Power, Purity, Meekness and God. The Ugly Reality of Rape Culture.

“Imagine that your parents are going to surprise you and give you a brand-new bike for Christmas. Two weeks before Christmas, they buy your bike and hide it in the storage shed in the backyard. But then the boy next door sneaks into the shed and borrows your new bike; he stunt-rides it up and down the back alley.

“On Christmas morning your parents lead you out to the shed to reveal the special gift they bought for you, and as they open the door and say, ‘Surprise!’ they’re just as surprised as you are. You’re all shocked to see that the bike looks like it’s been thrown off a cliff. The front fender is missing, and the front tire is warped so it rubs on the frame. It’s dirty, the paint is all scratched and chipped, and the seat has a big rip in it. It looks worse than something you would have bought at a garage sale.

“I’m sure you would still be grateful for the bike, and you would have fun riding it, but it won’t be in the condition your parents had hoped and dreamed it would be when you received it. You would miss out on a lot of the enjoyment they meant for you to have.

“In that same way, we don’t want any boy (or girl) to come and steal your purity.”
​

As noted by Michelle Duggar, on the importance of purity, especially for girls. This is the lesson her husband, Jim Bob Duggar, gave to their children.

The message is clear. It is up to you to protect your purity, to maintain it. Without it, you are nothing but a soiled and broken thing, an object so desired when pure and shiny and new, but much less so when used, ridden and much less shiny.

And women more so. Jim Bob Duggar preached to them, that a person, especially a woman, who is somehow not pure before marriage is undesirable, impure, dirty and disgusting. And the moral basis of this story is that it is up to the girl and woman to maintain her purity. Not let anyone touch it or take it.

And that’s just scratching the surface. The Duggars built their brand on a slavish dedication to ideals of modesty and purity, keeping their children away from Unwholesome Influences, even to the point of shouting “Nike!” when the family was out for a walk in the presence of a woman who was immodestly attired, in order to get them to stare at their shoes. Women must be “modest” and “godly” and pure to attract a godly man. This is where their value lies. Chaperones! Courtship! Side-hugs only! Even hand-holding is off the table.

​

Twelve years ago, Josh Duggar, the eldest of their sons, sexually molested at least 5 young girls in his home. Four of which were his sisters. The molestation went on for a fairly long period of time, even after he had admitted his actions to his parents. Nothing was done. They did not contact the authorities, nor did they attempt to seek therapy and treatment for their son. They also did not remove their son from the home, nor were the victims removed for their safety. Instead, Josh Duggar was allowed to continue to offend. A year after his parents were informed by Josh Duggar and by some of the victims, Jim Bob Duggar approached the elders of his church for advice. They correctly suggested that Josh needed therapy and help. Jim Bob refused.

Jim Bob knew of this beginning in March 2002, when Josh was 14. Josh’s victims were children younger than him, and in some cases significantly so. For an entire year Jim Bob knew what was happening, but did not go to the police or seek treatment or outside intervention. In March 2003, with the incidents of molestation still occurring, Jim Bob said he and the elders at his church, to whom he had gone for advice, agreed that Josh should enter a treatment program.

But when one of the elders at Jim Bob’s church suggested sending Josh to a legitimate treatment program, Jim Bob demurred, reasoning that Josh would likely be exposed to more serious offenders and that that was not appropriate for the nature of his offense. So instead of sending Josh to an actual treatment program, Jim Bob sent him to Little Rock for four months to help a family friend with some remodeling.

When Josh returned in July 2003, Jim Bob took Josh to speak with a state trooper he knew personally about what had happened. The trooper gave Josh “a very stern talk” but didn’t file a report, reportedly reasoning that nothing needed to be done because Josh had already gone through a treatment program. Except of course that helping a family friend in Little Rock do some remodeling is not a treatment program. (The trooper who spoke with Josh was later convicted of child pornography.)​

The Duggar parents then effectively went above and beyond to protect their son from a police investigation, even refusing to hand him over for questioning and held out until the Statute of Limitations ensured his safety from prosecution.

At no time did they attempt to seek professional help for Josh.

But what of the girls? His very own sisters, some of whom were also his victims?

No help was sought for them either. All Josh was required to do was to say sorry. Justice for being preyed on by their older brother was not considered. Their role was to remain silent about the whole matter. After all, this was their lot in life and it was expected that they remain submissive, meek and compliant.

They adhere to a fringe Christian movement called the “Christian patriarchy,” which commands total female submission to men and limited education for women. The Duggars do everything they can to control their children’s minds, then brainwash them with misogynistic dogma.

Josh Duggar grew up in this sexist milieu. He was told that women exist to serve men—to show them “submission,” “obedience,” and “reverence.” He was barred from seeking out any differing views about men and women. His mind was warped from childhood. Is it any surprise that, by the time he reached adolescence, he believed girls’ bodies were his to touch however he pleased? ​

And like good little girls, they lived up to their parents expectations in that regard.

