Duggar son allegedly molested girls including sisters

[Anonymous]

I think we can agree that for any family this would be a very difficult situation. You would want to protect your teenage son from a lifetime of castigation and judgment from society, but you would want the behavior to stop immediately. I can empathize with that challenge. I personally think they made a big mistake. I think that the first and most important decision they should have made was to get Josh away from the girls, because however you may wish to classify the damage being done to them, there WAS damage being done. Perhaps not rape, but something that would make any girl upset. I imagine in a house where sex outside of procreation was absolutely verboten, the fondling/molestation would be very difficult to even verbalize. By my math, if it started when Josh was 14 as is claimed, then the girls would be as young as 8. These are children who in my mind are too young to handle such a large decision as forgiving the sinner (which is what I believe the statements say happened -- that Josh confessed, apologized and was forgiven in the family setting).

I would have also hoped sincerely to protect my son from having his whole life ruined by his actions, of course. But I would have first addressed the damage being done within the family by his actions, then work to get him the kind of help he clearly needed. And to get the girls the help they would need to deal with this.

That's just my take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I view the 14-year-old as much of a victim as his sisters. He was hardly raised in a healthy household.

I also wonder what people think should happen to a 14 year old who does this. There life should just be over in your book? 14 is still a child. 15 is still a child.

They should suffer consequences and be counseled. They should also be monitored so no one else becomes their victims... you know, like we do with sexual predators.

What consequences should a 14-year-old CHILD suffer?

How should they be monitored? Put on a sex offender list, where they will never be able to hold a job or maybe even find a place to live?

I would not want this to happen to my brother because he touched my breast. Total overkill.

+1

I also think if a 14 year old molested/raped (whatever to that whacky pp and their semantics) their child they wouldn't be crying out that the predator was a CHILD.

So, what do you want done to him? Be specific. And are you willing to have that punishment done to your own son if he touched someone's breast?

He didn't just touch someone's breast once. He REPEATEDLY fondled genetalia on MULTIPLE victims when they were sleeping. I assume they woke up at some point during the fondling and were too shocked to do anything. And these are much younger girls, ages 5-12. He had reached puberty and was turned on by prepubescent children. This isn't "oh, he touched a breast". He did far more, to young children, when they are at the most vulnerable.
Sick. Yes, he should have to register for his entire life.

And to be clear: This is also what you would demand for your 14-year-old son?

Yes. He would pay for his crime, receive counseling that actually addresses the issue, and yes, register for the rest of his life. Would I want him in prison with adults? No. But juvenile jail, of course, and for a reasonable duration (more than a few months but not 20 years).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

Apples and fucking oranges.

Exactly. Some guy gropes you at a bar or wherever, you set him straight and move on. Your brother does it to you, in your house and in your bedroom, that's very different. That's a huge violation of trust.

I agree.

A little anecdote here. I have a big brother and I never have to worry about anything while he is around. Jr High/High School - No one messed with me. He always dealt with any problems, anyone getting handsy when I didn't want them to. When I went off to college I was amazed how much he actually did, but it had also taught me not to put up with shit I didn't want.

When a friend confided to me that her brother used to touch her (much like Josh "the animal" Duggar) it made me so freaking sad, because I saw my big brother as a protector, a role I think most big brothers are expected to take on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just can't believe we're debating the definition of what TYPE of assault he committed...

what the fuck does it matter? He sexually assaulted his own damn sisters!

+1

It has also been asked and answered about 10 times along with if you'd want this for your 14yo son. He just won't let up.

I guess we should be saying "Hi JimBob, thanks for stopping by the thread."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little anecdote here. I have a big brother and I never have to worry about anything while he is around. Jr High/High School - No one messed with me. He always dealt with any problems, anyone getting handsy when I didn't want them to. When I went off to college I was amazed how much he actually did, but it had also taught me not to put up with shit I didn't want.

When a friend confided to me that her brother used to touch her (much like Josh "the animal" Duggar) it made me so freaking sad, because I saw my big brother as a protector, a role I think most big brothers are expected to take on.

I think this is an important point to emphasize. This wasn't a stranger but someone who was supposed to set an example for the rest of the family.

I think there has been a huge betrayal by the Duggar family to the public. I am thinking back to many of those on-camera confessionals where Josh talked about growing up where he realized early on and was told by his parents that he needed to set an example for his brothers and sisters. It just seems creepy given that he had a two year spell of molesting these siblings.

I get that people can do terrible things and can repent. But then I think it's a betrayal if you go on camera day after day to espouse values which you yourself have not been able to uphold. And I also think it is clear they very much wanted this to be hidden, which is understandable but also undermines their credibility. They have talked about the sin of birth control in about 100 episodes and how they learned from that (when God made them miscarriage baby number 2). The sins of molesting one's siblings? Silent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think we can agree that for any family this would be a very difficult situation. You would want to protect your teenage son from a lifetime of castigation and judgment from society, but you would want the behavior to stop immediately. I can empathize with that challenge. I personally think they made a big mistake. I think that the first and most important decision they should have made was to get Josh away from the girls, because however you may wish to classify the damage being done to them, there WAS damage being done. Perhaps not rape, but something that would make any girl upset. I imagine in a house where sex outside of procreation was absolutely verboten, the fondling/molestation would be very difficult to even verbalize. By my math, if it started when Josh was 14 as is claimed, then the girls would be as young as 8. These are children who in my mind are too young to handle such a large decision as forgiving the sinner (which is what I believe the statements say happened -- that Josh confessed, apologized and was forgiven in the family setting).

