The Duggars Respond to Reports That Josh Duggar Was Accused of Child Molestation

[ToeInTheWater]

They may have more trouble repackaging the Duggars after cancelling Honey Boo Boo for the molestation connection. Do TV networks care if they are perceived as hypocrites?

Interestingly, Honey Boo Boo’s mom herself has actually stated much the same and is threatening to sue TLC.

I’m not sure what will happen, it’s just that I’ve seen a whole lot of B-list reality show celebs keep staging comebacks in some form that I’m not comfortable stating anything else. As well as many conservative icons who were fired due to outrageous comments only to be fairly quickly picked up by some other employer; the late Bob Grant comes to mind. He was fired from WABC, went to WOR, and eventually quietly surfaced back onto WABC briefly before he died. Similar story with Don Imus.

I actually wouldn’t be surprised if the Duggars get kicked off TLC, but they might re-surface in a less mainstream venue.

 

[QuestLove]

Oh, and BTW, to those who are harping on how the IN TOUCH mag “broke the law” in order to get this story, as it turns out they were NOT the first to find this out.

Here’s a very interesting People magazine article:

Online Commenter Warned About Josh Duggar Molestation Accusations 8 Years Ago

Once again, the blogosphere had scooped the mainstream media. Unfortunately, as most such sites have a definite political or other agenda, reports on those sites tend to get overlooked.

Yes. Apparently we were late to the game. It seems bloggers have known this for awhile.
defamer.gawker.com/the-web-has-known-about-josh-duggar-for-years-when-did-1706258269

This is like the John Edwards saga where the tabloids scooped the news media and no one believed them until he was caught red-handed.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Yes. Apparently we were late to the game. It seems bloggers have known this for awhile.
defamer.gawker.com/the-web-has-known-about-josh-duggar-for-years-when-did-1706258269

This is like the John Edwards saga where the tabloids scooped the news media and no one believed them until he was caught red-handed.

I recall there was once a very anti-Duggar poster on CAF (now banned) who mentioned the Save Jinger site, and also very interestingly referenced some sex-related conversation Jim Bob had with Jinger while out hunting that she labeled “sicko”. Since I never saw that episode myself, I don’t know if that conversation really was that inappropriate. But she did bring up other sex abuse scandals in the same community, including Gothard himself. I wonder if she knew about this story as well, but perhaps didn’t think CAF was an appropriate forum to bring it up.

Anyway, my take on this is:
It is wrong to dig up dirt on people simply to score political points. However, I’ve seen a tendency for some Duggar defenders to essentially imply that everyone who is criticizing the Duggars for how they handled this, including everyone on CAF, are doing so out of ulterior political motives. I find that line of argument very close to ad hominem attack mode. Yes, SOME people, in the world outside CAF, are using this scandal to score political points. Maybe even some people posting here. But I don’t appreciate people using this argument to essentially try to shut down discussion.

 

[Galnextdoor]

So? Why isn’t TLC entitled to decide who they will employ and what shows they will air? TLC made the decision to pull the show (not cancel it) based on the feed back received (google 19 kids and counting backlash) and the reaction of advertisers such as General Mills, they have hedged their bet by “pulling” the show instead of cancelling it.

Any network has the right to pull or cancel a show for any reason. Why do people feel the Duggars are entitled to the TV show?

Okay maybe what I said was nitpicking, but… the viewers technically did not make the choice. TLC made the choice due to the reaction of their advertisers etc. I imagine that there are people who would want to support the family and would watch it if it were aired. I wouldn’t be one of them.

TLC is entitled to show whatever they want.

I just think Hollywood is fickle about who they embrace. (Woody Allen married a girl to whom he was a father figure. He was not allowed to visit her siblings, which were his children due to the judges decision that there was probable cause for pedophilia. Woody Allen still makes movies. He is proud of his behavior. Check out his bio on Wikipedia.)

