8 Simple Rules for dating a Duggar Daughter

[Xantippe]

Wow thanks so much! I guess I know what I’m reading for this month…

Very good!

Austen is really good at showing personality, the problems of discerning character in new acquaintances (and how easily one can make mistakes). On the one hand, her heroines usually have more social support than young women today do (society and parents were making a concerted effort to provide them with new single male acquaintances and safe opportunities for getting to know them), but on the other hand, the penalties for failure were much harsher than we have today.

It’s also interesting to get a feel for what was proper and what was improper.

Good luck!

 

[Xantippe]

True. Also I don’t think we should necessarily label the Duggar parents as these crazy control freaks. It obviously is a part of their faith and if they want to manifest it in this way than that is their right. The sad thing is people will say they are Christian (Which I have no doubt they are) and say that its okay, much like people of all denominations jumped on (and still practice) the whole courtship idea from “I kissed dating goodbye” and take it too extremes.

And one more thing, I think I asked this earlier, but does the dad expect his daughters to practice this even if they are past 25 or 30. I couldn’t imagine having to go through this as a man having to ask dad if I can date her. If I was 16 yes but not at say 28. Granted he’s probably got suitors in mind for his daughters

I was wondering the same thing about older daughters, but we’d have to have Jim Bob here to ask that.

There’s already a 24-year-old single daughter, I believe, so tick tick.

I think you’re quite right that a huge percentage of good guys would be squicked out by having to have paternal permission to court a mid-late 20-something for a variety of different good reasons.

 

[petitfleur]

…:…:
I don’t know what the Duggars will do but there are many families also associated with Gothard, ATI, IBLP, fundlementalist who have older children living at home. The Botkin sisters, the Maxwell’s have a daughter in her 30’s who lives at home, has never worked outside of the home and no college. The Arndt family has 13 sons and one daughter. The oldest son is 33 all the kids still live at home. I think there are 8 adult males.

 

[Xantippe]

Again, what I have heard from someone who left, it is very common for these girls in this movement to become old spinsters living at home. They have no choice but to sit around and wait for a suitor to ask daddy to court. Often times it never happens for them and they continue to live under daddy’s roof, even into their 30’s and 40’s. Even the “good looking” girls.

I just find that so sad and infuriating.

Yes.

A few more thoughts:

1. As my husband pointed out to me, in many traditional societies, it would generally be the job of a FEMALE matchmaker to set up matches between different families. It’s not a job that would come easy to many dads.

To this day, I believe Jewish Orthodox communities in the US use matchmakers. It speeds up the process to have a go between who is familiar with a large number of suitable single people.

1. In Jane Austen’s England, society (at least the gentry society she documents) and parents were working hard to pair up young people. There’d be balls, picnics, various outings, the season in London, maybe a visit to Bath. We don’t have that stuff. In our mainstream culture, we have co-ed education and mixed gender work places, so that makes up quite a bit for that deficit, but notice that that doesn’t apply to homeschooling courtship families who don’t send daughters to school or college and don’t think that they should be prepared for professions. Those families are at a considerable disadvantage, both in comparison to traditional society and mainstream society. (Of course, there is the internet for meeting likeminded individuals, but mainstream society has the internet, too.)
2. As far as I can tell, in Jane Austen, there is no request to court a daughter. Men did ask parents’ blessing for engagements, but not to court. There was no explicit courtship stage, although the mamas would be trying desperately to figure out which young man was getting serious about their daughter.

Also, come to think of it, the suitors ask the young woman to marry them, get a yes, and then and only then approach the parents for their blessing/permission. (Given that the parents would often have the power to give or withhold substantial financial support for the prospective marriage, this was not just a matter of form.)

1. It’s clear that the financial side of marriage is not an afterthought. It’s necessary to get enough funds to live on (or for an Anglican priest to secure a good parish) before getting married, rather than getting married and figuring it out later, and parents do not allow marriages without an adequate income. In Jane Austen’s books, just about all of the couples who heedlessly pursue relationships without thinking about the material side face severe punishment. With no appropriate income and a growing family, romance quickly fades into misery, drudgery and privation (see, for example, Fanny Price’s parents’ marriage in Mansfield Park). When Jane Austen’s heroines (as opposed to just female characters) do not have the prospect of a reasonable family income, they do not rush forward into marriage.