It is interesting that in all of the discussions about Josh Duggar, very few people have commented on the girls and their rights and how their parents failed to protect them and instead, forced them to remain under the same roof as their abuser. They are submissive and meek.

People often wonder about the notion of "rape culture" and what it actually means. Sadly, the Duggars and their supporters have set a very good example of what that term really means.

When reading about this horror show of a story, one thing remained constant in the whole thing. The story focused on Josh Duggar and the excuses people made for what he did. From his being homeschooled and not taught about sex education, to his being so young and curious about sex that he saw an opportunity and took it while his sisters would be asleep or awake, to his apparently raging hormones. The comment sections in some of the more conservative online sites were awash with excuses for Josh.

None more so than Mike Huckabee, who argued that Josh deserved for this to not come out and that he needed to be protected from the evil people who dared to question the morality of the family's actions.

At no time do any of Duggar's supporters comment on whether or not Josh's victims deserve protection, nor do they comment on why their parents forced them to remain in the same house as their abuser and allowed the abuse to continue. No, the main concern for these people was that Josh was being maligned by the media.

 

The Duggars homeschooled their children and followed the disgraced Bill Gothard's Bible based lesson plans.

They have supported Gothard and given lectures and speeches for his organisation and are quite closely connected to it.

Gothard also has a manual and teaching plan on how to deal with sexual assault in the home and even had an example of the older brother molesting the younger sisters and explained to parents on how to handle such situations. This was written back in the 1990's, so it is not based on Josh Duggar. However the hypothetical closely mirrors Josh's actions. Just as the reaction of his parents literally follow the education plan for it to the letter.

Titled "Lessons from moral failures in a family", the hypothetical is given of the older brother sexually abusing his younger sister(s) and it details the questions the parents should be asking their son, how they should interpret it and how the victim should be viewed. It is a lesson in victim blaming and shaming.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

These are the questions.

Part of the answer given by the hypothetical son, as a lesson to parents and girls alike, discusses modesty of women and girls in the home. Apparently even baby girls and those sexually appealing diapers and nappies.

The need for modesty in the home Modesty was a factor. It was not at the level it should have been in my family. It was not uncommon for my younger siblings to come out of their baths naked or with a towel. They would often run around the house for the next twenty minutes until my mom or sister got around to dressing them.

Changing my younger sisters' diapers when they were really young may not have been a big thing, but it really did not have to be that way (if we had only applied Levitical law). My younger sisters used to wear dresses often, but as they were young and not aware of modesty, they did not behave in them as they should.

Mom did not push the modesty unless we were in public, and Dad only had the opportunity to mention it during weekends. Little people do not realize their nakedness right away. It takes several years before they grasp it. It needs to be taught to them. My mom is a nurse, and the human body was not a big deal to her. I guess she didn't want it to be for her children either.

She and I have talked about it. She explained to me that she had no idea how visual male sexuality is, compared to women who are mainly by touch. I am so grateful my parents have changed so much of this area in our home. This was not a major reason for the offending, but it allowed my little sister to be open to what I made her do. I don't think so much teaching was necessary because everyone was so young. However, a different lifestyle, with more modesty, might have prevented what happened.​

It is tempting to purge one's eyes with bleach after reading this level of pure drivel.

Recovering Grace, an organisation of, well, survivors from Gothard's lesson plans point out that that the main factor in the hypothetical, or the one that is most concerning to the parents is public exposure. This is a running theme in all of their lesson plans on the role of women and sexual and physical abuse in the home. For example, if the father was caught sexually molesting his children, Gothard has a lesson plan for this as well:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Note the steps. And note how the father retains his authority in the home.

The lessons are frighteningly light on personal responsibility, and heavy on blame for the victim—condemning younger sisters for dressing “immodestly,” and parents for exposing the boy to temptation by having him change his sisters’ diapers. The document also blames porn, advising families to “pray for protection from pornography.”

Recovering Grace notes that “of the four listed consequences of sexual abuse, three concentrate on damage to public image.”​

It is little to no wonder that the Duggars did what they did in response to their son molesting at least 4 of their daughters. The lesson plan for dealing with sexual assault does not get any better.

The running theme, once more, is victim blaming and shaming and ensuring that it does not get out.

According to Recovering Grace, ATI’s Counseling Seminar curriculum also includes a handout on “Counseling Sexual Abuse,” which examines the many ways that a victim could have brought abuse on him or herself by “defrauding” God: Did you dress immodestly? Were you, perhaps, associating with “evil” friends? You should consider whether you’re guilty and apologize to God.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

And no, this was not for the perpetrator of the sexual abuse. But for the victim to answer.

Rape culture? What's that?

 

I think one of the most disturbing aspects of this is that not a single person from that family, or their friends and from their church, have come out in support of the girls he molested.

