Jill Duggar Dillard, Derick Dillard, & Baby Israel - Part 2

[grandmadugger]

Do the Duggars breastfeed? If they are nursing every time baby is hungry (as opposed to following a strict baby only eats x number of times a day philosophy) then that should suppress ovulation for a fair amount of time.

I nursed and didn't get my period back until 14.5 months post partum, which means my first time ovulating was 2 weeks or so before that. But especially for very young babies, if you nurse on demand (not on a schedule) it does make a fairly reliable sort of birth control. Not perfect, mind you.

However, if she's only nursing a few times a day yeah, that won't work to suppress ovulation.

It's speculated that Jill is breastfeeding but no proof. We certainly don't know if she's doing it on demand. I know Anna does and that's probably why her kids are spread out. I hope for Jill's sake something is stopping ovulation. That poor girl just looks miserable. I can't fathom it.

[Arrowoftruth]

It's speculated that Jill is breastfeeding but no proof. We certainly don't know if she's doing it on demand. I know Anna does and that's probably why her kids are spread out. I hope for Jill's sake something is stopping ovulation. That poor girl just looks miserable. I can't fathom it.

Jill said she was breastfeeding in the vse

[OkToBeTakei]

It's speculated that Jill is breastfeeding but no proof. We certainly don't know if she's doing it on demand. I know Anna does and that's probably why her kids are spread out. I hope for Jill's sake something is stopping ovulation. That poor girl just looks miserable. I can't fathom it.

Just as long as nobody demands 'proof' and spectacularates ( new word...yay) every time they see or do not see/hear/read or do not about the poor we'an's food source :lol: it could be a 'Duggarbottlegate' before you know it!!!

I'd be screwed if I was a Duggar, I exclusively breastfed my baby until she was 18 months ( obviously she was eating ze real food at this time.) know when I got my first period? Four weeks... Yup 4 weeks after the birth and every four weeks after that! Mother Nature was cruel to me :(

[OkToBeTakei]

Wow Palimpest. You way overreacted to what I did up there in that post.

I bolded and enlarged the font because just bolding it as normal would make it too difficult to find as what I was referring to was buried literally in the middle of the long post. Many times I but I thought it would be easier to see, find, and understand to what I was referring to just bold and enlarge it. I have seen it done several times, is it silly when others do it or just when I do it?

Are you offended by my idea that you are essentially asking us to "cover up" and not post our own ideas because of the fear that Radar or someone will take the post as gospel truth and run with it? I was thinking that maybe you just didn't realize how it might be seen that way.

I feel my example is a perfect example, if I understand what you are asking. Maybe I do not fully understand what you mean.

Should I not say I would like to see a bigger star than JB pursue Jana and then name someone I think could take it on? I used Tim Tebow as an example of a person I thought was Christian enough and far more well-known than Jim Bob Duggar. To me, it would be ridiculous to think Tim Tebow is gonna sit at a table while Jim Bob grills him about debt and how to pay for unexpected car repair LOL. Or step in between Tebow and Jana and possessively put his arm around Jana.

Am I to only post about things I know as fact and not ever say anything like I think a loosened up Jinger would enjoy Coachella? Sure, maybe those ideas are weird to others but I don't see why you feel upset that I posted I would like to see Jana pursued (not courted by JB&M rules but pursued by his own rules) by someone more powerful than JB. Sorry I just really don't get why I can't offer my idea about what I'd like to see for a Duggar kid.

I think that was okay. I never said those two people were involved, never implied it. I don't recall how Grandmaduggar presented her thoughts on it but apparently we had very similar ideas... but we should not say things like that bc clearly the rags read here and it might be picked up as fact?

I am sorely disappointed that you felt you had to drop to the level of calling me names. It's never a good feeling to see someone with your authority stoop to that. Is this your way of trying to bully me off FJ? Because I'm not seeing why you felt the need to call me racist and homophobic and w/e else.... how do you see those things in me suggesting you are essentially asking us to modify our behavior because someone has thoughts we can't control. Isn't that actually the very essence of FJ - that people should be free to dress and do what they want and if some guy gets a hard on, that's his problem?

