Did the Duggers blame the little girls for the molestation? That would be a HUGE issue against the Duggers. Please post a credible reference that proves that the Duggers blame the little girls for being molested.
By Hannah
People are going by the movements own pamphlets, and teachings on the subject. Since this family is very committed to the movement it would make sense that they follow them.
Do we have any credible references that they went against the teachings they are so committed to in this case?
Since they tend to - and talk about - some of the other rather superstitious teachings that aren't based in scripture it makes me very leery of what approach they did take. Sadly, that could cause great harm to those children - and Josh as well.
It's not like they hid that they followed this movement, and endorsed this leader. They did openly.
Josh would have caught it down the line anyway, because they were not open about the past. The past tends to catch up to you. Due to his past he should have never been placed in the position of employment that he was given, and I have wonder if they knew...which they should been informed of. You don't place a person that has this type of past on the front lines preaching to others about treatment of family - or family life - especially when you don't fully expose your own failings in this area.
Kid or not - he was old enough to know better. I wouldn't be surprised if he himself wasn't messed with at some point, and or the strange viewpoint towards sexuality didn't play a part in his actions. Yet, that doesn't excuse the veil of secrets.
Hannah, I have been researching to find out about your statement bolded above. What I have found so far is information from GAWKER BLOG and the RECOVERINGGRACE.ORG. They both seem to be very involved in the Dugger situation. It seems that both use the material from the Bill Gothard teaching pamphlet, “Lessons From Moral Failures in a Family”, as evidence that the Duggers blame the victims, the young molested girls. It’s worth pointing out that the scenario in “Lessons From Moral Failures in a Family” isn’t based on Josh Dugger or the Dugger family.
I researched Gawker Blog and Recoveringgrace and found the g following:
Gawker Blog
In 2012, the website changed its focus away from editorial content and toward what its new
editor-in-chief A. J. Daulerio called "traffic whoring" and "
SEO bomb throws
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gawker
RECOVERINGGRACE
"Recovering Grace is a Christian organization dedicated to helping those affected by the teachings of Bill Gothard, the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP), and the Advanced Training Institute (ATI). As the foundational statement of our faith, we adhere to both the Apostles and Nicene creeds."
I am not sure that Gawker Blog is all that credible so I am going to use the REVOVERINGGRACE information
Analysis of How “Lessons From Moral Failures in a Family” Blames Victims
by Recoveringgrace May 22, 2015
Modesty was a factor. It was not at the level it should have been in my family. It was not uncommon for my younger siblings to come out of their baths naked or with a towel.”
This is the first time the extremely young sexual abuse victims are indirectly blamed for the abuse by their abuser, and his speculation is not countered or qualified in the document.
“They would often run around the house for the next twenty minutes until my mom or sister got around to dressing them. Changing my younger sisters’ diapers when they were really young may not have been a big thing, but it really did not have to be that way (if we had only applied Levitical law).”
This is the second time the parents (and now an older sister) are indirectly blamed for the abuse by the abuser, and his speculation is not countered or qualified in the document. His reference to Levitical law presumably refers to Leviticus 18, which prohibits “uncovering the nakedness” of various family members. However, Bible commentaries interpret this often used phrase in Lev. 18 as actual acts of incest/sexual intercourse — not simply an innocent uncovering of nakedness by a child.
“My younger sisters used to wear dresses often, but as they were young and not aware of modesty, they did not behave in them as they should.”
This is the second time the extremely young abuse victims are indirectly blamed for the abuse by their abuser.
“Mom did not push the modesty unless we were in public, and Dad only had the opportunity to mention it during weekends. Little people do not realize their nakedness right away. It takes several years before they grasp it. It needs to be taught to them. My mom is a nurse, and the human body was not a big deal to her. I guess she didn’t want it to be for her children either.”
This is the third time the parents are indirectly blamed for the abuse by the abuser.
“She and I have talked about it. She explained to me that she had no idea how visual male sexuality is, compared to women who are mainly by touch. I am so grateful my parents have changed so much of this area in our home.”