It is as though this is not that surprising and perhaps it is not, if one of the daughter's father-in-law's comment is anything to go by:

And while Jessa’s been ignoring the controversy on social media, her father-in-law has spoken out in support of Josh Duggar, stating that anyone who had the chance to would have also molested themselves some girls.

From the Inquisitr:

Jessa Duggar’s father-in-law goes on to say that fans shouldn’t be shocked by Josh’s actions — he claims that many people would do the same thing if they didn’t fear the consequences of their behavior.

“Many times it is simply lack of opportunity or fear of consequences that keep us from falling into grievous sin even though our fallen hearts would love to indulge the flesh. We should not be shocked that this occurred in the Duggar’s home, we should rather be thankful to God if we have been spared such, and pray that he would keep us and our children from falling.”​

I'm sorry, but where do these people come from that they believe that people would do the same thing if they had the chance? Do they think child molestation is just normal behaviour? Is the only reason Josh not molesting because he thinks he might get caught again? What about the father-in-law who believes that people just aren't doing that because they might get caught?

As Mark Shrayber then points out:

No, no it isn’t. For most people, I bet the decision not to molest a child probably doesn’t come down to thinking “I’ll get caught” or “man, I wish I could molest, but there are no kids around. Drat!” And if Jessa’s father-in-law is saying these things out loud now, are any of the Duggar kids (present and future) safe? I don’t know about you, but I’d be mighty concerned by anyone who says that we’d all be out there molesting if we just had the chance.​

He also notes that the family have completely ignored the victims in defending Josh Duggar.

The ownership culture of the Quiverfull movement has always been there for all to see. Yet so little is ever said about it. Look at the case of Andrea and Rusty Yates. Andrea suffered from severe post natal depression and psychosis and both were advised by doctors after having children that she should not have any more.

Yates' first psychiatrist, Dr. Eileen Starbranch, says she was shocked to disbelief when, during an office visit with them, they expressed a desire to discontinue her medications so that she could become pregnant again. She warned and counseled them against having more children, and noted in the medical record two days later, "Apparently patient and husband plan to have as many babies as nature will allow! This will surely guarantee future psychotic depression."[30] Nevertheless, she became pregnant with her fifth child, Mary, only 7 weeks after being discharged from Dr. Starbranch's care on January 12, 2000.[31] Despite Rusty's statements to the media that he was never told by psychiatrists that she was psychotic nor that she could harm the children, and that he would have never had more children had he known otherwise,[32][33][34] she revealed to her prison psychiatrist, Dr. Melissa Ferguson, that prior to their last child, "she had told Rusty that she did not want to have sex because Dr. Starbranch had said she might hurt her children." Rusty, she said, simply asserted his procreative religious beliefs, complimented her as a good mother, and persuaded her that she could handle more children.[35]

Author Suzanne O'Malley highlighted Rusty's continuing sense of unreality regarding having more children:

During the trial, he'd successfully maintained the position that Andrea would be found innocent. He had fantasies of having more children with her after she was successfully treated in a mental health facility and released on the proper medication. He worked his way through various fixes for their damaged lives, such as a surrogate motherhood and adoption (horrifying her family, attorneys and Houston psychiatrists) before giving in to reality.[36]​

Being part of the Quiverfull movement, she had no choice but to comply to her husband's demands and wishes. She eventually drowned her children in a bathtub. He owned her, he wanted more children, or as many children as nature intended for her to carry, she literally had no say in the matter.

These fundamentalists believe the man is always right. That the woman or girl must always agree and accept. The parents were aware that their son was molesting his sisters and at least one other young underage girl for a year before they did anything about it. One approached them and told them in March 2002. Josh Duggar allegedly confessed to his parents in July of that year. At no time did they report him to the authorities or seek professional help for him. They allowed him to remain in the home with his sisters. And the parents were told again and again by other girls in the house that he was molesting them, even after they were made aware of it and after he confessed. This is while Jim Bob Duggar was running on a platform that advocated the death penalty for rape and incest.

While Duggar was running on a platform that included this position about rape, the first allegations that Josh had molested a child surfaced. According to In Touch Weekly, which broke the story, a female minor told Duggar in March 2002 that Josh, who was 14 at the time, had been sexually touching her as she slept. Josh admitted as much to his parents in July 2002.

A police report suggests that the first victim who came forward lived in the same home as Josh. In March 2003, more minors accused Josh of touching their breasts and genitals. The police report suggests that four of the five total victims were Josh's sisters.​

I don't think it mattered that he molested the 'wrong sort of girls', in regards to his sisters.

I do think that regardless of who he had molested, the community and family he belongs to would always have excused his crime and him while ignoring or blaming the victims. After all, he is a male and by religious doctrine, he is automatically blameless.

 

I take it you did not read any of the links provided in this thread, which detail the teachings the Duggars adhere to?

If not, it might be a good idea to read them.

There is also the fact that they allowed him to remain in the house and continue to abuse his younger sisters, even after they had advised that he was molesting them. It went on for about a year, if not more, even after Josh Duggar had confessed to his parents.