It never occurred to me to feel pride that the Tebow thing made it outer edges of mainstream press. It made me feel very weird and it was certainly eye opening to see and understand that posts made on Free Jinger might end up as news stories in places that I normally frequent for what I thought was actual news. I have participated on many different types of boards and forums over the years and this is the first time I've seen that. So now I know for sure that news on yahoo comes from "lesser light" sources, I probably should have already realized it but it startling to see that on yahoo knowing there was no basis for Tebow/Jana other than posts on FJ. Not startling in a good way but you sure felt it was okay to assign a negative attribute to me about it. Which is, in fact, not true in the slightest.

Just the facts, ma'am. If you think Jinger would enjoy the music and fashion of Coachella, please keep those racist, homophobic, weird thoughts to yourself. They certainly aren't welcome here and we certainly would not want the fine folks at Coachella issuing statements denying that Jinger Duggar ever darkened their doors. Grass. Entry gate.

Because it's all Grandmaduggar's fault that Tim Tebow's people issued a statement denying a relationship with Jana Duggar. It is certainly no fault of the rag websites that picked it up and printed it as fact or the other websites that reprinted it.

Got it.

What the ever living fuck are you talking about?

Is this some kind of poor me I'm getting picked on type post or do you really just not get what folks are saying.

Nobody is trying to run you off FJ, they are merely disagreeing with your opinions.

I hate to break it to you. This is not all about you.

Wall o text ye gods :lol:

[Furbabies]

Humble question born of ignorance: for the medical folks... How badly could Jill have damaged her body thru her choices? Was baby Izzy at risk? I know all this has been discussed, but I'm sterile and no nothin about birth in babies. :embarrassed:

[Honeysuckle]

Do the Duggars breastfeed? If they are nursing every time baby is hungry (as opposed to following a strict baby only eats x number of times a day philosophy) then that should suppress ovulation for a fair amount of time.

I nursed and didn't get my period back until 14.5 months post partum, which means my first time ovulating was 2 weeks or so before that. But especially for very young babies, if you nurse on demand (not on a schedule) it does make a fairly reliable sort of birth control. Not perfect, mind you.

However, if she's only nursing a few times a day yeah, that won't work to suppress ovulation.

Michelle mentioned on one of the episodes that she has gotten pregnant while breastfeeding. Something about it changing her milk and the baby she was nursing not liking it any more, after she got pregnant. So with that family history, I would not be surprised if Jill got pregnant while breastfeeding. But I suspect, not that the Duggars would ever confirm or deny it in any way, that once the baby was past the newborn stage Michelle would have been having the older girls get up with the baby in the night and give bottles, which would explain why the breastfeeding stopped working as birth control.

[sense and nonsense]

Humble question born of ignorance: for the medical folks... How badly could Jill have damaged her body thru her choices? Was baby Izzy at risk? I know all this has been discussed, but I'm sterile and no nothin about birth in babies. :embarrassed:

While opinions on FJ differ, a few NICU nurses have commented that her labour was quite dangerous to her and Izzy.

A few pages back, someone mentioned a forum- Previously TV, where on a births page, an OB GYN discussed her labour, I think that is a good place to read about the labour. She gives a fairly clear account of what could/couldn't have happened.

Lastly, I don't want to support random speculation, but why do we as snarkers on a this forum care about what Radar online writes? Does anybody? Yeah, they publish an article, people read it, search their brains for who the Duggar are, realise they don't care, and simply move on. The article is later disproved/discarded. All is well.

[Melissa1977]

Do the Duggars breastfeed? If they are nursing every time baby is hungry (as opposed to following a strict baby only eats x number of times a day philosophy) then that should suppress ovulation for a fair amount of time.

