Duggar son allegedly molested girls including sisters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I brought it up as a fact - those were the ages of his sisters. The pp had mentioned the youngest would have been 8, but it could include the five year old.
I guess the oldest or youngest left out based on his "taste" of what age to molest. The 12 yr old could have reached puberty and thus not his liking. Or maybe because she would have been the strongest and able to fend him off and tell mom. Or maybe he didn't want to touch someone as young as 5.
No, it doesn't really matter - he molested young girls. But it is curious why only 4 of his sisters, not 5.

[Anonymous]

Those poor girls, they are in the public eye and now everyone will also remember they were diddled by their brother.

I feel bad for all the comments people are making on their instagrams and I also hope this doesn't somehow "soil" them in the eyes of a potential suitor, that is how these people think.

I'd rather them get out of their free will but if they can't at least let them marry and leave, not be stuck with those asshole parents forever.

I keep fearing Josh is going to move back to arkansas and hide out in that little aluminum room Ben lived in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

The police report says that one of the two oldest sisters was not molested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I brought it up as a fact - those were the ages of his sisters. The pp had mentioned the youngest would have been 8, but it could include the five year old.
I guess the oldest or youngest left out based on his "taste" of what age to molest. The 12 yr old could have reached puberty and thus not his liking. Or maybe because she would have been the strongest and able to fend him off and tell mom. Or maybe he didn't want to touch someone as young as 5.
No, it doesn't really matter - he molested young girls. But it is curious why only 4 of his sisters, not 5.

Precisely - takes one to know one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

The police report says that one of the two oldest sisters was not molested.

Yes... so then it wouldn't be logical to assume the youngest wasn't molested or to assume it was indeed the oldest.

[Anonymous]

Let's not go down this route. He assaulted his sisters. That's bad enough. Debating his preferences in age accomplishes nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those poor girls, they are in the public eye and now everyone will also remember they were diddled by their brother.

I feel bad for all the comments people are making on their instagrams and I also hope this doesn't somehow "soil" them in the eyes of a potential suitor, that is how these people think.

I'd rather them get out of their free will but if they can't at least let them marry and leave, not be stuck with those asshole parents forever.

I keep fearing Josh is going to move back to arkansas and hide out in that little aluminum room Ben lived in.

Josh bought a house in Arkansas earlier this year. So if he can make it right with the IRS, he and his family can live there.

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2015/04/josh-and-anna-duggar-buy-new-house-despite-major-tax-debt/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those poor girls, they are in the public eye and now everyone will also remember they were diddled by their brother.

I feel bad for all the comments people are making on their instagrams and I also hope this doesn't somehow "soil" them in the eyes of a potential suitor, that is how these people think.

I'd rather them get out of their free will but if they can't at least let them marry and leave, not be stuck with those asshole parents forever.

I keep fearing Josh is going to move back to arkansas and hide out in that little aluminum room Ben lived in.

Josh bought a house in Arkansas earlier this year. So if he can make it right with the IRS, he and his family can live there.

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2015/04/josh-and-anna-duggar-buy-new-house-despite-major-tax-debt/

I think they have seen this coming for a while now. Thats why the last few episodes this season were basically wrapping things up and then a Q&A "finale".

[Anonymous]

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2015/05/19-kids-and-counting-to-continue-after-tlc-fires-josh-duggar/

I hope if they do just fire Josh and bring the show back they at least address the issue.

If TLC had any sort of heart they wouldn't bring back anything JimBob controlled. Let Jill and Jessa have the show along with any other girls that get married or hopefully escape.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure the surprise when the parents left the kids to parent themselves and each other. They may have parented the first few, but its clear the older kids are basically raising the younger ones when the parents are traveling and doing their own thing. Its pretty tragic for all the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Who is defending molestation? I'm asking people not to replace, create, or subtract the facts of what actually happened. Honesty shouldn't be so complicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Who is defending molestation? I'm asking people not to replace, create, or subtract the facts of what actually happened. Honesty shouldn't be so complicated.

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

Unnecessary and unkind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Who is defending molestation? I'm asking people not to replace, create, or subtract the facts of what actually happened. Honesty shouldn't be so complicated.

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

I've been called gross, a liar and a defender of molesters because I am asking posters to not make things up. I'm not the one with social problems, honey. Too many of you guys are just hateful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP: Okay, but you continue to do it ad nauseam, we get it. Shoving your view down a persons throat isn't going to make them agree with you and you cannot control what people post in this thread.

Also it does look a bit like you are defending molestation or making light of it, hence why people are having a bit of fun at your expense because you are getting on their nerves.

I say this kindly are you a bit socially awkward or on the spectrum, because you are not taking social clues very well. We get it.

Unnecessary and unkind.

Hmm an explanation that the PP was asking for. Some clues as to why people might be poking fun at them. Asking a question to try to understand why this was happening.

Not unnecessary or unkind. But, okay.