Surely you understand that this is bad, yes? This whole time, during this whole sorry saga, they never once addressed his victims and what they needed. All the have focused on was Josh Duggar. That family and their inner and outer circle are too busy making excuses for Josh Duggar to even acknowledge his victims. Did they receive treatment and counseling? Since Josh was merely sent away for a couple of months after he wouldn't stop molesting his sisters, I would say the answer to that is no. Did they stick with the lessons they teach their children and blame the victims, perhaps? After all, the lesson plans they adhere to clearly state that it is not the abuser's fault. Why did they allow him to remain in the home, and continue to molest for so long? They knew it was going on, they knew he was doing it. By their own admittance, they knew.

You don't think that is not taking care of the victims and their needs? Because if they cared about those girls, he would have been permanently removed from the home and he would have been give the treatment he needs.

None of which they addressed or used when their own son molested his sisters and another girl. Some even while they slept. Repeatedly and consistently, even after even Josh Duggar told them what he was doing.

While they may not condone sibling molestation, they sure do have a lot of excuses for it and they certainly have a lot of ways to blame the victims, even the little baby girls are to blame for being molested by their brother because he saw their vaginas when changing their nappies or saw them naked. This is what the Duggars teach their children and these are the teachings they support and provide for their home schooled children.

I'm sorry, but usually when parents are made aware that their children are being sexually molested, even by one of their own children, they will usually seek to remove their child from harm and away from that abuser, which usually means seeking immediate treatment and rehabilitation for the child that is abusing his or her siblings. That's what happens in the normal world.

Unless of course you are suggesting that there is nothing wrong and that it is normal to force victims to continue to be molested and to remain under the same roof as their abuser? Because that is exactly what the Duggars did. Usually when parents do this, their children are removed from their care and they are arrested. The Church elders suggested Josh Duggar be sent for treatment and removed from the home. His father lied to one and all and refused to send him for treatment or therapy. Instead, he forced his daughters to remain in the same house and continue to be molested until he sent him away to live with a friend who was remodeling a house before allowing him to return to live in the same house with his victims.

And what of his victims?

At no time does Josh Duggar even acknowledge that he might have damaged or ruined the lives of his victims. Instead he says this:

"I understood that if I continued down this wrong road that I would end up ruining my life.”​

His life. Not the lives of his victims.

They treated it as a sin. So in Josh Duggar's eyes, if he sinned, then his life would be ruined. The victims? What about them? The only person who matters is that Josh does not sin and go to hell. So he needed to stop because if he didn't, it could ruin his life. Not his victims. They don't count.

If those victims counted, Josh Duggar would have been sent to actual treatment and he certainly would not have been allowed to remain in that house and continue molesting his little sisters, for over a year.

Rehabilitation would have been the recognition of damaging the victims. At no time does Josh Duggar do this. Instead, he focuses on damaging and ruining his life.

Childhood sexual behaviour.. You make it sound like he was doing something normal, like masturbating.

He kept fiddling with little girls, without their consent, and sometimes even while they slept.

As for his adult ideological characteristics, that's another issue. His father campaigned for the death penalty for incest and rapists, and yet hid his son's abuse and allowed his son to continue abusing his own sisters for a year. Josh and his parents spends time inferring that members of the LGBT community molest children, when he is a child molester.

That would depend on if he penetrated their vaginas with his fingers.

There is nothing reformed about Josh Duggar. The fact that he is more concerned about ruining his own life than ruining the lives of his victims shows that quite well.

 

It was reported by multiple of his victims, as well as Josh Duggar himself.

The abuse continued even after the parents were made aware of it, and he was molesting his little sisters while they slept and while they were awake. The molestation was ongoing, and the parents were aware of it.

Why do you think the trauma depends on the nature and frequency of the touching only? And how it was perceived by victims.. Tell me, do you think it is less damaging that the victims were taught lessons which blamed victims for molestation and which taught that the male always has more say and more rights?

I think it is a tad disturbing that you are excusing the parents for allowing the molestation to continue for a year. Would you have said the same if it was an adult family friend or perhaps the father who was molesting the children? What about a religious elder? And why do you think the children are less damaged from it?

It is always recommended that victims of child molestation are kept safe and that the molestation stop immediately. These children told their parents and their parents allowed it to continue for a year. And you seem to believe that it isn't really that big of a deal..

If someone starts molesting children in a house, you either need to remove the children or the molester. Telling his younger siblings that Josh might stick his hands down their underpants while they sleep or watch TV and expecting them to live in constant fear and have to keep watching is placing the onus on the victims to not be molested.

What do you constitute "not severe" abuse? Fondling breasts? Exploring their genitals with his hands? You don't think that is severe? You would be okay for your child to suffer through that as a 5 year old, for a year? Would you say to her 'it isn't severe, so it's not that bad'? These were small children and some may have been small enough to be sleeping in a cot. The reports suggest that at least one of his sisters was very small when she was molested.