I nursed and didn't get my period back until 14.5 months post partum, which means my first time ovulating was 2 weeks or so before that. But especially for very young babies, if you nurse on demand (not on a schedule) it does make a fairly reliable sort of birth control. Not perfect, mind you.

However, if she's only nursing a few times a day yeah, that won't work to suppress ovulation.

Lots of women who breastfeed On demand have their periods back in a few months. Mine came back in 12 months, but my cousin had hers in just 8 months (breasfeeding like 10 times a day).

Anna breastfeeds, but we don't know for how long.

Michelle had problems breasfeeding, she did only few months with each baby (plus Gothard recommend breastfeed few months to get pregnant again as soon as possible).

Sure Jill breastfeeds, she's crunchy and if you try a homebirth I think it's normal to breastfeed.

I'm not sure about Jessa. I can see Ben bottlefeeding at night to let her rest.

[tapdancer493]

I can't get over how big (read: long) this kid is. He looks like he could be standing with support tomorrow and walking in a week. Derick posted his weight at one month, but I'm curious how much longer he's gotten...

[Coco]

Aw, it looks like he has a cowlick. So cute. My 2.5 year old has one kinda like Woody on Toy Story. I'm a little worried that he'll always have his hair sticking up in the front. At least Izzy's is in the back. :lol:

Izzy is a huge baby. I wonder if all Jill's babies will be big. She may be out of luck about vbacs, if so.

[Coco]

Just today on the editorial page of my newspaper was a column entitled "Why did the GOP cave in to delusional paranoia?" written by Gene Lyons who is a columnist for the Arkansas Times. These lines jumped out at me: "But just across the border (from El Paso, TX) in Chihuahua, according to the Family Research Council there's a secret ISIS base with thousands of terrorists poised to strike. Hundreds of miles of underground tunnels have been dug to facilitate the invasion." (bolded added by me). As most here already know, FRC is Josh Duggar's employer.

What?

With spoons? :lol:

So they they vetoed the Trojan Horse idea?

oh wait - that's the reason for the eathquakes!

anyway, some of those border patrol agents would just love a reason to bust loose. I know there have been thoughtful people that have endangered themselves to leave water jugs for the illegals.

[OkToBeTakei]

While opinions on FJ differ, a few NICU nurses have commented that her labour was quite dangerous to her and Izzy.

A few pages back, someone mentioned a forum- Previously TV, where on a births page, an OB GYN discussed her labour, I think that is a good place to read about the labour. She gives a fairly clear account of what could/couldn't have happened.

Lastly, I don't want to support random speculation, but why do we as snarkers on a this forum care about what Radar online writes? Does anybody? Yeah, they publish an article, people read it, search their brains for who the Duggar are, realise they don't care, and simply move on. The article is later disproved/discarded. All is well.

Or you could be sensible and not believe ANYTHING you read on the internet from anybody claiming to be an expert :lol:

If you want total speculation and ridiculousness go to the first page of this thread where you will find the link to the previous thread wherein lies the speculation train on steroids.

You could always watch the birth episode and *gasp* make your own conclusions based on what you see. You can scramble about the web reading every and any article about the birth, then do a compare and contrast study which may give you a EUREKA moment which points to massive cover-up by TLC/DUGGARS/ALL MEDIA/ that concludes basically .......jack shit. OH...wait....that's already been done (previous thread.)

This is a long way of saying read the previous thread. Also if you lack knowledge about reproduction may I suggest there are many good medical sites where you can educate yourself.

Anybody claiming to be an OB GYN on a TV snark site is a) full of shit. We all know everybody on the internet is an axe-murderer. b) Ethically as a health professional, extremely unprofessional. So.. c) Full of shit.

Whatever happened to don't believe everything you read? Shit I'm old and I learned this way before the web, on the web that rule times eleventy. Are folks so naive?

I mean we have degreed law professionals apparently on FJ (I love the fact this is now a title :lol: )

[Cactus]

At the risk of posting something tangentially related to the initial topic... that baby is humungous. :shock: I have trouble keeping in mind that Israel is, what, less than two months old?

