Life Is Short; Have an Affair

[The Grand Nudger]

Perhaps the guy was just inclined to be a molestor - it's a possibility...but that doesn't change the encouraging nature of his upbringing, which I don't -have- to consult anyones personal psych for...as they saw fit to air that load of laundry on TV. Maybe we could cut the shit, between us. Its not the parents, you're concerned about the incrimination of their "christian" upbringing. They're not catholics, you're safe. You don't -have- to have a dog in that fight.

Was their upbringing a recipe for disaster? Yes, it was. Argue that until you're blue in the face for whatever reason, but I think it's silly to do so.

[Catholic_Lady]

Perhaps the guy was just inclined to be a molestor - it's a possibility...but that doesn't change the encouraging nature of his upbringing, which I don't -have- to consult anyones personal psych for...as they saw fit to air that load of laundry on TV.  Maybe we could cut the shit, between us.  Its not the parents, you're concerned about the incrimination of their "christian" upbringing.  They're not catholics, you're safe.  You don't -have- to have a dog in that fight.

Was their upbringing a recipe for disaster?  Yes, it was.  Argue that until you're blue in the face for whatever reason, but I think it's silly to do so.

You're assuming that the only reason I'm defending Josh's parents' upbringing is because they're Christian, and then accusing me of it. Same as you are assuming Josh's parents' upbringing is the reason why Josh molested girls.

Assuming and then making accusations at people based on those assumptions is foolish and rash and unfair. This is pretty basic principle.

[Minimalist]

People who are as uptight about sex as those fuckers always seem to have a couple of screws loose.  Here's the latest:

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/adult-ac...happiness/

Adult actress claims Josh Duggar paid her for sex while wife was pregnant: ‘I don’t think he deserves happiness’

He's quite a nasty little shit.  Perhaps jesus loves him?

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm not actually assuming, Cath.....but it doesn't matter.  I was simply hoping to take that weight off your chest in order to give you more room to move.   Do you object to the contents of my explanation, do you object to our repeated observations of correlation? Do you object to the notion, specifically, that sexual repression - regardless of reason or intent or ideological foundation, has a non-random effect?

[thesummerqueen]

Not necessarily. Nature vs nurture are more nuanced than that.

I know they are, lol. That's my point. You can't say "oh there's no way this person is this way due to nature because his dad isn't this way" in the same way that you can't say "oh there's no way this person is this way because of nurture because his siblings aren't the same way." I agree, they are more nuanced. Both of them. I was using Vic's own logic about the former to make a case for the latter, but truth is they are both weak points. I just don't think we should pretend to be someone's psychologist and say the person's upbringing by the parents caused them to do whatever horrible thing they did. It's rash judgement, and unfair to the parents.

You must have missed the part where I said the parents could entirely be to blame if only because they were also raised in such environments.

There's a concept that people who grew up with relatives who have NPD call "fleas" - you can't help but catch some of the shit these people fling off. I think that's true of just about any upbringing. My father grew up with what I am now 99% sure was a mother and sister (my aunt) both suffering (happily suffering, it seemed) from NPD. The things he dealt with were things he in turn projected and inflicted on me, on a much lesser scale, but it's still there. I've since come to terms with it, now that I understand it.

Anyway, my point is that Josh's parents could likewise have been raised in such an environment, and possibly their parents too, and they're only further spreading a repressive, toxic and selfish worldview onto their children. And while we haven't heard that any of the other children have done those things yet, it's possible that more of them had that potential, but a variety of complicated reasons means Josh is the only one who did something about it - anything from his individual personality to his ranking in the pack to something he got told once by someone when he was a kid. You say you can't blame the parents. I say you can, at least in part. Why? Because when he did it, he was 14 years old. Still a minor, and theoretically still under the teaching and guidance of those parents, as were his sisters.

Apparently steps were taken to 'help' Josh and they were irresponsible and did nothing to help or protect the sisters. Most parents I know in my secular community would have moved the earth to make sure their kids got the appropriate therapy they needed. The Duggers didn't. You're damn right I blame them, even if they are part of a cycle and not the initiators, because guaranteed there were signs before the molestations happened that they didn't pay attention to or treat properly.

[Catholic_Lady]

I'm not actually assuming, Cath.....but it doesn't matter.  I was simply hoping to take that weight off your chest in order to give you more room to move.   Do you object to the contents of my explanation, do you object to our repeated observations of correlation?  Do you object to the notion, specifically, that sexual repression - regardless of reason or intent or ideological foundation, has a non-random effect?

I appreciate it but there is no weight on my chest. 

And yes, you were assuming that the only reason I am defending Josh's parents is because they are Christian. This assumption is incorrect. Unless you proclaim yourself a psychic who just read my mind you cannot claim that this is fact rather than your assumption.    

Unless you are a perpetrator's psychologist, I don't think it's right to point fingers at his parent's upbringing for his acts of molestation. This seems extremely basic to me, and I am surprised by the number of people here arguing that it is perfectly appropriate to do so. But I have nothing else to say, so I guess we will just agree to disagree.

[The Grand Nudger]

So....... you do or you don't object to our repeated observations that repressive environments have non-random outcomes? You do....or you don't object to the notion that this particular brand of "christian parenting" is repressive?

[vorlon13]

Have ANY actual real life flesh and blood women turned up in the Ashley Madison data base yet ??

[Catholic_Lady]

So....... you do or you don't object to our repeated observations that repressive environments have non-random outcomes?  You do....or you don't object to the notion that this particular brand of "christian parenting" is repressive?

This is an extremely loaded question. 

First, what you may consider a "repressive environment" might be totally appropriate for someone else who has different beliefs and life styles, and it is not right for me, as an outsider and an unqualified person, to say. Second, sorry but the supposed "repeated observation" of an anonymous person on an online forum really means nothing to me lol. Third, I thought we were talking about the outcome of Josh having molested girls and cheating on his wife, not simply of "non random" outcomes.

Bottom line is it doesn't matter how you ask the question. Yes, I do find it wrong for unqualified people (people who are not his/his family's psychologist) to point fingers at Michelle/Jim Bob's parenting style as a cause for Josh's molestation and unfaithfulness.

[The Grand Nudger]

Um...no, it's not, it's pretty cut and dry.  Repressive environments show strong correlation with sex offense.  You keep telling us that we need a psychs opinion.....well.......what do you think that is?  You think I'm referring to -my- repeated observations?  Knock knock..anyone home? I'd call that outcome non-random..wouldn't you? In that it just so happens to fall in line with a pattern widely studied and opined upon.......by the people whom you've put forward as the proper authorities to defer to......which I keep asking you about.

I can ask the question as many ways and as many times as you can evade it, you realize.