I mean, what sort of molestation do you think is bad enough to warrant action aside from telling the potential victims to just stay away from him and placing the onus on them to not be molested?

And I take it you did not read further down where she discusses just how abuse can affect the lives of victims and how sexual abuse can have long lasting repercussions into adulthood? And the part where she notes that it is up to parents to ensure their children's safety?

The fact of the matter is, Josh's sexual contact with his sisters and at least one other child in that house were inappropriate and certainly not age appropriate. We also know that the impact from sibling sexual abuse and molestation is the same as for any other forms of sexual abuse for victims. The fact that they are siblings can make it even worse. At no time did they seek treatment for Josh, or for the family as a whole. Instead, they sent him away for a few months and then had him lectured by a paedophile who was later imprisoned for decades. The victims were ignored and their sole focus was making sure Josh Duggar was not caught or arrested. When the police later investigated, at least one victim

Most parents would not allow the abuse to continue for a year before doing anything about it. They did nothing at all about it. Most parents would seek help from doctors or therapists and get their abusive child into therapy and the abused children into therapy. That is what most parents would do and that is also what is recommended for such forms of abuse.

The police reports show that the abuse was ongoing, even after the parents were made aware of it and that the victims were telling their parents and they did nothing about it.

It was after a year of this abuse that he was sent to live with a friend to do some refurbishing and then they made him talk to a paedophile, one on one, who apparently showed him the error of his ways. We do not know if the abuse has ceased. We can hope it has. But what of his victims? And their children? Did they grow up to think that this sort of behaviour was normal? It certainly seems so. At no time did they parents try to protect them for the year they were abused by their brother. They were certainly brought up to believe that as women, they were secondary and that the male always has a right, even to their own bodies. What kind of message does that send when you mix sexual abuse into it?

And remember, children who are sexually abused by siblings suffer the same negative impacts that children abused by others go through.

Minor sexual contact? Do you think someone forcibly fondling a child's genitals to be "minor sexual contact"?

Wow, others are defending Duggar because of his age.

You are defending him because you think the sexual molestation his victims suffered were minor, and thus, somehow not traumatic..

As I linked above, childhood sexual molestation has the same impact on victims as other forms of sexual molestation on children, regardless of how "mild" it is. Now couple this with the fact that these children were taught to blame themselves if they are abused or sexually molested, what kind of ongoing damage do you think these children suffered? How do you think a victim of child sexual abuse feels when they are reminded again and again that the main priority was to not ruin the life of their abuser?

Because that is exactly what went on here. The whole process was to ensure that Josh did not ruin his lives. The lives of his victims did not matter and continue to not matter, as Josh Duggar and his parents and his wife and the family pointed out that the main thing was to ensure he did not ruin his future and his life. Nothing was said of stopping him from ruining the lives and future of his victims.

For most people, I would say that would be telling. However you seem to believe that since you feel the sexual molestation was minor, that the victims should simply have had the onus placed on them (hey, what do you know, exactly what the Duggar's taught their daughters) and that it wasn't really harmful because it was minor, so perhaps this might be a hard concept for you to grasp.

As I noted above, how do you define minor?

For most people, forcibly sticking a hand down someone's pants and fondling their genitals is up there for not being minor. Certainly when it is done for over a year.

And as I linked above, child sexual molestation such as this can and often have a long lasting impact on victims. In a variety of ways. Coupled with those girls being brought up to believe that they don't really have a right or say over their own bodies, how "minor" do you think the molestation actually was and what kind of self image do you think those girls had growing up? What am I doing asking you such questions? You think that child sexual molestation isn't that bad if it's minor.

 

As well as reports by Josh, and sexual molestation in the living room and laundry.

I'm sorry, are you comparing normal behaviour and saying it isn't that different to sticking his hands down their pants and up their dresses and tops to feel them up?

No one is inventing trauma, Capracus. In March 2002, one victim approached Jim Bob Duggar, "crying and upset" and reported that Josh had been molesting them in their room while they slept. Nothing was done about it. In July of 2002, Jim Bob advised that Josh admitted to having molested his sisters. and what appears to be another molestation had occurred, and it was then that he was punished by his father. Nothing further was done. Jim Bob then advised that 9 months had passed when Josh again molested his sisters, once while reading to them on the couch and within the same time-frame, in the laundry. What is clear is that the girls reported being inappropriately touched by their brother and he was allowed to continue with the same behaviour for a year, while his parents lied and then refused to send him for actual therapy and treatment which he needed. At least one advised that their parents never even spoke to her about what he did.

There is clear evidence that even this form of sexual molestation is traumatic, which is clear considering the children were running to tell their parents in some instances. At no time was treatment sought for the victims and instead, they were made to continue to have to put up with it for 12 months. Where he did reoffend, at times while they slept.

And they did nothing about it for several months, after they were first made aware of it. And he continued to molest.