[formergothardite]

Just as long as nobody demands 'proof' and spectacularates ( new word...yay) every time they see or do not see/hear/read or do not about the poor we'an's food source :lol: it could be a 'Duggarbottlegate' before you know it!!!

I'd be screwed if I was a Duggar, I exclusively breastfed my baby until she was 18 months ( obviously she was eating ze real food at this time.) know when I got my first period? Four weeks... Yup 4 weeks after the birth and every four weeks after that! Mother Nature was cruel to me :([/quote]

Me two. :cry: I was quite shocked this happened because all the books make it seem like as long as you are breastfeeding your period won't start. If I would have been a Duggar people would have thought I didn't breastfeed and was trying to get pregnant fast.

[JHeathen]

Michelle mentioned on one of the episodes that she has gotten pregnant while breastfeeding. Something about it changing her milk and the baby she was nursing not liking it any more, after she got pregnant. So with that family history, I would not be surprised if Jill got pregnant while breastfeeding. But I suspect, not that the Duggars would ever confirm or deny it in any way, that once the baby was past the newborn stage Michelle would have been having the older girls get up with the baby in the night and give bottles, which would explain why the breastfeeding stopped working as birth control.

Breastfeeding on demand does not suppress ovulation for everyone. Got my period back when my babies were 3 months old, nursing around the clock, and they ate like piggies.

J'Chelle claimed her "milk changed" at 6 months and so her babies would refuse her milk. But then again, she also claimed her milk was "skim," and a doctor looked at her like she was insane. Which she is.

[Rescinded and Mended]

I breastfed my son for the first two months of his life. I had to quit due to low milk production and an allergy to dairy, but my cycle wound up coming back 6 weeks after he was born, while I was still nursing. So yeah, we had to look at other birth control options when that happened.

[nelliebelle1197]

Wow Palimpest. You way overreacted to what I did up there in that post.

I bolded and enlarged the font because just bolding it as normal would make it too difficult to find as what I was referring to was buried literally in the middle of the long post. Many times I but I thought it would be easier to see, find, and understand to what I was referring to just bold and enlarge it. I have seen it done several times, is it silly when others do it or just when I do it?

Are you offended by my idea that you are essentially asking us to "cover up" and not post our own ideas because of the fear that Radar or someone will take the post as gospel truth and run with it? I was thinking that maybe you just didn't realize how it might be seen that way.

I feel my example is a perfect example, if I understand what you are asking. Maybe I do not fully understand what you mean.

Should I not say I would like to see a bigger star than JB pursue Jana and then name someone I think could take it on? I used Tim Tebow as an example of a person I thought was Christian enough and far more well-known than Jim Bob Duggar. To me, it would be ridiculous to think Tim Tebow is gonna sit at a table while Jim Bob grills him about debt and how to pay for unexpected car repair LOL. Or step in between Tebow and Jana and possessively put his arm around Jana.

Am I to only post about things I know as fact and not ever say anything like I think a loosened up Jinger would enjoy Coachella? Sure, maybe those ideas are weird to others but I don't see why you feel upset that I posted I would like to see Jana pursued (not courted by JB&M rules but pursued by his own rules) by someone more powerful than JB. Sorry I just really don't get why I can't offer my idea about what I'd like to see for a Duggar kid.

I think that was okay. I never said those two people were involved, never implied it. I don't recall how Grandmaduggar presented her thoughts on it but apparently we had very similar ideas... but we should not say things like that bc clearly the rags read here and it might be picked up as fact?

I am sorely disappointed that you felt you had to drop to the level of calling me names. It's never a good feeling to see someone with your authority stoop to that. Is this your way of trying to bully me off FJ? Because I'm not seeing why you felt the need to call me racist and homophobic and w/e else.... how do you see those things in me suggesting you are essentially asking us to modify our behavior because someone has thoughts we can't control. Isn't that actually the very essence of FJ - that people should be free to dress and do what they want and if some guy gets a hard on, that's his problem?