This was a tragedy in the Duggar family. The sad thing is that the whole family will be punished for it. (i.e. The girls will be treated differently. The family might be losing their show, and they will be losing financial commitments that help them support their family, which, will in turn, effect the entire family.)

 

[ToeInTheWater]

I just think Hollywood is fickle about who they embrace. (Woody Allen married a girl to whom he was a father figure. He was not allowed to visit her siblings, which were his children due to the judges decision that there was probable cause for pedophilia. Woody Allen still makes movies. He is proud of his behavior. Check out his bio on Wikipedia.)

So we should all embrace the values of Hollywood? Shouldn’t people claiming to be pious Christians actually hold fellow Christians to a higher standard, instead of using the “well the other side does it too” excuse to, well, excuse the Duggars because “hey Hollywood excused what Woody Allen did”?

Look, I am no fan of Hollywood. I found the adoring going-away party David Letterman had to be disgusting as well. I stopped watching his show once I found out what he had done. While he also minimized his actions, I see his behavior as sexually predatory as well. Sure, he claims all the female staffers he had sex with were consenting, but this was essentially a case of someone’s boss making sexual moves on them, in an industry where networking and connections are extremely important. Not even mentioning the part where he cheated on his wife.

And as I recall, the guy who brought him down (or tried, obviously he failed) actually tried to extort money from him, I find that to be even a worse crime than the “crime” committed by whoever leaked this report. That doesn’t make what Letterman did any less disgusting.

So, no double standards from me, at least.

This was a tragedy in the Duggar family. The sad thing is that the whole family will be punished for it. (i.e. The girls will be treated differently. The family might be losing their show, and they will be losing financial commitments that help them support their family, which, will in turn, effect the entire family.)

Your use of the word “tragedy” makes it sound like the Duggars were hit with some external force that harmed them, as if a tornado busted through their house. No, both Josh himself AND his parents made horrible choices.

And while I suspect you would disagree and state “the Duggars thought the records were sealed, it’s not their fault haters broke the law to get them”, I agree with the posters who think that Jim Bob and Michelle showed a tremendous amount of hubris in parading their family on TV as the epitome of traditional family values knowing what skeletons lurked in their closets. So they also have some responsibility for this story becoming so public, it would NOT have become such a big story if they weren’t Reality TV stars.

This story was lurking about the blogosphere for years before the smoking gun was found. I suppose in order to be more charitable, I can say they were more naive than anything. But if they’re really as involved with politics as it seems, I’m not sure if saying “they were naive” is accurate, either.

 

[Galnextdoor]

I’ve already stated that I didn’t see any law being broken. Police reports are a matter of public record. I merely think that the amount of effort spent arguing about the reports rather than the crime it describes is disingenuous.

I’ve noticed the word “compassion” being thrown around a lot in re: this subject, and I’m unimpressed. It’s the compassion shown towards the flock for not being shorn enough, whilst ignoring the wolf dwelling silently within.

Just because you refuse to acknowledge that laws were broken, doesn’t mean that laws weren’t broken. If the report were released, the names of the parents should have been redacted so the victims could not be identified.

Okay. I am sorry that you are unable to understand compassion for the victims. I guess it’s to be expected that there are people in our me culture who can’t understand that people feel compassion and empathy for the victims.

How would you feel if you were one of the girls? Would you want this plastered all over the newspapers so all your friends and neighbors could read about it and talk about?

It seems that we have become a nation who thinks that we are entitled to any and all information about people’s private lives, regardless of who it hurts.

 

[Galnextdoor]

So we should all embrace the values of Hollywood? Shouldn’t people claiming to be pious Christians actually hold fellow Christians to a higher standard, instead of using the “well the other side does it too” excuse to, well, excuse the Duggars because “hey Hollywood excused what Woody Allen did”?

