Why am I Bothered by the Duggars?

This is a first for me … blogging about the Duggars, but the announcement that they are expecting their 20th child bothers me, really bothers me. Beyond what it should.

NBC Today Show

I strongly believe that everyone has a right to do what they want with their life, as long as they aren’t hurting anyone else. I read news stories everyday of people doing things that I think are odd or  unusual, but I usually assume it’s their life, so they can do whatever they want to.

But this announcement from the Duggars bothers me. I only have basic cable, so I’ve never seen their show. I know very little about them, which means I shouldn’t really care what they do with their lives, but for some reason this bothers me.

I’m trying to figure out why their announcement on Today  bothers me.

.

Do I want a TV show like they have?
Do I wish I was married to a man named Jim Bob?
Am I envious because reports say they make at least $50,000 per show.
Is it a numbers thing: Am I jealous because they have 20 children and I have 3?
And they got to use 17 more J-names than I did.

.

No, I don’t think it’s any of those reasons. I think one of the reasons is that when it comes to women, it seems like they and others in the Quiverfull movement give more credit to a woman’s womb than to her brain. 

They believe that if a woman has a working womb, she should use it. They say it’s God’s will. Yet I’ve never heard them say the same about a woman’s brain. If God gave the womb for babies, didn’t he give the brain for thinking?

While I was never in a pronounced quiverfull movement, I know many that lean strongly towards the mindset of allowing God to plan the size of one’s family and at times, I felt guilty that I used my brain to plan a family that I felt was best for my husband and me.

The Duggar’s last baby (#19) was born early with severe medical issues, did they take time to seriously think about all the complications that could happen for Michelle and/or the baby?

Another reason is that the Duggars say since they got pregnant again God must want them to have their 20th child. If they believe everything is a sign or message from God, then why do they not see the medical issues of the last child as a sign to stop having babies?

Vyckie, a former Quiverfull woman who now has a blog called No Longer Qivering: (There Is No ‘You’ In Quivering) explains the problem with that mindset better than I can.

.

As a Quiverfull believer, whenever anything that could be considered good or positive happened in my life ~ I took it as proof that I was doing right and therefore, God was blessing me.

Conversely, whenever anything occurred which wasn’t so great ~ trials, tragedies, hardships ~ these I considered as evidence that I was doing right  and therefore, Satan was upset and he was determined to make me regret having chosen the Quiverfull path.

Either way ~ I *knew* beyond a shadow of a doubt that my Quiverfull ideals were God’s will for me…

So what if God wanted to tell the Duggars to stop?
What could He do to get His message across?

.

Many people lean towards that mindset, not only with family planning, but also other things in life. I used to try to force myself to believe that any and everything was a sign from God, but now I can’t do the mental gymnastics needed to believe that anymore, but how can the Duggars and others say they believe one thing is a sign, but another thing is not?

Some of  the other reasons I’m bothered by their announcement are written about in a post at Mom-In-A-Million. Here’s a few excerpts from it:

.

So, in my opinion, the values of the Duggars are not good. They repress women and girls…

And I’m pretty sure that girls get truly substandard educations because they are being trained to be submissive wives, not independent thinkers …

.

In that post, I Don’t Admire the Duggars, she also goes on to explain why she feels the Duggars are using their children to pay their bills.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Because I believe everyone has the right to choose how to live their own life, I still don’t know quite why this announcement bothers me on the level that it does.

What’s your take on The Duggars?

 

Bookmark and Share
  • Janis

    All humans also have two working fists.  Doesn’t mean we should go out of our way to use them, either.

  • Janiscortese

    There’s another way of looking at it — why do the women have all those babies?  Simply to have them?  And who does all the childcare — the girls in the family, and everyone knows it.  But that trains them to do nothing but have babies … to go and do the same, no college, no education, just trains them to have way too many babies, so they can have way too many babies, and so on.  All just for the sake of reproducing without any question or thought.

    When that happens elsewhere in the kingdom of life — mindless reproduction without thought or planning — it’s called cancer.  Humans are better than that.  As you say, we were given brains so we could be MORE than that, and we should use them.

    If you can tell, I’m not terribly generous toward them either.