It never occurred to me to feel pride that the Tebow thing made it outer edges of mainstream press. It made me feel very weird and it was certainly eye opening to see and understand that posts made on Free Jinger might end up as news stories in places that I normally frequent for what I thought was actual news. I have participated on many different types of boards and forums over the years and this is the first time I've seen that. So now I know for sure that news on yahoo comes from "lesser light" sources, I probably should have already realized it but it startling to see that on yahoo knowing there was no basis for Tebow/Jana other than posts on FJ. Not startling in a good way but you sure felt it was okay to assign a negative attribute to me about it. Which is, in fact, not true in the slightest.

Just the facts, ma'am. If you think Jinger would enjoy the music and fashion of Coachella, please keep those racist, homophobic, weird thoughts to yourself. They certainly aren't welcome here and we certainly would not want the fine folks at Coachella issuing statements denying that Jinger Duggar ever darkened their doors. Grass. Entry gate.

Because it's all Grandmaduggar's fault that Tim Tebow's people issued a statement denying a relationship with Jana Duggar. It is certainly no fault of the rag websites that picked it up and printed it as fact or the other websites that reprinted it.

Got it.

Do you really want us to rehash for the 90th time the various statements you have made that are racist and homophobic? The statements you NEVER own?

You and many others are missing the entire point. Happy Atheist has stated very clearly that this is neither a fan site or a hate site for the Duggars. Long term members are leaving over the tone in this subforum. Upthread someone is actually wanting to figure out when Jill ovulates, FFS.

The whole point about the Tebow thing is that people are just posting without reading, without figuring out context and just repeating speculation as FACT. That is all critical posters are pointing out -a lot of stuff going on over here is changing board culture in a negative way, resulting in more rules and guidelines cropping than ever before. Many long-term members are liking it and things are going to be said. That is how FJ works. Always has and always will.

[sbroh]

Oh I know it doesn't suppress ovulation for everyone. For a lot of people it does for a period of time, for some it doesn't.

Michelle's comments about her milk being skim are insane. I'm guessing she's trying to justify stopping nursing in order to get pregnant faster (not that anyone needs to justify how they feed their baby, obviously Michelle felt she needed an excuse though).

[Coco]

well... y'all know it was based on more than just us shooting the breeze. :lol:

(photo was posted by the Duggars on Nov.11, 2014 but I couldn't confirm that was the date of the banquet)

source: starcasm.net/archives/297452 (article is from Nov. 26, 2014)

/not trying to join a side of this discussion at all, just saying there was more to the rumors, like actual family friendship. 8-)

youtu.be/EAgpXwsC8rs

[Palimpsest]

My comments in blue.

Wow Palimpest. You way overreacted to what I did up there in that post.

No, I don't think I did.

I bolded and enlarged the font because just bolding it as normal would make it too difficult to find as what I was referring to was buried literally in the middle of the long post. Many times I but I thought it would be easier to see, find, and understand to what I was referring to just bold and enlarge it. I have seen it done several times, is it silly when others do it or just when I do it?

This is basic Netiquette 101. Typing in all caps is shouting. Bolding and using enormous fonts can be used for emphasis, but more often denotes anger and aggression. The last time I saw bolded and enormous fonts here was a young adult fundie accusing us of killing the baybeees!!!! By all means bold and use enormous fonts in your own posts. Please do not edit my posts when you quote them to include enormous fonts again. It is far preferable to snip, bold, use color, or highlight. So yes, I think you were silly. And overreacted. See below.

Are you offended by my idea that you are essentially asking us to "cover up" and not post our own ideas because of the fear that Radar or someone will take the post as gospel truth and run with it? I was thinking that maybe you just didn't realize how it might be seen that way.

I am very offended that you managed to misinterpret my statement "Some of us are getting more cautious about [wild speculation and inventing rumors]" into "you are essentially asking us to cover up" and then rant on at length. Get a freaking grip!