And I don’t think that the focus on the material side is unique to Jane Austen. Pretty much throughout human history, responsible parents have hesitated to allow their daughters to marry without adequate material provision. It’s actually a unique bad feature of some “traditionalists” today that they pooh pooh the material side of marriage and family. I can’t think of any Jane Austen father who would have happily accepted a penniless 19-year-old prospective son-in-law.

Of course, Jane Austen is not a historical text, but it does suggest what the cultural environment was like.

(By the way, the recent movie version of Mansfield Park is totally unfaithful to the book.)

 

[UbiCaritas]

Again, what I have heard from someone who left, it is very common for these girls in this movement to become old spinsters living at home. They have no choice but to sit around and wait for a suitor to ask daddy to court. Often times it never happens for them and they continue to live under daddy’s roof, even into their 30’s and 40’s. Even the “good looking” girls.

I just find that so sad and infuriating.

For what it’s worth, I helped a woman in this movement “run away from home” a couple of years ago.

She was in her late twenties.

She’s doing remarkably well considering her background, but still struggles with many things that most people take for granted. Fortunately, she had friends she could call to ask “how do I register a car?” “How do I fill out a job application?” “Did I sin when I smiled at this man at work?” “I’m angry at my parents for exposing me to a child molestor/beating me/emotionally and spiritually abusing me; does that mean I’m a terrible sinner?” Etc.

Her parents still insist that a) they had the right to treat her as they did and b) that she’s making most of it up, including verifiable facts like “Relative X is a registered pedophile sex offender and you left me alone with him on multiple occasions.” Nothing happened, they say, and if she has problems with anything that did occur, it’s because of her “rebellious and ungodly spirit.”

She is, thank God, in counseling now with a good therapist, and in a safe place. I have (cautious) hope for her: she seems to be making good strides. She’ll carry those scars all her life, though.

 

[UbiCaritas]

Yes.

A few more thoughts:

1. As my husband pointed out to me, in many traditional societies, it would generally be the job of a FEMALE matchmaker to set up matches between different families. It’s not a job that would come easy to many dads.

To this day, I believe Jewish Orthodox communities in the US use matchmakers. It speeds up the process to have a go between who is familiar with a large number of suitable single people.

1. In Jane Austen’s England, society (at least the gentry society she documents) and parents were working hard to pair up young people. There’d be balls, picnics, various outings, the season in London, maybe a visit to Bath. We don’t have that stuff. In our mainstream culture, we have co-ed education and mixed gender work places, so that makes up quite a bit for that deficit, but notice that that doesn’t apply to homeschooling courtship families who don’t send daughters to school or college and don’t think that they should be prepared for professions. Those families are at a considerable disadvantage, both in comparison to traditional society and mainstream society. (Of course, there is the internet for meeting likeminded individuals, but mainstream society has the internet, too.)
2. As far as I can tell, in Jane Austen, there is no request to court a daughter. Men did ask parents’ blessing for engagements, but not to court. There was no explicit courtship stage, although the mamas would be trying desperately to figure out which young man was getting serious about their daughter.

Yes, and even in Orthodox Jewish communities, the couple still goes out on dates alone together before getting engaged. No spending time alone at an apartment, obviously, but dinner out, coffee, walks etc are fairly SOP.

 

[masondoggy]

I was wondering the same thing about older daughters, but we’d have to have Jim Bob here to ask that.

There’s already a 24-year-old single daughter, I believe, so tick tick.

I think you’re quite right that a huge percentage of good guys would be squicked out by having to have paternal permission to court a mid-late 20-something for a variety of different good reasons.

I think a lot of good men would pass a Duggar girl up because of Jim Bob’s controlling ways (especially considering it’s been broadcast to the public on the show). Why would a guy want to deal with that? It’s easier to just move on and court a girl that has a Dad that won’t be up your business constantly.

For what it’s worth, I helped a woman in this movement “run away from home” a couple of years ago.

She was in her late twenties.

She’s doing remarkably well considering her background, but still struggles with many things that most people take for granted. Fortunately, she had friends she could call to ask “how do I register a car?” “How do I fill out a job application?” “Did I sin when I smiled at this man at work?” “I’m angry at my parents for exposing me to a child molestor/beating me/emotionally and spiritually abusing me; does that mean I’m a terrible sinner?” Etc.

