Josh Duggar arrested and in federal custody

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is disgusting. It does make me wonder if he experienced sexual abuse as a child. There is something so creepy about Jim Bob. I think Anna is a victim here, she doesn't know how to get herself or children out of a horrible situation.

She may be a victim but if she can’t keep her children away from a sexual abuser, then she is not a competent legal guardian.

+1 As a mother, I can't understand not having that instinct to get your kids away from something like that. It wouldn't take me half a second to run far away from someone like that if I had kids with him....regardless of any religious brainwashing. Being a mother comes first.

I mean women not fundy brainwashed women allow their children to be abused by their boyfriends and husbands every day.

No one here is saying that there aren’t crappy mothers. But if you’re not a terrible mom, you do whatever you can to protect your children from major harm such as potential sexual abuse - regardless of what you’ve been through or what you’re dealing with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is disgusting. It does make me wonder if he experienced sexual abuse as a child. There is something so creepy about Jim Bob. I think Anna is a victim here, she doesn't know how to get herself or children out of a horrible situation.

She may be a victim but if she can’t keep her children away from a sexual abuser, then she is not a competent legal guardian.

+1 As a mother, I can't understand not having that instinct to get your kids away from something like that. It wouldn't take me half a second to run far away from someone like that if I had kids with him....regardless of any religious brainwashing. Being a mother comes first.

You clearly don't understand brainwashing or humans. If being a mother was all it took from preventing child abuse we'd be a lot better off in this world, Sadly,it doesn't work that way.

That’s not what she said.

That's ecactly what she said.. PP is well meaning but she's ignorant and naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is disgusting. It does make me wonder if he experienced sexual abuse as a child. There is something so creepy about Jim Bob. I think Anna is a victim here, she doesn't know how to get herself or children out of a horrible situation.

She may be a victim but if she can’t keep her children away from a sexual abuser, then she is not a competent legal guardian.

+1 As a mother, I can't understand not having that instinct to get your kids away from something like that. It wouldn't take me half a second to run far away from someone like that if I had kids with him....regardless of any religious brainwashing. Being a mother comes first.

I mean women not fundy brainwashed women allow their children to be abused by their boyfriends and husbands every day.

No one here is saying that there aren’t crappy mothers. But if you’re not a terrible mom, you do whatever you can to protect your children from major harm such as potential sexual abuse - regardless of what you’ve been through or what you’re dealing with.

But pp and others seem to thinj that this just something mothers do instinctively it's not. It just isn't so Comments about how You would never let your child be abused are both stupid and irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is disgusting. It does make me wonder if he experienced sexual abuse as a child. There is something so creepy about Jim Bob. I think Anna is a victim here, she doesn't know how to get herself or children out of a horrible situation.

She may be a victim but if she can’t keep her children away from a sexual abuser, then she is not a competent legal guardian.

+1 As a mother, I can't understand not having that instinct to get your kids away from something like that. It wouldn't take me half a second to run far away from someone like that if I had kids with him....regardless of any religious brainwashing. Being a mother comes first.

I mean women not fundy brainwashed women allow their children to be abused by their boyfriends and husbands every day.

seriously, there is always one Perfect Parent Karen who shows up in threads like these saying they would never allow this and they don't understand moms who do. Well duh lady. No remotely healthy functional person would ever allow this, or anything close to this, ever.

Anna's brain is not responding to the primal urge to protect her children because her brain is broken. Maybe her brain was wired wrong from birth -- it happens. Or maybe she once had the correct wiring in there, but her brain was broken by lies, fear (of abuse, of going to hell for divorce, take your pick) and a cult -- this stuff is trauma -- it actually rewrites your brain pathways. She's not behaving like you would because she's not you.

+1

And historically speaking, this severing of the maternal instance thanks to cultural conditioning is pretty common. Think femicide in China, Spartan mothers getting happy about their kids dying in battle and letting babies who looked weak be left out to die... I won’t go on because this is depressing.

Anyway, she should be held accountable, because cultural conditioning is a reason but not an excuse, but I wouldn’t assume that she actually could have made different choices.

You guys are stripping her of her agency, which dehumanizes her. All of us have agency, no matter how tough our lives have been.

And it doesn’t take a Perfect Parent Karen to know that you ought to keep your children away from sexual abusers. Get real.

[Anonymous]

If he’s convicted, and for some reason only gets minimal jail time/house arrest. He should not be allowed to be around ANY children, including his own, without a court appointed designee to supervise the entire visit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is disgusting. It does make me wonder if he experienced sexual abuse as a child. There is something so creepy about Jim Bob. I think Anna is a victim here, she doesn't know how to get herself or children out of a horrible situation.

She may be a victim but if she can’t keep her children away from a sexual abuser, then she is not a competent legal guardian.

This. And if she "didn't know how to get herself or children out of a horrible situation," accepting the help with doing just that offered by at least two different family members would have been an excellent start.

+1. Why are people acting like she’s a small child or something? She’s a grown woman making choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The worst part of all this? Nothing is going to happen to him. He might get house arrest. But they will let him walk.

No they won’t. You don’t know the feds on child pornography.

I know people who had house arrest and that was it. I am serious when I say nothing will happen.

What was the nature of the CP? How solid was the evidence that they searched for and downloaded it themselves? How many files? I am sure you’re serious but not sure you know what you’re talking about.

It was over 600 files. I know what I am talking about. In this politcal climate, he may get more. But see above about the guy who had 6 months to a year max and then just went home. They seriously don't do anything to these guys. It made me lose a lot of faith in the system. It also scared me to death he wasn't on the sex offenders list. He can't go near schools etc but no nieghbor would know except for neighborhood gossip and some pointed googling.