I am even more offended that you ignored the rest of that paragraph where I said "The point is that there are many real and important things to criticize the Duggars and their belief systems about without making things up. Wild speculation or misinformation turning into "fact" is destructive to FJ's reputation - to say nothing of being unnecessarily cruel. See "sin in the camp" in the Myths thread. That unfounded rumor has been around for years." To clarify for the dim-witted, speculation and rumor morph into fact all to easily on the internet. It is a suggestion to be thoughtful about what you write only.

I feel my example is a perfect example, if I understand what you are asking. Maybe I do not fully understand what you mean.

I think I already answered this. You, possibly deliberately, misinterpreted what I said. Asking someone to try to be conscious, thoughtful and careful of what they write on the internet is hardly akin to falling prey to the patriarchal thinking or censoring opinions. Your analogy was exaggerated, overblown, and overly aggressive given the context.

Should I not say I would like to see a bigger star than JB pursue Jana and then name someone I think could take it on? I used Tim Tebow as an example of a person I thought was Christian enough and far more well-known than Jim Bob Duggar. To me, it would be ridiculous to think Tim Tebow is gonna sit at a table while Jim Bob grills him about debt and how to pay for unexpected car repair LOL. Or step in between Tebow and Jana and possessively put his arm around Jana.

Am I to only post about things I know as fact and not ever say anything like I think a loosened up Jinger would enjoy Coachella? Sure, maybe those ideas are weird to others but I don't see why you feel upset that I posted I would like to see Jana pursued (not courted by JB&M rules but pursued by his own rules) by someone more powerful than JB. Sorry I just really don't get why I can't offer my idea about what I'd like to see for a Duggar kid.

This is funny. Actually, I wasn't thinking of the Tebrow incident at all when I wrote that, it was more of a generic caution. I'm not sure I even saw the Tebrow story in real time or knew it started at FJ. So I wasn't upset with you. Apparently you decided that the shoe fit, so you went off like the town fire siren! Guilty conscience? Anyway, when you and GrandmaDuggar finally figure out who birthed that specific rumor get back to me!

At least two other far more malicious stories have hit the press as fact. I won't bring them up again because I forget the details and don't want to proliferate them further. Come to think of it, they may not have originated here but were certainly discussed here. Those stories made me sit back and contemplate how far to take my own snark. I, personally, decided to be more cautious. Others might want to think about it too. That is all.

I think that was okay. I never said those two people were involved, never implied it. I don't recall how Grandmaduggar presented her thoughts on it but apparently we had very similar ideas... but we should not say things like that bc clearly the rags read here and it might be picked up as fact?

I am sorely disappointed that you felt you had to drop to the level of calling me names. It's never a good feeling to see someone with your authority stoop to that. Is this your way of trying to bully me off FJ? Because I'm not seeing why you felt the need to call me racist and homophobic and w/e else.... how do you see those things in me suggesting you are essentially asking us to modify our behavior because someone has thoughts we can't control. Isn't that actually the very essence of FJ - that people should be free to dress and do what they want and if some guy gets a hard on, that's his problem?

This does need clarifying. I have no more authority on FJ than you do. I am merely part of a work group so that is why my name is in a different color. Yes, I do certainly call people out on what I consider to be ugly behavior sometimes. I've gone easy on you in the past. Do you really want me to dig up some of your nastier homophobic and racist posts? It will take time I don't have today.

It never occurred to me to feel pride that the Tebow thing made it outer edges of mainstream press. It made me feel very weird and it was certainly eye opening to see and understand that posts made on Free Jinger might end up as news stories in places that I normally frequent for what I thought was actual news.

Yes, the press do pick up on some weird things and don't check sources properly. Some of the more malicious tabloids also make things up with little or no evidence and keep repeating the stories for years, citing their own past stories as "proof" that the stories are true.

Dear Lord, I just realized!