The narrator inserts observations on very normal male sexuality into a story about very abnormal sexual abuse of young children, suggesting a link. In this document, the young man’s specific sexual attractions and interests are not at all presented as abnormal; if anything, they are presented as part of an expected continuum of unchecked sexual interest.
“This was not a major reason for the offending, but it allowed my little sister to be open to what I made her do.”
Even with the mild concession that his parents’ lack of conformity to (how he interpreted) Levitical law was “not a major reason for the offending,”
this is the third time he indirectly blames his abuse on his victim, and his speculation is not countered or qualified in the document. The author’s description of his sister as “open to what I made her do” is especially disturbing, as it implies complicity and guilt on her part, an implication never countered in the document.
“I don’t think so much teaching was necessary because everyone was so young. However, a different lifestyle, with more modesty, might have prevented what happened”
This is the fourth time the parents (and by implication the young victims) are respectively blamed for the abuse by the abuser, and though he offers some qualification to his conjecture, his speculation is not countered or qualified by any more authoritative voice in the document.
http://www.recoveringgrace.org/2015/05/gracenote/
Hannah, based on the recoveringgrace analysis of Bill Gothard teachings you certainly have reason to say it makes sense to believe that the Bill Gothard teachings does blame the victims (molested girls). That is why I always ask for some credible reference for an accusation against someone. Credible references takes out a possible bias or an emotional response that can be made by anyone, male and female.
I do conclude that the recoveringgrace organization (those affected by the teachings of Bill Gothard) are a credible source. However, I am not so sure about Gawker blog.
Because I think as much information as possible should be presented I want to add a few comments to the recoveringgrace analysis.
Modesty was a factor. It was not at the level it should have been in my family. It was not uncommon for my younger siblings to come out of their baths naked or with a towel.”
This is the first time the extremely young sexual abuse victims are indirectly blamed
Although the recoveringgrace analysis may certainly be correct that it was an attempt for the abuser to blame the victim it also could be some good advice about modesty. Even with poor modesty a molester cannot use that any kind of excuse at all
“My younger sisters used to wear dresses often, but as they were young and not aware of modesty, they did not behave in them as they should.”
This is the second time the extremely young abuse victims are indirectly blamed for the abuse by their abuser.
Again, the abuser maybe using this as an excuse and blame the victim but it can also be good advice about modesty. Good modesty and molestation are in different universes! Not a connection at all.
“This was not a major reason for the offending, but it allowed my little sister to be open to what I made her do.”
Even with the mild concession that his parents’ lack of conformity to (how he interpreted) Levitical law was “not a major reason for the offending,”
this is the third time he indirectly blames his abuse on his victim,
The “THIS” that the recoveringgrace are referring to is “how visual male sexuality is” reprinted below is more of the actual quote.
She and I have talked about it. She explained to me that she had no idea
how visual
male sexuality is, compared to women who are mainly by touch. I am so grateful my
parents have changed so much of this area in our home. This was not a major reason for the offending, but it allowed my little sister to be open to what I made her do. I don't think so much teaching was necessary because everyone was so young.
All of the above with the Modesty and “how visual male sexuality is” are factors that can stimulate the male sexually ( stimulation for underage girls it is a perversion) but to use that as an excuse to blame the victims is a travesty and an outrage especially when it comes from molesters or abusers.
I believe in getting as much information, especially credible third party information, as possible about such an event such as the Duggers. As I see it, in this case of the Duggers blaming the victims, I see a connection between the close association of the Duggers to Gothard’s teachings as probable cause to be suspect and alerted to getting as much information and evidence if any on the Duggers blaming the innocent victim girls.
By Hannah
Do we have any credible references that they (Duggers) went against the teachings they are so committed to in this case?
NO
However, with our system we have to go along with the law that says “Innocent until proven guilty” That is why credible evidence is important.
Also, it is noteworthy, that to my knowledge, that none of the victims have said that the Duggers blamed the victims. These girls are old enough, some adults, to think for themselves so I think that they would have spoken up. I cannot image any mother or father with any sense at all blaming their little daughters for the molestation even if the molester was the son. It just does not seem human but I am willing to change my mind if any credible evidence is presented.