Look, I am no fan of Hollywood. I found the adoring going-away party David Letterman had to be disgusting as well. I stopped watching his show once I found out what he had done. While he also minimized his actions, I see his behavior as sexually predatory as well. Sure, he claims all the female staffers he had sex with were consenting, but this was essentially a case of someone’s boss making sexual moves on them, in an industry where networking and connections are extremely important. Not even mentioning the part where he cheated on his wife.

And as I recall, the guy who brought him down (or tried, obviously he failed) actually tried to extort money from him, I find that to be even a worse crime than the “crime” committed by whoever leaked this report. That doesn’t make what Letterman did any less disgusting.

So, no double standards from me, at least.

Your use of the word “tragedy” makes it sound like the Duggars were hit with some external force that harmed them, as if a tornado busted through their house. No, both Josh himself AND his parents made horrible choices.

And while I suspect you would disagree and state “the Duggars thought the records were sealed, it’s not their fault haters broke the law to get them”, I agree with the posters who think that Jim Bob and Michelle showed a tremendous amount of hubris in parading their family on TV as the epitome of traditional family values knowing what skeletons lurked in their closets. So they also have some responsibility for this story becoming so public, it would NOT have become such a big story if they weren’t Reality TV stars.

This story was lurking about the blogosphere for years before the smoking gun was found. I suppose in order to be more charitable, I can say they were more naive than anything. But if they’re really as involved with politics as it seems, I’m not sure if saying “they were naive” is accurate, either.

Okay. So you don’t like the Duggars. Just say so and move on. To say it was not a tragedy, is to deny the pain and heartache the family went through and is now continuing to go through. You have no idea what it’s like to see your family villified on the front page of a newspaper. You have no idea what it is like to walk into a public room and have conversation stop. Then restart as people say hateful things about you and your family. The whole family has been victimized again.

I wouldn’t say that the Duggars displayed hubris, I think they displayed naivete. They believed that people would forgive them for what their son did, because they and their children were willing to forgive.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I just think Hollywood is fickle about who they embrace. (Woody Allen married a girl to whom he was a father figure. He was not allowed to visit her siblings, which were his children due to the judges decision that there was probable cause for pedophilia. Woody Allen still makes movies. He is proud of his behavior. Check out his bio on Wikipedia.)

This was a tragedy in the Duggar family. The sad thing is that the whole family will be punished for it. (i.e. The girls will be treated differently. The family might be losing their show, and they will be losing financial commitments that help them support their family, which, will in turn, effect the entire family.)

Why is it “Hollywood” that’s fickle, they make movies and spend a lot of money doing it, they expect to make money on the investment and effort. If the audience still goes to the boxoffice, sits in front of the “tube”, downloads, pays per view, and does it more frequently for certain big names how is "Hollywood being fickle. It looks to me they are simply supplying what people pay for, they are catering to the fickle.

How is losing their show punishment? You make is sound like a parent taking away a child’s toy for misbehavior. That’s not the “contract” between entertainer and audience. The entertainer is not entitled to a platform and a paycheck, he gets that from the audience by delivering what they want, by fulfilling their expectations. Deviate from that and all bets are off, the Duggars changed the product. Sexually dysfunctional family dynamics were not part of the sales pitch, you can find that all over TV, the appeal of the Duggars was the wholesomeness advertised, that’s not so common in this type of programing. You can argue that human being are not a product but I disagree when it comes to this type of programing. Reality shows commodify people and their relationships.

 

[Galnextdoor]

I think the exploitation charge is leveled at the parents not Josh, he was just beneficiary of it. After all how many other kids get the kind of job Josh had with only a GED?

I think you mean that Josh exploited his family connections to get the job as a family advocate? Is that what you are trying to say?

If so, you might be right, or the Family Counsel could have been trying to use Josh because his family is well-known. They might of thought it was like having a celebrity advocate for their cause. Josh should have refused the job.

Josh is not Jim Bob or Michelle, or Jana, or Jill, or Jessa etc. Josh is not the person that 19 Kids and Counting is all about. To say that all the Duggars are manipulative and exploit their fans is wrong.