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      That is one of my concerns … the girls in the family. What if one of them has no desire to be a wife and/or mother, will they give her the freedom to choose something else? 

  • Brendaboitson

    Love Janis’ comment.  I have a womb.  I have yet to use it and at this point in my life am unsure that I ever will.  A woman’s reproductive choice is important (IMHO) but I do not believe that you should ever do anything to endanger another person, and having a 20th child against the medical desires of your doctoral staff is endangering not just 1, but 2 people.

    • Janis

      It’s also endangering the 18 others as well.  :-(

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1360906588 Karen Lockinger Greenberg

    I have to admit that I agree with you 100% and also can’t figure out why I feel this way.  It really doesn’t hurt me any, and the family does seem to be producing adults that will be able to care for themselves, so it really shouldn’t be bothersome.  But, it is.  If you ever figure out why this rubs you the wrong way, let me know.  Until then, I’ll just stand by, shaking my head along with you.

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      Glad to hear I’m not the only one that is bothered.

      • AG

        This is what bugs me about it…I am #3 of 11, oldest daughter. I very well remember all the extra responsibility that I had and I had no life of my own until I moved out at 18. I saw a comment on this somewhere else that said it so well…Mom is the incubator and then the child goes to his/her older sisters to be cared for and raised! I so feel for the older girls. It’s not their decision for Mom to have so many babies but they are literally stuck caring for them. 

        • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

          Thanks for sharing! 
          I like hearing viewpoints from all angles… and hearing from someone that has lived a similar lifestyle to them is helpful. 

          So I’m curious … do girls that had to mother before they want to mother go on to become mothers themselves? I don’t know your age… but are you a mother and/or do you want to be one?

    • http://www.alise-write.com Alise Wright

      Ugh! Exactly! There’s nothing outright that I can point to and say, “THAT is why this bugs me.” It’s just a bunch of little things. 

  • http://www.garylougher.net/wordpress Gary Lougher

    Janet,

    Thanks for the thought provoking post.

    Kind of taking this in a different direction. I also find it troubling that there is actually a market for this kind of “entertainment”. I find it a sad statement of what our society values. I can’t help but wonder how many people watch this show about a couple with 19 kids while their own children are starving for support and attention. And it happens all the time. People watching other people get healthy, instead of getting healthy; being lonely or allowing their own realtionships to deteriorate while watching some fairly tale; spending an entire Sunday the couch watching wathing sports franchises instead of exercising their own franchise. 

    Thanks again,

    Gary

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      Interesting points Gary – thanks for sharing!
      You are so right that too often we tend to take the easy route, rather than making the most of the life we have. 

  • ShellyK

    I don’t have much to say about the whole story, however, this statement quoted above did not sit well with me…” to be submissive wives, not independent thinkers …”
    I am wondering what kind of proof the author of this comment has in order to make this statement?  I am both a submissive wife AND an independent thinker….it’s very possible to be both!

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      You are right, I think some understandings of submissive do allow a person to be both. But I find it hard to reconcile some of the more extreme understandings of submissive with being an independent thinker. 
      I know a man who said no wife of his will ever use birth control and because they believed that a wife should be submissive to her husband, she never used birth control. How did that allow her to be an independent thinker?

    • Janis

      I’m not seeing how one can be both.  Submissive means doing what the other person wants.  Sure, you can THINK differently, but you’ll ACT on what he says, simply because he says it.

    • lise

      right shellyk. you independently think…i wish i didn’t have to do whatever my husband tells me to…

  • http://www.ayoungmomsmusings.blogspot.com Melissa @Permission to Live

    One thing that bothered me about some of the interviews I’ve seen, is when they ask the kids “how many of you want to have a very very large family” and all of them say they do. Out of all those kids not one says differently, for me that prooves that they have the same brainwashing I had. I’ve been trying to finish a post on this all week, just haven’t been able to pull it together.

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      Melissa … I’ve only watched one interview, so I didn’t notice that, but that is sad. So sad! And that would point towards brainwashing, because there is no way 19 people every think alike about anything without brainwashing or feeling like they don’t have a choice.
      I look forward to your post.

  • http://www.sistersadist.com/ Cam

    I dislike the Duggars. I think it’s ridiculous they are having a 20th child especially with the terrifying issues they had with #19. The whole thing makes my stomach turn, especially as a pro-independent-thinking-woman-in-control-of-her-reproductive-organs. Submission is not an option. 

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      I like this description  … “a pro-independent-thinking-woman-in-control-of-her-reproductive-organs.” and I wish every girl/woman in the world could be that.

  • http://kclanderson.com KCLAnderson (Karen)

    As a woman who chose never to use her uterus for its intended purpose, I find the whole thing rather insane, but at the same time think, “it’s their choice” (just as it’s my choice not to have children). That said, if they weren’t getting paid so much money, and they weren’t on television, would they still be having children?? That’s my question…

    “Reality” television is a corruptive, exploitative device.

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      Exactly Karen, I don’t think they set out to have a large family to be on TV, because there was no show when they first started … but would they have continued to have children if there was no TV show?

  • Janis

    Still thinking about this — sorry for so many comments.  :-}  I think the main problem I have with this is not only the unchecked growth, but that this whole philosophy assumes that ALL of one group of people are leaders, and ALL of another group are not.  Imagine a philosophy that claimed that ALL people with red hair were natural leaders, and ALL people with brown hair were not.  That is crazy, and yet that’s what this does with men and women.

    And this is incredibly dangerous.  There are men who are simply not naturally suited to be leaders by temperament.  They aren’t bad guys or “wimps,” they’re just more laid-back.  And I’ve seen what happens to men like that, who are placed in a leadership role who are not temperamentally suited to it: they become screamy, touchy, paranoid tyrants who see offense and threat under every rock.  I’ve also seen what happens when you take a woman who IS naturally suited to leadership and force her to give up the wheel: they become manipulative, resentful, and bitter.  The fact is that there is no one way to tell whether someone is a natural leader or not based on their gender.  Some men are better suited to being laid back and letting someone else be in charge, and some women are natural leaders.

    For women who are not natural leaders, and men who are, this situation MIGHT work out for them, as well as any situation of unchecked, unplanned growth can work out for anyone.  But what about their sons who are more laid-back or their daughters who aren’t?  (Women inherit half their genes from their fathers too, and sons from their mothers.) They would be happier in a setting where they could follow their natural talents, which this whole world forbids to them.

    I just don’t see it.  It makes no sense to me to arbitrarily designate certain people as “leaders” and others as “followers,” when the quality used to distinguish them has nothing to do with leadership temperament.  So you wind up with a significant number of screamy tyrants, and another number of unhappy, resentful underlings — all of which could be avoided by just letting people settle into their natural roles and having some families led by women and some led by men.

    I’ll shut up now.  :-)

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      No don’t shut up… I like your thought process. And your questions. 
      And I agree that this happens… “you wind up with a significant number of screamy tyrants, and another number of unhappy, resentful underlings”
       and that could be avoided if each person was allowed to be themselves and be true to who they are.

  • Dawn

    Janet, I enjoyed reading your thoughts on the Duggars.  After working in the adoption field, what bothers me most about this family with the resources and desire for a houseful of children is that they continue having baby after baby instead of ADOPTING one of the thousands upon thousands of children waiting for a family….

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      Interesting point Dawn… wonder if they would ever consider adoption. 

    • jokate17

      Those are always my thoughts exactly after I see anything about this family!  I would love to know if they’ve ever been asked about adoption, and what their response would be.

  • mac

    I really have no problem with Michelle and Jim-Bob having all the babies they want.  What I have a problem with is once the baby is born, they don’t raise him/her.   Michelle nurses the baby for six months and then turns the baby over to the oldest daughter who takes care of not only that child, but all the others too.  In addition to that, the oldest girls do all the house cleaning, cooking, and Jessa now handles the schooling of the younger ones.  Michelle just over-sees everything and then goes and spends time with Jim-Bob, who is her only “buddy”. 
    I watched two or three seasons of the Duggar show.  I liked them at first, even admired them.  But by season 2, I was beginning to see how things really were.  The oldest daughters were doing all the work and Jim-Bob controls everything.  Its one thing for Jim-Bob and Michelle to believe a certain way, and they certainly have the right to share that belief with their children, but they don’t leave any room for the kids to make their own decisions.  If the kids do decide to live a different way, they will lose all they have ever known.   (This goes for sons and daughters.)  I watched the latest episode of “19 Kids and Counting”, which was assorted Duggars answersing some questions by fans of the show or random people picked by the camera crew.   Michelle was asked what would happen if one of their daughters kissed someone before they were engaged.  She side-stepped the real answer and then one of the litte Duggar boys answered, “No kissing before marriage.”   Well, that is how his parents feel (even though his parents did kiss before marriage) but why not let their kids decide for themselves how they want to handle that? 

    • http://www.JanetOberholtzer.com Janet Oberholtzer

      Oh gosh, thanks for sharing. As I said I don’t watch the show, but I wondered about the care of the young children. I feel so freakin’ sad for their older daughters … that’s not fair to them. They should not have to mother young children before they choose to have them on their own.

      And your point about what they did before marriage and what they expect their children to do is interesting. I’ve noticed that with others… since they’ve become more entrenched in strict conservative ideals over the years, they now expect and hold their kids to almost impossible ideals, much stricter then they themselves did. 

  • sjmrn

    And everyone is worrying about this, WHY? I am not sure I understand why this concerns any of us?

  • Joy

    I think it concerns us for the same reason that sexuality and violence on television concern us. I don’t mean that as a Demeaning analogy – but we worry about sexuality and violence because of the message it sends to kids and families – and this is one that is concerning – is it all right and responsible to have that many children? Just because you can should you? Does it send the wrong message to girls – that they should aspire to be like Michelle and stay home and have a posse of children and treat their daughters like nannies to take care of the younger ones? what ideas of God are people getting from this show? That all Christians are freaks? What about all those kids? None of them seem to be succeeding in life – not one has gone off to college. Do any of them aspire to be more? Do they even have a choice? Those are all reasons that it

  • Skyeblue

    The Duggars really push my buttons too, and for a long time I couldn’t figure out why. But then I realized it’s because I, too, grew up in a large family (not Duggar-like, there were only 9 kids in my very religious family) and even though my parents loved us and provided for us, I never got much personal time with either parent. I lived my life being simply “one of many” and that affected me. My siblings and I were very well-behaved, much like the Duggars seem to be, but the truth is that real families are messy. They yell, they argue, they express themselves, they’re allowed to have emotions. Now when I see super well-behaved children who never seem to act up, I don’t think that’s a good thing. I see children who are repressed and controlled and aren’t allowed to be who they are.

    I watched one of their TV shows before they had a series and the mom was talking about how organized the household is and how each older kid has a “buddy,” or younger kid they’re responsible for. That made me really sad because that means the mother isn’t very present in anyone’s life. She’s too busy taking care of the latest newborn to pay much attention to the other children. That means the younger children don’t have a real mother, and also means that the older children are forced into a parental role WAY too early in life.

    It makes me angry. Especially when they keep popping out kids and saying that it’s God’s will. I no longer believe in God, but if there was a God, I think he or she would want parents to care for the children they have. There’s a reason we have parents. Children need a mom and dad. Children shouldn’t be raising other children. Those kids are all going to be messed up, no matter how well-behaved they act in public. Who even has time to get to know each one personally? They’re living life as “one of many,” and once in a while it’s nice to feel like an individual.

  • midwest2

    I agree with Mac – the raising of the children is left mostly to the older girls – as is the cooking, cleaning, packing, etc. It’s all on them. And as I understand things, when Jana Duggar (one of the older girls) started to show signs that she was thinking for herself, she was shipped off to “Journey to the Heart” where she would be brainwashed just like she is at home. They send kids there to “straighten them out.” It’s such a stifling environment in which to grow up. And if you think the kids aren’t brainwashed, think again. And they are required to smile and be happy. You might also want to check out how, at least one point in her life, she “taught” her infants by luring the baby off a blanket, and the swatting the baby with a soft ruler. They now hold their own church services in a house Bob Duggar bought – and they invite a handful of people to join them. The world they present to their children involves a totally controlled environment.