You need to read the report. It was reported to them and told it had happened multiple times in March 2002. Nothing was done by the father's own admittance. Then in July 2002, Josh admitted to having molested again, and he was "disciplined". And then 9 months later, they were told about it again and in that "time-frame", Josh had molested multiple times.

At no time did the father even admit to getting help for Josh's victims and we know at least one of them was upset and crying. So she was clearly traumatised by what he did to her.

Are you suggesting that when told that one child was sexually molesting another child(ren), that most parents would do nothing at all about it for months?

Which is why they ran to their parents, one in tears and clearly upset about what had happened, and others ran to inform their parents about it.. They did this because it's normal and because he confused and creeped out and they were more concerned about that then their personal safety?

The police report clearly shows that you are mistaken.

Are you suggesting that it is normal for children to molest each other while they sleep and play?

There is appropriate touching between children for different age groups and there is inappropriate touching between children for different age groups. As I clearly linked earlier, what Josh did, even in his age group, was inappropriate and overtly sexualised behaviour against other children, some much younger than he was.

Well, since you consider clearly inappropriate sexual touching between children to be normal behaviour, I am surprised you would have done anything about it at all.

What is inappropriate:

11-12 Years of age: Any sexual play which involves children younger than themselves.


13-18 Years of age:
Compulsive masturbation
Attempt to touch or expose other's genitals - especially without permission
Sexual contact with animals and younger children
Using sexual themes to degrade others or themselves
Chronic preoccupation with sex and pornography​

I wouldn't have thought that people were not aware of this, but there you go.

 

And who said otherwise?

No one.

So I fail to see whatever point you are trying to make by diverting attention away from the subject at hand. If you wish to discuss the power difference in the relationship between Josh Duggar and his sisters and the way in which they were/are educated and the role and power difference between boys and girls in the education plans they are taught at home, then by all means, lets. And that is clearly a point of this thread. These children are taught from an early age that the male is the dominant one in the home. Josh Duggar was older than his victims, in some cases, apparently several years older, and he was in a position of power and dominance, both by education and the way in which that household views gender roles. In which case, then there is a clear cause for concern.

I get it if you haven't bothered reading the links at the start of this thread, but it might behoove you to be aware of the society Josh and his victims belonged to and how they were taught and putting that into context with this discussion, which you clearly are failing to do. For example, the Duggars freely admit to homeschooling their children, with plans, from one example, from the Advanced Training Institute. If you ever want to hear of or know of a backwards education plan, then the ATI and the Duggar's Quiverfull principles would be top of the list. Women and girls have to be submissive, weak and controlled, yes, even by their own older brothers.

Of course I do. But really, your distinctions are disturbing and so far out of context that I don't know whether to laugh at you or feel sorry for you, because this is kind of pathetic. Would you say that to a victim of domestic abuse? 'What? It's just a slap, it's not that bad!'..

What's a bit of incest between brother and sister.....

Yes, Capracus, unwanted touching is sexual assault. If someone gropes you without your consent, yes, it can be and is often construed as violent contact, hence why it is called sexual assault.

Are you aware that it is still forcible touching because of that lack of consent?

But to hear you excuse it, you don't seem to think that incest, forcible sexual molestation/touching is really a bad or negative thing.

Is that what you call it?

You have just spent some time trying to normalise incest and tried to convey your belief that you do not seem to think that it was or is even harmful. And you also seem to be arguing for lying and hiding sexual molestation to protect the molester.

And he wasn't, was he? He wasn't while it was happening. His parents didn't even address it for months and he kept molesting.

You mean the ex-trooper who was a police officer when this was reported to him and the one who is a paedophile and who failed to file a report about it?

Yes, how lucky that his father took him to a paedophile, who protected a boy who sexually molested his little sisters and at least one other girl.

Because hiding sexual molestation and protecting child molesters is a good thing, in your opinion?

You should join the Catholic priesthood. They would love you. Because they are also into protecting, defending and lying to protect and hide child molesters.

If Jim Bob had not lied, then his children would have received the treatment they needed.

As the report also clearly shows, the parents lied to the victims, by telling them that they had sent Josh for treatment. Not just to the victims and the rest of the family, but to their church and police. Meanwhile, they go around telling people that gays, lesbians and transgender are child molesters, and the mother who went out of her way to record robocalls demonising LGBT as child molesters in her bid to reverse legislation removing discrimination for LGBT.. Poor them for all they are enduring..

 

Pretty sure I did not miss the point, Capracus.

Look dude, I don't know where you are from, but where I am from, a 14 year old sexually molesting his younger siblings and other little girls is not normal behaviour and is considered a crime. Clearly you disagree and you believe this could fall into "normal" behaviour in a family, and behaviour that should be protected and hidden, and you even went so far as to say, in previous posts in this thread, that you do not consider a teenager molesting little kids to be violent sexual assault or even really harmful if the victim does not feel harmed by it.

No one has said that bullying and violence between siblings is normal or good behaviour, or normal examples of familial physical interaction.

Do I need to remind you that sticking your hand down your younger sister's underpants and fondling her vagina is not "rough play" or normal familial physical interaction? I didn't think this needed to be explained anymore.

Sexual abuse is still sexual abuse.

It isn't normal for teenagers or older siblings to get sexual gratification from contact with their siblings, dude, especially their much younger siblings while they are sleeping or while he is reading them a story from a story book. It is certainly not normal behaviour for an older sibling to grope his younger siblings, by grabbing their breasts and sticking his fingers in their vagina.

The term in that "time frame" indicates the abuse was ongoing and multiple molestation occurred within that time frame, by the parent's own admission.

Is this another attempt for normalising sexual molestation and incest?

Because thus far, you have tried to downplay the harm caused by sexual molestation of children within families and by siblings, you have tried to claim that it could just be construed as normal familial physical interaction, you have praised the family's lying about it and hiding it, you have praised the paedophile police officer who failed to file a report about it and who gave him a stern talking to, not about it being wrong, but about how badly things could go for him if it got out (ie the repercussions).

The report is ambiguous and the father's report of continued molestation in "that timeframe" could be taken either way.

That said, it would be surprising that his repeated molestations would suddenly stop for a period of months and then start up again with a flurry of his touching his sisters before his parents decided to send him away to do some remodeling work on a house and instructed him to read his bible.

And when the behaviour continues, they would seek outside help.

The parents, in this instance, were told about it by one of the victims. By their own admittance, they did nothing until he confessed to it months later, when he was then punished. What that entails, no one really knows. Then months after that, the molestation clearly did not stop and it was then that they lied about sending him for treatment and instead sent him to live with a friend of theirs for a couple of months.

This is unacceptable.

Sexually molesting little girls is not a normal child activity.

Please stop trying to normalise it by comparing it to normal child activities.

I see the notion that you can't goad someone into hitting you as an excuse for domestic violence hasn't made it to your shores yet.

And more excuses for sexual violence..

Two boxers who get into the ring, with the full intention of boxing - hitting each other - is consensual because both consented to the physical contact of the sport anyway. If one person walked up to another and beat him up, it would not be consensual and thus illegal.

Rubbing someone's breast while they sleep is non-consensual contact. Why? Because the person is asleep and has clearly not consented to it. And really, what kind of person sexually molests people while they sleep anyway? Especially little children?

And your complaint that sexual violence has been broadened to apply to all forms of sexual violence is noted.

 

I have never advocated that non-sexual abusive behaviours were acceptable or normal.

Nor have I ever made excuses for it.

You, on the other hand, have spent quite a bit of time trying to normalise the molestation of children and incest, to the point of praising the family for lying about it and praising a paedophile police officer for protecting a child molester. Why? Because you want to pitch a fit that non-sexual family violence is not being addressed in a thread that deals with and is about sexual violence and rape culture.

Who is this "us" of which you speak?

Because you don't speak for anyone I know. No one I know would praise a paedophile for protecting the interests of a child molester, nor would they praise the father of the child molester for hiding it, lying about it and not getting the molester or his victims (his own daughters) any help. Sorry if that's not what it is like in your neck of the woods, but that's how it is in mine. And if this sort of behaviour is normal in your family, I would suggest you contact the authorities immediately and tell them why.

What you have been doing is bending yourself into a pretzel to deem the molestation of children as normal familial contact, while deliberately ignoring the context and especially the context in which these girls are brought up and how they are brought up. If you wish to speak about non-sexual violence and how that is often excused in a familial setting, then by all means, start a thread about it. No one here has said that non-sexual violence is not damaging to children in every way.

Actually, parents often do, hence why treatment centers for child molesters like Josh Duggar exists for teenagers and children.

I certainly do hope that you are not trying to suggest or insinuate that child molesters are not a menace, by your statement that it is society that makes them out to be a menace. Although, after your display in this thread, I am not holding out much hope.

Please take time to read the links in the first few posts in this thread, as they go into detail about how these girls were educated and brought up by their parents. It would go a long way in your not wasting people's time, because all you need to know to answer those questions can be found in those links.

 

I think it needs to be said that this has been hovering around this family and such strictly religious sects for a while now. And it is only now, with the benefit of hindsight, that we can look at what the Duggar family have been encouraging and forcing as "rules" in bringing up their children, especially their daughters, that we can see just how perverted it has been. For example, in their "rules" about dating, the Duggars encouraged the brothers to oversee their sisters, chaperoning them and monitoring them while on dates:

All of the Duggar boys have been chaperones to Ben and Jessa, even the younger ones who will go along with them to a coffee shop or out to dinner. Jim Bob and Michelle say there is something special about the way brothers size up a potential suitor. “The brothers can see how they treat mom and dad, or see whether they show the sisters respect,” Michelle says, adding that each brother has given Jessa their opinion of Ben.​

Now, consider for the moment that Josh is one such brother who had chaperoned the sisters he molested, and has given his opinion on their sister's boyfriends, and was in a position to size up the potential suitors. If that isn't creepy enough, consider that in the Duggar household, being part of the Quiverfull movement and the of the Christian beliefs that defer to the male as the ultimate authority over even the sister's, it becomes something out of a twisted horror story.

What our neighbour really leaves out in his pfft'ing child molestation and incest between siblings is the context in which these girls in particular are brought up in. When he comments that the girls are not harmed by it, he leaves out the fact that these girls are not really allowed to complain or not forgive their older brother for what he did to them. They had no other option but to forgive. Their needs were always secondary. The only thing that mattered was their brother's redemption.

The Duggars are part of a theological movement called “Quiverfull,” a deeply conservative sector of Protestant theology whose most salient characteristic is a disregard for birth control—including the rhythm method. Such families also tend to be politically conservative, believing white Christianity in America to be under threat. Producing godly Christian children to carry on the gospel, both politically and socially, is vital to the continuation of the faith: You must have lots of “arrows”—children—in your “quiver.” More children means more demographic power, according to this philosophy, and the ability to control societal and governmental outcomes by maintaining hold of majority power.

And typically attendant with this theology is a whole host of conservatively minded elements. Women are to stay in the home; men are to be breadwinners. Women are to be conservatively and modestly dressed, and sexual purity is prized above all things when entering into a marriage contract. Generally, men and women marry young and start producing children quickly.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The theology is not shy about making sure that men are the heads of households and women are subservient. Frequently, families are so large that older female siblings are enlisted in helping to care for the younger, allowing the mother to focus on newborns. Such a practice not only places minors in charge of each other; it frequently places the work of educating the family members in the hands of people who are still learning things themselves. This combination of factors creates a vortex of little to no education and a lack of skills transferrable to the outside world. In other words, the theological sect perpetuates itself by keeping women dependent upon the family structure until they are married off into a family approved by their patriarch—which is usually another family within their denomination. Women are functionally without power or voice within this movement; leaving it often means leaving behind every social structure you have ever known.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

These elements combine to produce a conservative Christian culture in which victims can be silenced and sexual abuse may be excused as part of an abuser’s redemption story. The prioritization of forgiveness means that having a neat, clean story of Jesus’ power is often more important than actually stopping harm from being done.

So Josh Duggar’s victims likely had a number of things working against them. In addition to the typical problems facing victims of childhood sexual abuse, these young girls existed (and continue to exist) in an environment that prioritizes the redemption of men over the pain of the women they hurt. Coming forward for any one of the victims meant going against a very powerful patriarch in their sect, and it meant an “admission” of sexual impurity on their part.

In the Duggars’ narrative of events, Josh admitted his crimes to his now-wife, Anna, during their courtship, and Anna forgave him. The police report from 2006 also notes that the young victims of the Duggars had been spoken to about the events and that they all had “chosen” to forgive Josh for his transgression. But in a world as theologically, socially, and politically constrained as the Duggars’, is it really possible for these girls—some younger than ten years old—to really understand a concept as weighty as forgiving the man who abused you?

Any forgiveness in such a situation is a Band-Aid over a bullet wound at best. These women may genuinely feel that the abuse they experienced has no real impact on their lives now. But it is undeniable that the environment in which they were raised and the heavily moralistic and gendered purity culture in which they exist contributed both to their abuse and to the subsequent cover-up and minimization of such acts.

This problem of sexual abuse in conservative Christian environments is not just a Duggar problem. This is not an anomaly. This kind of cover-up, this kind of abuse and minimization is all too common for such theologies. It’s just that not every story will involve a national television star.​

It is not surprising that his victims forgave him. They had no other choice. There were no other options available to them.

For Josh's victims and as they wrote in their book, their purpose as girls and women is to be a "godly girl", to seek forgiveness and to put their past behind them and choosing to live for God.

“We know that a godly girl is not someone who has lived a ‘perfect’ life but is someone who has received God’s forgiveness and is seeking to put the past behind her and choosing to live every day for Him,” Jana, 24, Jessa, 21, Jill, 23, and Jinger, 20, wrote in their book “Growing Up Duggar.”​

Now, you can imagine how and why these girls had no choice but to forgive him. It is not surprising that the Duggars have focused more on ensuring that Josh's future was not ruined, that this was their biggest concern. The paedophile police trooper Jim Bob took him to was sure to focus more on Josh's future prospects if he continued and was caught. The girls did not factor in this at all.

It is concerning that we have a member who is praising the deliberate act of hiding and protecting child molestation, to the point of refusing to allow said molester to be questioned by police and lying about his getting actual treatment, even going so far as to praise a paedophile for protecting a child molester. I might question this individual's motives in this matter, but I do think that approaching this out of context leaves out even more of the tragedy that is this story.