Her parents still insist that a) they had the right to treat her as they did and b) that she’s making most of it up, including verifiable facts like “Relative X is a registered pedophile sex offender and you left me alone with him on multiple occasions.” Nothing happened, they say, and if she has problems with anything that did occur, it’s because of her “rebellious and ungodly spirit.”

She is, thank God, in counseling now with a good therapist, and in a safe place. I have (cautious) hope for her: she seems to be making good strides. She’ll carry those scars all her life, though.

Wow, I can’t even imagine the struggles she has to deal with. I’m glad she was able to find help and support to get out on her own.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I think a lot of good men would pass a Duggar girl up because of Jim Bob’s controlling ways (especially considering it’s been broadcast to the public on the show). Why would a guy want to deal with that? It’s easier to just move on and court a girl that has a Dad that won’t be up your business constantly.

As I’ve stated, this isn’t just demeaning to women, it’s also extremely emasculating and humiliating for the man.

I also want to say, and this may not be politically correct, but I really like strong, take charge men. I have a strong personality, and I wanted someone even stronger. No way would I have been attracted to an adult male who asked anyone’s permission to ask me out.

 

[WhatMeWorry]

And one more thing, I think I asked this earlier, but does the dad expect his daughters to practice this even if they are past 25 or 30. I couldn’t imagine having to go through this as a man having to ask dad if I can date her. If I was 16 yes but not at say 28.

Yes, Jim Bob would expect it, no matter what the age of his single daughters.

Not only that - but he would also expect it of anyone who wants to court his widowed mother - “Grandma” Duggar. That’s right…if some gentleman friend wanted to call on her, he has to go through Jim Bob. She lives in the home and Jim Bob is the man of the family and “in charge” of her - or as the Duggars put it, the “protector.” (They’re big on “protecting” their women.) You’re not going to get any more adult than she is, and yet, she’d also have to go through the chaperone thing. I’m not saying Grandma is interested in going out or having a suitor, but if she did, she’d be subject to the same rules as her granddaughters.

 

[masondoggy]

As I’ve stated, this isn’t just demeaning to women, it’s also extremely emasculating and humiliating for the man.

.

Good point. I agree completely.

 

[petitfleur]

I always thought a man asking permission to marry was really just a formality these days.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Re Jane Austen, I certainly love her works, but I wouldn’t say life for women in the Regency era, even the “upper middle class” women she focuses on, is that much more attractive for me than the Duggar lifestyle. Of course, Austen’s heroines all have happy endings for the most part (though many argue Marianne “settled”), but S+S shows Eliza Williams following in her mother’s footsteps as a disgraced single mother, while in P+P we have Lydia consigned to marriage with a rascal that is still considered a better fate than being “ruined” for a mistake she made when she was just fifteen years old, Fanny really only being saved from marriage to Henry Crawford when he randomly decides to run off with Maria (JA herself has stated in a letter that if HC hadn’t succumbed to his pride/lust then Fanny would have eventually agreed to marry him), etc.

Her works reflect an era in which women were absolutely financially dependent on men, and I don’t think that era should be over-romanticized. Also, the idea that one mistake in terms of sexual sin would “taint” a woman forever, this unfortunately has carried over to many “courtship” believers, that if a couple falls into sexual sin they “must” marry (there are even tales of women actually marrying their rapists because they felt “ruined” for any other man), the same way everyone in P+P states Lydia and Wickham “must” marry. (I actually found the official Catholic position on “shotgun” marriages, even if the woman is pregnant, to be refreshing compared to this kind of thinking.)

Yes, Jim Bob would expect it, no matter what the age of his single daughters.

Not only that - but he would also expect it of anyone who wants to court his widowed mother - “Grandma” Duggar.

WMW, where is your source for this information? I mean, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it were true, but this does seem quite extreme, especially because AFAIK, Grandma Duggar doesn’t even hold the same beliefs as her son and D-I-L. (Yes, sometimes it DOES happen that children are more conservative than their parents).

As for “what kind of man would want to marry a Duggar daughter”, from the glimpses we have seen into Jim Bob’s approach to not just his daughters, but the prospective sons-in-law, I do suspect that most men who believe the whole “leaving and cleaving” part of the Bible would not. I also wonder why Ben’s own father seems so accepting of his son essentially becoming incorporated into the Duggar clan, instead of setting up an independent household. (The question sadly doesn’t apply to Derek’s father as he’s deceased.)

I should point out that although we have focused on the Duggar daughters in this topic, it does seem that the Duggars believe in the courtship principles for their sons as well, and the older sons (other than Josh) also still live with the families, although I know from the TLC blog that second son John David has worked as a firefighter and a police constable.

I also realize that the modern nuclear family certainly has its pitfalls, and many “second wave” feminists started out as isolated suburban SAHMs, but this whole idea of Jim Bob as the family patriarch who has authority over all his adult children indefinitely, as well as his son-in-laws (ironically, D-I-L Anna seems much more independent), reminds me more of many Eastern/Asian and Islamic cultures than Christian ones. Unless we really want to turn back the clock into the Middle Ages or something.

Even as far back in Regency times, the “family patriarch”, at least in Jane Austen’s work, seems to have much less true power than JB does in his family. The one patriarch who exerts autocratic power who I can think of, is Colonel Brandon’s father who wanted control over the first Eliza’s fortune and therefore coerced her into marrying his oldest son, not the future Colonel (who was the second son at the time). Yet even in-universe, the Colonel finds the father’s behavior appalling and no one disagrees. Anne Elliot was persuaded to reject Wentworth not by her father, but by her friend Lady Russell.

 

[masondoggy]

WMW, where is your source for this information? I mean, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it were true, but this does seem quite extreme, especially because AFAIK, Grandma Duggar doesn’t even hold the same beliefs as her son and D-I-L. (Yes, sometimes it DOES happen that children are more conservative than their parents).

.

I don’t think that Grandma Dugger is part of the Gothard movement unless she followed her son into that group later in life. She certainly didn’t raise her own family that way and her other daughter wears pants and only has one child. I think they are still pretty conservative Christians but they don’t seem to follow the same rules as the Duggars.

 

[Xantippe]

Not only that - but he would also expect it of anyone who wants to court his widowed mother - “Grandma” Duggar. That’s right…if some gentleman friend wanted to call on her, he has to go through Jim Bob. She lives in the home and Jim Bob is the man of the family and “in charge” of her - or as the Duggars put it, the “protector.” (They’re big on “protecting” their women.) You’re not going to get any more adult than she is, and yet, she’d also have to go through the chaperone thing. I’m not saying Grandma is interested in going out or having a suitor, but if she did, she’d be subject to the same rules as her granddaughters.

Gah!

See, that’s another difference between the Duggar model and traditional Anglo-American culture.

In our traditional culture, a widow would be very much her own person. She would not be under any man’s authority, and certainly not her son’s. Our literature (and not just in Austen) abounds with formidable widows. See Mrs. Norris in Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park or Trollope’s Can You Forgive Her? There’s a rich widow in the latter book who is having a very, very good time.

Speaking of which, Can You Forgive Her? is a very interesting window on sex roles in mid-19th century England.

It’s one thing to embrace traditional norms, it’s quite another thing to essentially invent “traditional” norms from one’s own personal interpretation of scripture and then try to squeeze one’s family members into those roles.

 

[masondoggy]

…and just because something was done a certain way in the past doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to continue doing it now.

 

[sailor28]

I just have to say that after this long, drawn out discussion, it really makes me appreciate the wisdom and guidance in the teachings of the Catholic Church, especially when it comes to human sexuality, marriage, and the dignity of both men and women.

Yes, I agree.

Although, some of these issues do happen in the church. Other have mention growing up in Catholic homes with similiar traits as the Duggars. It is human nature that we can’t avoid. If we look at the Legionaries of Christ we see cult like issues as well. That was once the most thriving conservative order in the church. It flourished right under the Pope. All kinds of unhealthy rules and structures were put in place. For some reason no one kept it in check until disaster happened. There are also some Catholic colleges that had very oppressive rules in place that created a spiritually abusive environment.

Even here at CAF I’ve seen priests give advice that any passionate kissing before marriage is a sin. I personally don’t think that would have been healthy for my relationship with my husband (then fiance) It was actually hard enough for my husband to go from suppressing sexual desires to being sexually active. It would have been worse had we not shared in any physical intimacy.