 

[zaffiroborant]

I think you mean that Josh exploited his family connections to get the job as a family advocate? Is that what you are trying to say?

If so, you might be right, or the Family Counsel could have been trying to use Josh because his family is well-known. They might of thought it was like having a celebrity advocate for their cause. Josh should have refused the job.

Josh is not Jim Bob or Michelle, or Jana, or Jill, or Jessa etc. Josh is not the person that 19 Kids and Counting is all about. To say that all the Duggars are manipulative and exploit their fans is wrong.

My point about Josh and his lack of education vis-a-vis his job was more related to this point

chumming it up with presidential candidates, injecting themselves into political campaigns, entertwining themselves with political action committes

But I do agree that the Duggars leveraged their particular brand of Christianity to connect with viewers and grow their audience. I see that as morally neutral.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Okay. So you don’t like the Duggars. Just say so and move on. To say it was not a tragedy, is to deny the pain and heartache the family went through and is now continuing to go through.

First of all, when I state “Duggars” in this post, I am speaking of the PARENTS. I agree with you in that the children are innocent here, with the exception of Josh, of course.

It’s not as simple as me not “liking” the Duggars. That is so simplistic, as simplistic as gay rights activists who assume that anyone who doesn’t support homosexual activity is a “hater”.

Actually, in the past I have both critiqued what I saw as problematic about the Duggars’ beliefs, and defended them from what I saw as uncharitable accusations based on speculation.

When I questioned your use of the word “tragedy”, it’s not because I’m denying anyone’s pain and heartache. However, you have consistently defended the Duggars’ handling of the situation, minimized Josh’s actions, and accused anyone who questions the veracity of what Josh and his parents are saying now, of “bearing false witness”. Even though these are the same people who acted for a long time as if they headed a perfect family that never had any significant problems or conflicts, let alone something this major.

You seem to be completely in denial that the Duggars’ credibility has been seriously damaged, because they DID present themselves as a Godly family who lead a way of life that is morally superior to the standard secular family, and DIDN’T have the many problems “normal” families have. Michelle is claiming NOW that “we’re not a perfect family”, but that was the vision she and her husband was trying to sell to the public for years.

You have no idea what it’s like to see your family villified on the front page of a newspaper. You have no idea what it is like to walk into a public room and have conversation stop. Then restart as people say hateful things about you and your family.

This is silly. Unless your own family is as famous as the Duggars, you have no idea what they are going through either. For all we know, at least some of the Duggar kids aren’t blaming the big bad media, but are actually angry at their parents for putting them in this situation. There have certainly been rumors chipping away at the “one big happy family” myth for a while, involving Jana and Jinger chafing at Jim Bob’s control freakiness, and also one of the boys being sent to reform school (though I forgot the name). I also remember questioning if I was contributing to a kind of exploitation of the kids by watching of the show, when I found out that Jessa chose NOT to have her first kiss in front of not just a crowd of church witnesses, but a national TV audience.

I wouldn’t say that the Duggars displayed hubris, I think they displayed naivete. They believed that people would forgive them for what their son did, because they and their children were willing to forgive.

No, I think they believed that people would never find out what their son did, even as they aspired to simultaneously become rich celebrities with crossover appeal to the very same sinful secular society they sanctimoniously set themselves apart from.

 

[Galnextdoor]

Why is it “Hollywood” that’s fickle, they make movies and spend a lot of money doing it, they expect to make money on the investment and effort. If the audience still goes to the boxoffice, sits in front of the “tube”, downloads, pays per view, and does it more frequently for certain big names how is "Hollywood being fickle. It looks to me they are simply supplying what people pay for, they are catering to the fickle.

How is losing their show punishment? You make is sound like a parent taking away a child’s toy for misbehavior. That’s not the “contract” between entertainer and audience. The entertainer is not entitled to a platform and a paycheck, he gets that from the audience by delivering what they want, by fulfilling their expectations. Deviate from that and all bets are off, the Duggars changed the product. Sexually dysfunctional family dynamics were not part of the sales pitch, you can find that all over TV, the appeal of the Duggars was the wholesomeness advertised, that’s not so common in this type of programing. You can argue that human being are not a product but I disagree when it comes to this type of programing. Reality shows commodify people and their relationships.

When a person uses i.e., that means they are listing examples afterwards. If can’t you see that losing their show would be an unpleasant outcome as the result of their son’s behavior, I don’t know how I can explain it to you. I’m not trying to be mean, but maybe looking the word up in the dictionary might be helpful?

 

[zaffiroborant]

When a person uses i.e., that means they are listing examples afterwards. If can’t you see that losing their show would be an unpleasant outcome as the result of their son’s behavior, I don’t know how I can explain it to you. I’m not trying to be mean, but maybe looking the word up in the dictionary might be helpful?

So every unpleasant thing that happens to a person is a punishment? When a factory closes because people no longer buy the product it produced are the former employees being punished? Or are they just losing out because no one want the doohickey then made anymore? When the guy plowed into the rear end of my car while I was stopped at a red light, was that was a punishment?

Why can you not see that the Duggars by hiding the dysfunction in their family and pretending to a standard that viewers want are selling a false product. Dr. Phil, Jerry Springer and a host of others have this kind of stuff all the time, people watch 19 Kids and counting BECAUSE it didn’t have this ugly content.
Why can’t you see that it’s not punishment but consequences?

Who is punishing the Duggars if the show is cancelled?

 

[Galnextdoor]

First of all, when I state “Duggars” in this post, I am speaking of the PARENTS. I agree with you in that the children are innocent here, with the exception of Josh, of course.

It’s not as simple as me not “liking” the Duggars. That is so simplistic, as simplistic as gay rights activities who assume that anyone who doesn’t support homosexual activity is a “hater”.

Actually, in the past I have both critiqued what I saw as problematic about the Duggars’ beliefs, and defended them from what I saw as uncharitable accusations based on speculation.

When I questioned your use of the word “tragedy”, it’s not because I’m denying anyone’s pain and heartache. However, you have consistently defended the Duggars’ handling of the situation, minimized Josh’s actions, and accused anyone who questions the veracity of what Josh and his parents are saying now, of “bearing false witness”. Even though these are the same people who acted for a long time as if they headed a perfect family that never had any significant problems or conflicts, let alone something this major.

You seem to be completely in denial that the Duggars’ credibility has been seriously damaged, because they DID present themselves as a Godly family who lead a way of life that is morally superior to the standard secular family, and DIDN’T have the many problems “normal” families have. Michelle is claiming NOW that “we’re not a perfect family”, but that was the vision she and her husband was trying to sell to the public for years.

This is silly. Unless your own family is as famous as the Duggars, you have no idea what they are going through either. For all we know, at least some of the Duggar kids aren’t blaming the big bad media, but are actually angry at their parents for putting them in this situation. There have certainly been rumors chipping away at the “one big happy family” myth for a while, involving Jana and Jinger chafing at Jim Bob’s control freakiness, and also one of the boys being sent to reform school (though I forgot the name). I also remember questioning if I was contributing to a kind of exploitation of the kids by watching of the show, when I found out that Jessa chose NOT to have her first kiss in front of not just a crowd of church witnesses, but national TV.

No, I think they believed that people would never find out what their son did, even as they aspired to simultaneously become rich celebrities with crossover appeal to the very same sinful secular society they sanctimoniously set themselves apart from.

Actually, unless you know for sure that they are lying, calling them liars is wrong. Asserting speculation as fact in detrimental way, is bearing false witness against thy neighbor. Saying that I have accused anyone who questions whether they are lying is bearing false witness against me. You can say that you think they are liars, and that is your opinion. If you actually say they are lying, but have no valid proof, only your speculation, that is bearing false witness against your neighbor.