I can’t remember the name of the guy but there was a thread in the real estate forum because the house was on the market - the house where he actually made videos of his own kids. Another Republican strategist/lobbyist. He only ended up serving four years IIRC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I know it’s fiction, but what about the mother in “Room”? She should have lost her child because she didn’t keep him safe? She didn’t escape when she could have?

I’m sorry, but I 100% think Anna was essentially held captive.

Plus if she divorced him he'd have the kids without supervision half the time. We see moms on this board saying they won't divorce their poor executive functioning DHs because the kids would be the ones to suffer when they forget to pack their sports equipment; this is that concern to the millionth degree.

You’re just making this up. None of us know if this would have been true. We don’t know everything he did, and we don’t know everything she knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys know Josh is the actual pervert here, right? What’s the obsession with Anna?

This one is easy actually. Because we can and do accept that some members of society are simply evil -- like Josh. This is black and white, uncomplicated in some way.

What is much harder to accept and understand -- what becomes galling -- are the enablers. The seemingly average, everyday people who surround the evil person, enable that person, could have prevented more harm ... and didn't. And that leaves us asking, demanding: How could they?

Well said!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I know it’s fiction, but what about the mother in “Room”? She should have lost her child because she didn’t keep him safe? She didn’t escape when she could have?

I’m sorry, but I 100% think Anna was essentially held captive.

Plus if she divorced him he'd have the kids without supervision half the time. We see moms on this board saying they won't divorce their poor executive functioning DHs because the kids would be the ones to suffer when they forget to pack their sports equipment; this is that concern to the millionth degree.

Would he though? Considering the crimes he's now been charged with? I'd think he'd automatically lose custody, no? A poor executive functioning DH is very different from a DH who is a known pedophile and sex offender I would think.

No. He wasn't charged with these crimes until today - people are saying she's guilty for not leaving him earlier. One of his previous scandals, the one where her brother offered to put her up, was cheating on Ashley Madison. There's zero chance he'd automatically lose custody for infidelity. Men who have put their wives and kids in the hospital in documented abuse cases still get custody. It's fantasy land to say that because he molested his sisters (and ostensibly stopped) 20 years prior a judge wouldn't let him have custody of his kids.

This is all ridiculous conjecture. You have no idea what sort of evidence the judge would see before deciding on custody. You guys are just making stuff up. I’m not sure why, but it seems like it’s because you want to excuse Anna’s choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys know Josh is the actual pervert here, right? What’s the obsession with Anna?

This one is easy actually. Because we can and do accept that some members of society are simply evil -- like Josh. This is black and white, uncomplicated in some way.

What is much harder to accept and understand -- what becomes galling -- are the enablers. The seemingly average, everyday people who surround the evil person, enable that person, could have prevented more harm ... and didn't. And that leaves us asking, demanding: How could they?

Well said!

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1

And historically speaking, this severing of the maternal instance thanks to cultural conditioning is pretty common. Think femicide in China, Spartan mothers getting happy about their kids dying in battle and letting babies who looked weak be left out to die... I won’t go on because this is depressing.

Anyway, she should be held accountable, because cultural conditioning is a reason but not an excuse, but I wouldn’t assume that she actually could have made different choices.

Accountable for what, and by whom?

NP here. She should be held accountable depending on what she knew or allowed if she allowed Josh to abuse their children or other children. For all we know Anna may have been helping the feds whie continuing to play fundy wife. If she's not involved in abusing the kids I sincerely hope she finally gets herself and her kids out.

He has not been charged with abusing children. Yet you want to hold Anna accountable for it? When there has been nothing to indicate it even happened?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If he’s convicted, and for some reason only gets minimal jail time/house arrest. He should not be allowed to be around ANY children, including his own, without a court appointed designee to supervise the entire visit.

My coworker (well, former coworker) was convicted on child porn charges, sentenced to 5 years, and had to register as a sex offender when released. I don’t know what happened with custody of his own child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1

And historically speaking, this severing of the maternal instance thanks to cultural conditioning is pretty common. Think femicide in China, Spartan mothers getting happy about their kids dying in battle and letting babies who looked weak be left out to die... I won’t go on because this is depressing.

Anyway, she should be held accountable, because cultural conditioning is a reason but not an excuse, but I wouldn’t assume that she actually could have made different choices.

Accountable for what, and by whom?

She was the only other adult who did not protect her kids. Child services will take them away. She should be in jail. She knowingly had more children with a known child molester.

There is absolutely no indication that Josh Duggar's kids were ever in danger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I know it’s fiction, but what about the mother in “Room”? She should have lost her child because she didn’t keep him safe? She didn’t escape when she could have?

I’m sorry, but I 100% think Anna was essentially held captive.

Plus if she divorced him he'd have the kids without supervision half the time. We see moms on this board saying they won't divorce their poor executive functioning DHs because the kids would be the ones to suffer when they forget to pack their sports equipment; this is that concern to the millionth degree.

Would he though? Considering the crimes he's now been charged with? I'd think he'd automatically lose custody, no? A poor executive functioning DH is very different from a DH who is a known pedophile and sex offender I would think.

No. He wasn't charged with these crimes until today - people are saying she's guilty for not leaving him earlier. One of his previous scandals, the one where her brother offered to put her up, was cheating on Ashley Madison. There's zero chance he'd automatically lose custody for infidelity. Men who have put their wives and kids in the hospital in documented abuse cases still get custody. It's fantasy land to say that because he molested his sisters (and ostensibly stopped) 20 years prior a judge wouldn't let him have custody of his kids.

This is all ridiculous conjecture. You have no idea what sort of evidence the judge would see before deciding on custody. You guys are just making stuff up. I’m not sure why, but it seems like it’s because you want to excuse Anna’s choices.

This whole thread is ridiculous conjecture except maybe for the occasional lawyer who has real experience with these types of charges.