That said. I do agree. There is healthier theology given in general in the Catholic Church as the ideal for us to follow versus the theology in the quiverfull, fundamentalist circles.

 

[Xantippe]

Re Jane Austen, I certainly love her works, but I wouldn’t say life for women in the Regency era, even the “upper middle class” women she focuses on, is that much more attractive for me than the Duggar lifestyle.

**It’s not ideal, of course, but my main point is that even so, those women got way more leeway than the Duggars envision in terms of freedom of association and privacy. In fact, in individual cases, sometimes they had more freedom than was quite good for them (see Lydia Bennet).

I’m not holding up the Regency as an ideal, just unfavorably comparing the Duggar system to the Regency upper middle class norms of 200 years ago.
**

As for “what kind of man would want to marry a Duggar daughter”, from the glimpses we have seen into Jim Bob’s approach to not just his daughters, but the prospective sons-in-law, I do suspect that most men who believe the whole “leaving and cleaving” part of the Bible would not. I also wonder why Ben’s own father seems so accepting of his son essentially becoming incorporated into the Duggar clan, instead of setting up an independent household. (The question sadly doesn’t apply to Derek’s father as he’s deceased.)

**I’ve read some stuff on the internet from a similar critter (the guy at “True Love Doesn’t Wait”) and my feeling is that there’s a (fortunately exotic!) subgroup that doesn’t actually embrace the “leave and cleave” norm, but favors early marriage by children unable to support themselves fully. That particular subgroup envisions more of a patriarchal household, with a patriarch, Mrs. Patriarch, their kids, their kids’ spouses, their grandkids, and so forth all living in one big happy family. Like Jacob, his wives and their kids or David, his wives, and all his kids.

Oops–wait, that doesn’t work.
**
**Here’s a cite:

"Shouldn’t the man be able to support a wife first?

"No. This issue can be divided into three parts:

1. The false idea that the young married man needs to be financially independent of his extended family.
2. The false idea that the young man and woman have to have “their own place”.
3. The false idea that the young man should be spiritually isolated from their extended family."

truelovedoesntwait.com/faq/**

So, a lot of what we see as a bug is actually seen as a feature in certain (hopefully very small) fundamentalist Protestant circles.

**I could go on all day about what’s unworkable about the big-happy-family idea, but I’ll limit myself to saying that 1) it only sounds like a great idea when you envision yourself as the grey-bearded patriarch and 2) it is amazing and wonderful to have a home of one’s own with one’s very own spouse and children and to be financially independent from parents and in-laws. **

Even as far back in Regency times, the “family patriarch”, at least in Jane Austen’s work, seems to have much less true power than JB does in his family.

Yes.

 

[Sarcelle]

I don’t think online college is necessarily bad as long as it’s an accredited, legitimate program that will lead to a degree that will lead to a job. I’ve taken a lot of online classes for my nursing program (they’re leaning toward online classes for any class that doesn’t involve clinical or lab time). If they’re done right, they can be much better than being in class because they can be flexible and I can go back if I missed something unlike an in-class lecture.

But my understanding about their homeschool program and College Plus program is that they are very substandard education-wise and will not give these kids a degree that they can use in the outside world.

And yes, college isn’t always necessary. There are other options. It seems that the boys have the freedom to pursue those options more than the girls. They’re even allowed to go out and start their own business.

Online classes are not really bad in and of themselves.
I used to take graduate engineering classes at night and then applying those same concepts I learned at my job.

I got the best of both worlds, book learning at a place and time convenient for me and practical application of what I learned in my job.

 

[Xantippe]

Online classes are not really bad in and of themselves.
I used to take graduate engineering classes at night and then applying those same concepts I learned at my job.

I got the best of both worlds, book learning at a place and time convenient for me and practical application of what I learned in my job.

But if one has been homeschooled through high school, doing just online college classes looks sketchy.

At some point, one needs to be evaluated in person by a real live human being.

 

[DarkLight]

But if one has been homeschooled through high school, doing just online college classes looks sketchy.

At some point, one needs to be evaluated in person by a real live human being.

Right. Coming out of a homeschool environment one does need to do some extra work to provide credentials. It’s not just having the knowledge but being able to prove one has it.

The situation of someone who has work experience and takes more classes is different - there’s already a work environment to demonstrate competence.