As for telling me that I have no idea what they are going through because I am not famous, that is jumping to conclusions and also shows that you have not read all my posts. I could p.m. you newspaper articles about what has happened to me and my family if you would care to read them for your enjoyment. They are painful for me, but I get the feeling that wouldn’t bother you.

 

[ToeInTheWater]

Actually, unless you know for sure that they are lying, calling them liars is wrong. Asserting speculation as fact in detrimental way, is bearing false witness against thy neighbor. Saying that I have accused anyone who questions whether they are lying is bearing false witness against me. You can say that you think they are liars, and that is your opinion. If you actually say they are lying, but have no valid proof, only your speculation, that is bearing false witness against your neighbor.

Please forgive me for not going back through all 50 pages of this topic, but I don’t recall any other posters stating as a FACT that the Duggars are lying.

As for telling me that I have no idea because I am not famous and nothing like this has ever happened to me, that is jumping to conclusions and also shows that you have not read all my posts. I could p.m. you newspaper articles about what has happened to me and my family if you would care to read them for your enjoyment. They are painful for me, but I get the feeling that wouldn’t bother you.

I do recall you mentioning a history of sexual abuse. I don’t recall you ever mentioning that your family was famous. No, I’d rather not know who you are in real life or where you hail from. I will point out, though, that you are not the only victim of sexual abuse to post on this topic.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

They are liars. Not an opinion, it is fact. They have lied for years and years. Not being truthful is lying, they weren’t truthful. They covered it up. And the statements now are conflicting. Dad and Josh said Josh had counseling. Mom said he went to build a building. Josh said that the victims had counseling, no one else in their family has even mentioned or confirmed that.
I don’t think they can be trusted.

 

[Galnextdoor]

Please forgive me for not going back through all 50 pages of this topic, but I don’t recall any other posters stating as a FACT that the Duggars are lying.

I do recall you mentioning a history of sexual abuse. I don’t recall you ever mentioning that your family was famous. No, I’d rather not know who you are in real life or where you hail from. I will point out, though, that you are not the only victim of sexual abuse to post on this topic.

If you want to see what a person has posted, you can click on their name and pull up their posts.

I never said I was famous. I said that things that happened to me and my family hit the front page of newspapers. It was also mentioned the t.v. local news.

I think that some people forget that the people who are posting are real human beings. That the people we are talking about are real human beings and deserve the same dignity with which we would treat our neighbor.

I realize that this thread is just hitting too many nerves and I need to step away.

May God Bless You.

 

[zaffiroborant]

That the people we are talking about are real human beings and deserve the same dignity with which we would treat our neighbor.

Interesting question, if I found out that a boy in my neighbors family abused his sisters how would I treat the family? First and foremost I would go to extreme lengths to insure that there was no contact between my daughters and the family unless I or my husband was present. I would also explain to my daughters why this was the case. That my family no longer trusts them would be obvious, do you think this is wrong? Should I just trust them and let my girls go to the neighbors house unsupervised?

 

[MaryT777]

Interesting question, if I found out that a boy in my neighbors family abused his sisters how would I treat the family? First and foremost I would go to extreme lengths to insure that there was no contact between my daughters and the family unless I or my husband was present. I would also explain to my daughters why this was the case. That my family no longer trusts them would be obvious, do you think this is wrong? Should I just trust them and let my girls go to the neighbors house unsupervised?

Well said. Our children are precious and their safety if of utmost concern.

Mary.

 

[WKW_69]

I know everyone is appalled at the revelation of the older brother

I am not appalled at all. He was 14 years old and immature. I’m sorry but unlike everyone that is appalled here I wasn’t a perfect kid either and none of my kids were perfect. Christians could use a little charity when it comes to any sin and not sit on our high horse judging others. Especially the actions of an immature teenage boy.

IMHO.

uch: