Page 31 of 64 FirstFirst ... 2127282930313233343541 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 465 of 946
Like Tree2490Likes

Thread: 19 Kids and Counting star Josh Duggar was named in an underage sexual abuse probe

  1. #451
    Elite Member Lofty Bike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4,775

    Default

    Josh probably knew that noone would take the younger girls seriously, after all, they were useless at that age, couldn't already raise smaller siblings or clean the house, or cook properly and they were only GIRLS anyway.

  2. #452
    Elite Member NickiDrea's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,735

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNoRehab View Post
    I disagree, NickiDrea. Josh deliberately avoided the sister closest in age to him and targeted his pre-pubescent sisters which indicates he wasn't interested in the bodies or sexual reactions of girls his own age, or girls who'd developed. Having a "sexual outlet" outlet also doesn't stop sexual predators. There is no way to justify it - a 14 year old boy is NOT normally sexually interested in or attracted to 5, 8, 9 and 11 year olds (the ages of his sisters at the time). Wanting to touch a 5 year old's genitals is NOT normal sexual curiosity or urges from a teenage boy, repressed or not. A man interested in young girls is not satisfied with sex with a grown woman, and 14 is old enough to demonstrate sexual preferences.
    Let me ask you- have you ever worked with a sexual predator before? Handled hearing before sex offender boards? Worked with victims of sex assault? Have you ever sat in on a psychosexual? How familiar are you with various levels of sex offender treatment?

    I ask these questions because for me, the answer to all these questions is yes. I can see that my comments might upset people because it seems that I am making excuses for his behavior. But at this point I can probably be considered to be an expert in sex offenses- which was never my intention, it just kind of happened, to some extent against my will. I spend a lot of time training other attorneys and social workers about these cases. I don't look at these cases the way a layperson does- for me, these types of behaviors do not necessarily equal pedophilia or someone who can ever be rehabilitated. I look at the facts, the family dynamics, the age, what the specific acts were, etc. I am saying that based on the bare facts we know, this looks like a case in which a psychosexual would actually say he is at LOW risk to reoffend. Again, that's not based on the level of trauma to the victims which is high no matter what Jessa and the other girls say. It's based on likelihood to re-offend which under these circumstances is probably not all that high, especially now.

    I am not making excuses for Josh, I don't even watch his stupid show and I can't stand his family. But there is a difference between being a sexually violent predator- I have met adult and juvenile SVPs and I don't think they can be rehabilitated, JMO- and someone who acts out in a sexually inappropriate manner. Josh does not appear to fall into the former category.

    I strongly disagree with your comment about sexual outlets and I have to say that the professionals who run sex offenders programs would disagree with you as well. That is why part of sex offender treatment for adults and children involves learning how to identify appropriate sexual outlets (whether it's a consenting same age peer or masturbation) and use them.

    I will not comment on this case any further, it's not my intention to upset anyone with my comments. I am looking at this from a purely legal viewpoint, which by its very nature is objective. I am approaching it the way I would approach any sex case I've been assigned. But this is not really the forum for legal analysis, this is probably not the best place for this type of discussion.
    Last edited by NickiDrea; June 13th, 2015 at 04:34 PM.
    Bombshell, sluce, dilligaf and 6 others like this.
    "Thankfully I'm an educated multi-millionaire who knows better than to speak to perverted unjust cops without my lawyer. "
    "I think she's psychotic...what do I do?" - Jenny Schecter

  3. #453
    Elite Member faithanne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    On the Hellmouth
    Posts
    13,967

    Default

    ^I appreciate your insight.
    czb likes this.
    "You're going to die tomorrow, Lord Bolton. Sleep well."



  4. #454
    Elite Member NoNoRehab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    LYNWOOD JAIL
    Posts
    3,034

    Default

    Sorry, but nothing will convince me of the Duggar party line that any teen boy would be tempted to diddle little girls given the chance. I think it's offensive to men to try and portray that as natural experimentation.
    Janus likes this.
    "Don't trust nobody, and 'nobody' meaning Jay Leno in particular." -Chris Rock

  5. #455
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,383

    Default

    That is your bias. It is not just a Duggar party line. No one says the parents handled this correctly but your leaps in diagnosis are based on your opinions, not reality or facts.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  6. #456
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    14,944

    Default

    To be fair, no one here as all of the facts. We're going on one police report and news articles. No one here has interviewed the involved parties or been privy to any testing or analysis by professionals.