That is what the Duggar subforum is turning into. The tabloid press! :lol: :lol:

The rest of your ramble really isn't worth responding to, so

[Fascinated]

I understand that FJ is not a fan site. But I think some posters who discuss conspiracies and Izzy's birth and other seemingly irrelevant topics, do so initially out of their distaste for the way JB and M raised their children. Then others join in the discussion and relate their personal experiences which, while interesting, lead the threads off topic and we end up with more of a chat site.

So, I absolutely get that this is not the intended purpose of Free Jinger. However, it seems to me that there are many other threads and topics besides the Duggars that remain on point and where the 'proper' style of fundie-snarking is alive and well.

I assume that the next time the Duggars do or say something snarkworthy (from a fundamentalist viewpoint) that posters will jump in with meaningful posts and the threads will presumably regain their original purpose. In the meantime, it is distressing to see FJers going at each other when I think most members here truly want the same thing. Isn't that why most (admittedly not all) people joined in the first place?

I probably shouldn't be joining the fray but it seems like it's turning into an internal hate-fest. And that surely isn't what FJ is about, either.

[Palimpsest]

I understand that FJ is not a fan site. But I think some posters who discuss conspiracies and Izzy's birth and other seemingly irrelevant topics, do so initially out of their distaste for the way JB and M raised their children. Then others join in the discussion and relate their personal experiences which, while interesting, lead the threads off topic and we end up with more of a chat site.

So, I absolutely get that this is not the intended purpose of Free Jinger. However, it seems to me that there are many other threads and topics besides the Duggars that remain on point and where the 'proper' style of fundie-snarking is alive and well.

I assume that the next time the Duggars do or say something snarkworthy (from a fundamentalist viewpoint) that posters will jump in with meaningful posts and the threads will presumably regain their original purpose. In the meantime, it is distressing to see FJers going at each other when I think most members here truly want the same thing. Isn't that why most (admittedly not all) people joined in the first place?

I probably shouldn't be joining the fray but it seems like it's turning into an internal hate-fest. And that surely isn't what FJ is about, either.

I'm sorry you are finding this upsetting and apologize again for the thread jack. However, I think these issues need to be discussed. Some of us think we need a course correction. But I agree that the discussion should be carried on elsewhere so as not to take over this thread completely.

BrownieMomma? Shall we take it to the "One weird trick" announcement thread because these issues are already being discussed there?

Fascinated, things can get very turbulent at FJ. If you think this is bad -- fasten your seat belt! :)

[OkToBeTakei]

I understand that FJ is not a fan site. But I think some posters who discuss conspiracies and Izzy's birth and other seemingly irrelevant topics, do so initially out of their distaste for the way JB and M raised their children. Then others join in the discussion and relate their personal experiences which, while interesting, lead the threads off topic and we end up with more of a chat site.

So, I absolutely get that this is not the intended purpose of Free Jinger. However, it seems to me that there are many other threads and topics besides the Duggars that remain on point and where the 'proper' style of fundie-snarking is alive and well.

I assume that the next time the Duggars do or say something snarkworthy (from a fundamentalist viewpoint) that posters will jump in with meaningful posts and the threads will presumably regain their original purpose. In the meantime, it is distressing to see FJers going at each other when I think most members here truly want the same thing. Isn't that why most (admittedly not all) people joined in the first place?

I probably shouldn't be joining the fray but it seems like it's turning into an internal hate-fest. And that surely isn't what FJ is about, either.

There is no 'proper' way to snark. We are not discussing snark. If you can't see the difference between snark and pointless hate nit-picking then you are totally missing the point.

There is no internal hate fest. There are possibly three maybe more core posters who under the guise of the bolded are basically just ...what was the apt term before? Hate-reading. Yes hate-reading and commenting on Jessa/Jill/ whoever purely out of sheer and utter nastiness.

