The burden to reduce your complicity in harm (and these words become slurs before they become “taboo.” They become “taboo” because the people they are used against speak out against the harm being caused) is necessarily higher when you are claiming to be an ally.

    Regardless, as I mentioned in my last post, my problems with Dan Savage are far from limited to the fact that he uses these slurs. The “Bad Tranny” article I mentioned reveal some nasty aspects to his perspective of trans folk. Other pieces in there reveal bi-erasure, bi-stereotyping, misogyny, rape apologia, anti-asexual ranting, and general nastiness.

    [Edited for poor wording in the first paragraph, and to add to the last paragraph]

  • Astrin Ymris

    IS there anyone who’s authorized to speak on behalf of all transgender and bisexual people as to what their language and usage preferences are? I would think there’s a lot of individual diversity of opinion on the subject of how serious outdated slang is compared to speaking out against proposed anti-LGBT legislation.

    You can think Dan Savage is wrong in a number of his expressed opinions about what sexual morality in the GSRM community should consist of– and based on the link, I agree– but he’s still not in the same category as Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz the Duggars, or any of their fellow travelers.

  • ShaLaLa

    A person can be less egregious or blatant in their bigotry than the most egregious or blatant offenders. That doesn’t absolve them of their responsibility.

    Dan Savage has a long history of saying crap that perpetuates the marginalization and maltreatment of already marginalized segments of the GSRM population. He also has a history of minimizing sexual violence and perpetuating rape culture.

    These things, and others, lead to the views I expressed in this thread. The use of a cissexist slur is something you brought up, not me, and is merely another example of Dan Savage being insensitive to people who are not like him.

    As to whether there is some authority that hands down rules on the language that is preferred by all trans or bi people, of course there isn’t. I assume you didn’t mean to make a strawman argument, but that is all that was. At no point did I suggest that trans people (or bi people) are a monolith, and at no point did I suggest that all members of either group share identical language preferences.

    What I did say (if not here, then in other conversations we’ve had) is that a large number of activists belonging to various marginalized groups have explicitly said that certain language causes them harm and perpetuates systems of injustice by normalizing the treatment of members of that group as Other. I have yet to hear anyone say that NOT hearing these words causes harm. When given the option between doing something that definitely causes harm to some people and doing something that causes harm to no one, the more morally viable option would seem to be the latter.

    And yes, sometimes it’s really hard. There are words that were so ingrained in my vocabulary, and that didn’t have an obvious better choice, that I would find myself still reaching for them. And sometimes I got it wrong, and I hurt someone anyway and got called on it, and that was uncomfortable too. But none of that matters compared to the fact that I was hurting people, and they were telling me so.

    I have to be honest, sometimes conversations with you become so mired in the fact that you don’t like people commenting on the language people use that it’s hard to get any further in the conversation, and I don’t really get that.

    Frankly, it feels like you are privileging the inconvenience of changing your vocabulary and the discomfort of being called on problematic language over the harm caused by marginalizing language. Maybe that is an unfair interpretation, I don’t know.

    Anyway, if you don’t want to change your language, don’t. No one can force you to, and frankly I don’t think anyone is trying to force you.

    Normally I enjoy your posts, but sometimes you are difficult to talk to, as if you’ve latched onto the fact that I find certain words to be largely problematic and are assuming that that is my primary focus.