    I appreciate everyone's point of view, particularly those who work in the field, but Nono makes a point I can't quite get past either. Josh may not be likely to re-offend but molesting a 5 year old seems more pathological than inappropriate / confused. In my totally laymen's opinion (notwithstanding my degree from Rolling Stone).
    sluce likes this.
    if you're so incensed that you can't fly your penis in public take it up with your state, arrange a nude protest, go and be the rosa parks of cocks or something - witchcurlgirl

  7. #457
    Elite Member NoNoRehab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    LYNWOOD JAIL
    Posts
    3,034

    Default

    When I was in kindergarten, my three older brothers were ages 12-15. I just know that we grew up in the country, before the Internet, no cable, etc. (so no easy access to porn and nudity) and not one of them ever got horny and thought, "I'm curious about vaginas, I know, let me finger my little sis while she sits on my lap."
    Bluebonnet and Janus like this.
    "Don't trust nobody, and 'nobody' meaning Jay Leno in particular." -Chris Rock

  8. #458
    Elite Member sluce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Top Secret Spy for Leann Rimes
    Posts
    37,383

    Default

    They also had access to other normal outlets for normal development. And you would be shocked by how many do look at, and even touch, little siblings out of curiosity. Very few grow up to commit sex crimes.
    You don't engage with crazies. Because they're, you know, fucking crazy. - WitchCurlGirl

  9. #459
    Elite Member MsDark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Northwest MS/Memphis TN
    Posts
    31,640

    Default

    In other words...jerking off. You guys had a Sears catalog right?
    joebob likes this.
    My Posts Have Won Awards. Can Any Of You Claim The Same? -ur_next_ex

    "I don't have pet peeves. I have major psychotic fucking hatreds, okay". ~George Carlin

  10. #460
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNoRehab View Post
    Sorry, but nothing will convince me of the Duggar party line that any teen boy would be tempted to diddle little girls given the chance. I think it's offensive to men to try and portray that as natural experimentation.
    I agree. It's the "boys will be boys" mentality.

    Fact is, we know he didn't receive any appropriate help (no religious "counselling" doesn't count). Fact is, we know from the police reports this went on for years, and he was escalating his behaviour. He could have continued on after that, but we don't know because the police report is "the end" of the insight we got. Given the absolute disgusting minimization going on from the parents and the Duggar supporters, they'd never admit if he did anything else or anything worse.

    The whole "well he'll leave children alone now that he's got a wife to have sex with whenever he demands is" is the whole reason he got married off so quick, so that's "Duggar-thinking" again. I think it's such a fundamental misunderstanding of child molestors there...that they are only "opportunists" and it isn't a preference.

    I think for people to "pull rank" on an internet forum (where you can be anything you want to be) is a bit lame in this case, because you people saying that haven't spoken to Josh, you aren't dealing with him or his victims, nor have you ever, so for you to state from the ivory tower of the Internet "he won't do this" and he "probably won't do that" is just wrong.

    At least today I've learned that the "violent" sex offenders are the only true sex offenders. If you molest/rape a child/woman/man but don't cause any lasting damage and aren't "violent" with them, then hey ho! you're not a disgusting pervert!






    Yeah, not buying, nor the "violent" qualifier there. What an underhanded way to try and pull rank and toe the party line. Disgusting!

  11. #461
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    59,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janus View Post
    I think for people to "pull rank" on an internet forum (where you can be anything you want to be) is a bit lame in this case,
    ?
    "But I am very poorly today & very stupid & I hate everybody & everything." -- Charles Darwin

  12. #462
    czb
    czb is offline
    Elite Member czb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    left coast
    Posts
    17,939

    Default

    quote overload!

  13. #463
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    58,150

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NickiDrea View Post
    Let me ask you- have you ever worked with a sexual predator before? Handled hearing before sex offender boards? Worked with victims of sex assault? Have you ever sat in on a psychosexual? How familiar are you with various levels of sex offender treatment?

    I ask these questions because for me, the answer to all these questions is yes. I can see that my comments might upset people because it seems that I am making excuses for his behavior. But at this point I can probably be considered to be an expert in sex offenses- which was never my intention, it just kind of happened, to some extent against my will. I spend a lot of time training other attorneys and social workers about these cases. I don't look at these cases the way a layperson does- for me, these types of behaviors do not necessarily equal pedophilia or someone who can ever be rehabilitated. I look at the facts, the family dynamics, the age, what the specific acts were, etc. I am saying that based on the bare facts we know, this looks like a case in which a psychosexual would actually say he is at LOW risk to reoffend. Again, that's not based on the level of trauma to the victims which is high no matter what Jessa and the other girls say. It's based on likelihood to re-offend which under these circumstances is probably not all that high, especially now.