Not one short year ago Jill and Jessa were the victims, the product of their parents choices. Suddenly they are the main target for vitriol far worse than I recall directed at their parents. Jill has just in the past week on this thread in no particular order, through her own arrogance nearly caused a near fatal outcome of her own child's birth. Source? Poster's imagination. She is lazy and has done nothing since her child was born. Source? Poster's imagination. Is suffering or it seems that some posters wish she will suffer from Post Partum depression. It has been speculated she spends little time with her baby because.......Poster's imagination. She can't cook rice=fail at an almost gleeful level. Wants her husband to leave his job....Source...Poster's imagination. I'm sure I've missed a ton of other nasty crap. So yeah I'm not seeing how this translates into distaste for her parents beliefs. That's just bitching for mean kicks.

I agree other posters have just tagged along. Many have abandoned these threads and some have left the forum because of it. I suspect if it continues more will follow.

ETA Damn it. Cross posted without reading. Problem I see is that some posters just ignore the rest of the board in their eagerness to get their Duggar bitch fest on. Public announcements seem to go right over their heads :lol:

[SassyPants]

As the "children," 3 of whom are half way or more to 30, grow older and move on to living their own lives, was the direction of this board and the topics discussed not supposed to change? If people here did not anticipate that progression, I am surprised. There is a difference between expectations for an adult vs a child. If Jill's behaviors and decisions are to be discussed within the same guidelines as Jonhannah's, the intentions of this board are off the mark. Personally, I think that's at the heart of the problem for those adult kids- the bar is too low, raise it and watch them do as well as their peers.

Further, if you have a show about role modeling for and educating others, it's probably best you start from the truth and make sure you actual know what you're talking about.

[Firiel]

There is no 'proper' way to snark. We are not discussing snark. If you can't see the difference between snark and pointless hate nit-picking then you are totally missing the point.

There is no internal hate fest. There are possibly three maybe more core posters who under the guise of the bolded are basically just ...what was the apt term before? Hate-reading. Yes hate-reading and commenting on Jessa/Jill/ whoever purely out of sheer and utter nastiness.

Not one short year ago Jill and Jessa were the victims, the product of their parents choices. Suddenly they are the main target for vitriol far worse than I recall directed at their parents. Jill has just in the past week on this thread in no particular order, through her own arrogance nearly caused a near fatal outcome of her own child's birth. Source? Poster's imagination. She is lazy and has done nothing since her child was born. Source? Poster's imagination. Is suffering or it seems that some posters wish she will suffer from Post Partum depression. It has been speculated she spends little time with her baby because.......Poster's imagination. She can't cook rice=fail at an almost gleeful level. Wants her husband to leave his job....Source...Poster's imagination. I'm sure I've missed a ton of other nasty crap. So yeah I'm not seeing how this translates into distaste for her parents beliefs. That's just bitching for mean kicks.

I agree other posters have just tagged along. Many have abandoned these threads and some have left the forum because of it. I suspect if it continues more will follow.

ETA Damn it. Cross posted without reading. Problem I see is that some posters just ignore the rest of the board in their eagerness to get their Duggar bitch fest on. Public announcements seem to go right over their heads :lol:

About the bolded-- can I say the most obnoxious thing is that when someone says something like, "I'm not sure if that's the case" to one of those assertions, the response is often-- "PROVE IT!" Which, I mean, it's not bad to offer up speculative evidence for your point of view, but the onus of proving something is not only on one party. This pops up a lot with the whole money thing. There seems to be an understanding that JB controls all TLC money, even for the married couples. That could be the case because I haven't read the TLC contracts. I find it unlikely to be true simply because that's not the way things would normally work, and I suspect TLC generally operates under typical contractual guidelines and not weird, special, patriarchial guidelines. But if you say that you find it hard to believe that JB controls money even for the married couples, suddenly you have to PROVE IT. Well, no. I can say "I think X because Y." It's valid to hold an opinion that you can't prove. It's also valid for someone else to an opposing opinion they can't prove, by the way. No one has to agree with each other. But it's usually good to have a reason to back up said opinion.