I would have also hoped sincerely to protect my son from having his whole life ruined by his actions, of course. But I would have first addressed the damage being done within the family by his actions, then work to get him the kind of help he clearly needed. And to get the girls the help they would need to deal with this.

That's just my take.

The report states 4 sisters (out of 5 at the time). They would have been 12, 10, 9, 8, and 5. It is logical to assume either the oldest or youngest wasn't molested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little anecdote here. I have a big brother and I never have to worry about anything while he is around. Jr High/High School - No one messed with me. He always dealt with any problems, anyone getting handsy when I didn't want them to. When I went off to college I was amazed how much he actually did, but it had also taught me not to put up with shit I didn't want.

When a friend confided to me that her brother used to touch her (much like Josh "the animal" Duggar) it made me so freaking sad, because I saw my big brother as a protector, a role I think most big brothers are expected to take on.

I think this is an important point to emphasize. This wasn't a stranger but someone who was supposed to set an example for the rest of the family.

I think there has been a huge betrayal by the Duggar family to the public. I am thinking back to many of those on-camera confessionals where Josh talked about growing up where he realized early on and was told by his parents that he needed to set an example for his brothers and sisters. It just seems creepy given that he had a two year spell of molesting these siblings.

I get that people can do terrible things and can repent. But then I think it's a betrayal if you go on camera day after day to espouse values which you yourself have not been able to uphold. And I also think it is clear they very much wanted this to be hidden, which is understandable but also undermines their credibility. They have talked about the sin of birth control in about 100 episodes and how they learned from that (when God made them miscarriage baby number 2). The sins of molesting one's siblings? Silent.

Yes, exactly. If I had a child that molested a sibling, my actions would have been much different. And I would not seek out TV stardom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I've been fondled and groped in crowd settings. I viewed it as gross, but not rape. I didn't call the cops -- I just moved away from the scene.

Apples and fucking oranges.

+1
Let's review: being fondled/groped/ground against in a public place as an adult vs. your teenaged brother - who, as a male you have been explicitly taught you are to be subservient to - coming into your room in your home, the place where you are supposed feel safe above all else, entering your room while you sleep and possibly digitally penetrating you? I repeat, WTF is wrong with you? Yeah, those little girls should totally have moved away from the scene!

WTF is "wrong" with me apparently is I'm able to take a multifaceted view of the issue, instead of just lighting up my torch and hauling out my pitchfork.

Oh, you mistook my pen and cellphone for a torch and pitchfork? Interesting. FTR, I'm the pp who would advocate turning him into the authorities, getting him from the house, getting him, his sisters and his parents therapy. Ooh. Scary. You're right. That's a complete overreaction to a big brother sexually molesting his sisters in their own home. But please, tell us all about your "multifaceted" view of incest with a touch of pedophilia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can agree that for any family this would be a very difficult situation. You would want to protect your teenage son from a lifetime of castigation and judgment from society, but you would want the behavior to stop immediately. I can empathize with that challenge. I personally think they made a big mistake. I think that the first and most important decision they should have made was to get Josh away from the girls, because however you may wish to classify the damage being done to them, there WAS damage being done. Perhaps not rape, but something that would make any girl upset. I imagine in a house where sex outside of procreation was absolutely verboten, the fondling/molestation would be very difficult to even verbalize. By my math, if it started when Josh was 14 as is claimed, then the girls would be as young as 8. These are children who in my mind are too young to handle such a large decision as forgiving the sinner (which is what I believe the statements say happened -- that Josh confessed, apologized and was forgiven in the family setting).

I would have also hoped sincerely to protect my son from having his whole life ruined by his actions, of course. But I would have first addressed the damage being done within the family by his actions, then work to get him the kind of help he clearly needed. And to get the girls the help they would need to deal with this.

That's just my take.

The report states 4 sisters (out of 5 at the time). They would have been 12, 10, 9, 8, and 5. It is logical to assume either the oldest or youngest wasn't molested.

How is that logical to assume?

[Anonymous]

Pp, why does it matter if the oldest or youngest wasn't molested? 4 out of 5 were - who cares which one was "left out"?

[Anonymous]

While this is certainly not a fact this is a heads up FYI, when you begin to defend (and split hairs) molestation and pedophilia most people think or at least wonder if you are a pedophile yourself, or have some other skeleton in your closet that makes you sympathetic.

Just a PSA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pp, why does it matter if the oldest or youngest wasn't molested? 4 out of 5 were - who cares which one was "left out"?

Exactly. Maybe the 5th couldn't or wouldn't tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While this is certainly not a fact this is a heads up FYI, when you begin to defend (and split hairs) molestation and pedophilia most people think or at least wonder if you are a pedophile yourself, or have some other skeleton in your closet that makes you sympathetic.

Just a PSA

Ha! Like the state trooper/child pornographer who gave the "stern" talking to...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just can't believe we're debating the definition of what TYPE of assault he committed...

what the fuck does it matter? He sexually assaulted his own damn sisters!

Let's just go ahead and call it "sodomy" from here on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't believe we're debating the definition of what TYPE of assault he committed...

what the fuck does it matter? He sexually assaulted his own damn sisters!

Let's just go ahead and call it "sodomy" from here on.

While this is certainly not a fact this is a heads up FYI, when you begin to defend (and split hairs) molestation and pedophilia most people think or at least wonder if you are a pedophile yourself, or have some other skeleton in your closet that makes you sympathetic.

Just a PSA