    I am not making excuses for Josh, I don't even watch his stupid show and I can't stand his family. But there is a difference between being a sexually violent predator- I have met adult and juvenile SVPs and I don't think they can be rehabilitated, JMO- and someone who acts out in a sexually inappropriate manner. Josh does not appear to fall into the former category.

    I strongly disagree with your comment about sexual outlets and I have to say that the professionals who run sex offenders programs would disagree with you as well. That is why part of sex offender treatment for adults and children involves learning how to identify appropriate sexual outlets (whether it's a consenting same age peer or masturbation) and use them.

    I will not comment on this case any further, it's not my intention to upset anyone with my comments. I am looking at this from a purely legal viewpoint, which by its very nature is objective. I am approaching it the way I would approach any sex case I've been assigned. But this is not really the forum for legal analysis, this is probably not the best place for this type of discussion.
    i appreciate your insight as well and i hope you still choose to comment on this and other similar topics. i appreciate it a lot more than the irrational, knee-jerk, race-to-be-the-most-outraged self-righteous indignation crap that comes out whenever a case like this makes the news. nothing is black and white, not even child abuse. approaching things objectively doesn't mean you're condoning, just explaining that not all sex offenders are created equal and gravity and recidivism rates will vary depending on motivation and a myriad other factors.
    Last edited by sputnik; June 16th, 2015 at 11:26 AM.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  14. #464
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    14,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janus View Post
    I agree. It's the "boys will be boys" mentality.

    Fact is, we know he didn't receive any appropriate help (no religious "counselling" doesn't count). Fact is, we know from the police reports this went on for years, and he was escalating his behaviour. He could have continued on after that, but we don't know because the police report is "the end" of the insight we got. Given the absolute disgusting minimization going on from the parents and the Duggar supporters, they'd never admit if he did anything else or anything worse.

    The whole "well he'll leave children alone now that he's got a wife to have sex with whenever he demands is" is the whole reason he got married off so quick, so that's "Duggar-thinking" again. I think it's such a fundamental misunderstanding of child molestors there...that they are only "opportunists" and it isn't a preference.

    I think for people to "pull rank" on an internet forum (where you can be anything you want to be) is a bit lame in this case, because you people saying that haven't spoken to Josh, you aren't dealing with him or his victims, nor have you ever, so for you to state from the ivory tower of the Internet "he won't do this" and he "probably won't do that" is just wrong.

    At least today I've learned that the "violent" sex offenders are the only true sex offenders. If you molest/rape a child/woman/man but don't cause any lasting damage and aren't "violent" with them, then hey ho! you're not a disgusting pervert!






    Yeah, not buying, nor the "violent" qualifier there. What an underhanded way to try and pull rank and toe the party line. Disgusting!
    Non here said that child molesters are only opportunists. No one here said only violent offenders cause lasting damage. You need to read more carefully.
    if you're so incensed that you can't fly your penis in public take it up with your state, arrange a nude protest, go and be the rosa parks of cocks or something - witchcurlgirl

  15. #465
    Elite Member SHELLEE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Florida Keys
    Posts
    24,163

    Default

    Who Needs TLC? Jill Duggar And Her Husband Launch New Company In Case ’19 Kids & Counting’ Is Cancelled


    



    Jill Duggar and her husband Derick Dillard are distancing themselves from the family business in the wake of her brother Josh‘s molestation scandal. RadarOnline.com has learned that on June 17 the couple secretly filed to incorporate their own new business: Dillard Family Ministries.
    “This is how the two plan on supporting themselves since Derick quit his job at Walmart,” reveals a source.


    As Radar reported, Dillard abruptly left the accounting department of the Arkansas-based retailer recently.
    “This new ministry is their ‘Plan B’ now that it’s unlikely their reality show will be coming back,” the source explains.

    The filing, obtained by Radar, shows that Dillard and Duggar have named themselves directors of the new company. The nature of the corporation remains to be seen, but fans have speculated they may be planning a mission to Nepal, where they first met.
    Jill Duggar & Derick Dillard Start New Company | Radar Online
    See, Whores, we are good for something. Love, Florida
    #fingersinthebootyassbitch

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Jessa Duggar Is Being Courted by a Boy Named Ben
    By Bluebonnet in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 239
    Last Post: November 13th, 2015, 12:39 PM
  2. Josh Duggar is to lead an Anti-Gay Hate Group
    By Seth82 in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: January 1st, 2015, 02:31 PM
  3. Replies: 36
    Last Post: September 22nd, 2009, 09:04 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 27th, 2008, 10:33 PM
  5. Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 14th, 2006, 01:41 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •