::Bites tongue and backs out::
I predict that (God forbid) if Mom should predecease Jim Bob, he will remarry a woman in her 20’s and start filling a second quiver.
Yepper.
Oh, I’m gonna judge and bust out some hatred. The Quiverfull movement they support is an anti-women, anti-gay, anti-social freedom group and those female children have no change for a full life unless they turn their back on their family and go out on their own. The boys are being raised to ignore the needs of their wife, put their health at risk, and be borderline abusive to their children.
And, it occurred to me last night - if this baby lives, they will now outnumber the 9/11 hijackers! They have an even better chance to spread their own version of religious zeal and hatred!
From now on, I’m using the word “quiver” as a euphanism for “uterus”
I can’t watch the show. The quasi 80’s hair creeps me out.
If post-childbirth vaginal looseness really happened to the extent that the jokes pretend it does, her poor abused uterus would have made a run for it by now.
She has 20 kids and show full of wierdness to prove otherwise.
I, for one, welcome our new quiverfull overlords.
Right, I forgot about the sets of twins.
It’s sad I know even that much about her reproductive history, but I always get sucked into reading these threads.
Even out of context, choosing to be so prolific is irresponsible and unsupportable.
As an explicit part of a movement that is intended to produce “soldiers” in a culture war, it’s horrific. Political or social ideology should stand on merit. If you want to spread it, you use reason (or rhetoric, if that’s all you can manage,) procreating for this purpose is repellent.
Nearly everyone values family and children - we’re wired up that way. But imagine that people viewed as “the enemy” by the Quiverfull movement decided to co-opt their tactics. “In order to increase our chances of passing referendums on social issues, let’s have dedicated people who reproduce as much as possible and indoctrinate the kids with our viewpoints from the cradle. Let’s start gay-exclusive sperm and egg banks and adoption agencies, and found charities to bring people who are dedicated enough to raise ten kids but not wealthy enough to afford it together with people who aren’t quite dedicated enough to do the actual parenting but are happy to contribute to the cause.”
Of course people would be repulsed by this - because it has bugger all to do with loving children and family- it is twisted, pathological behaviour.
Two things:
1)Michelle’s best friend is pregnant w/#19, I bet she thought,“OH NO, we can’t be tied!”
2)The “clown car” thing doesn’t make sense to me, "vending machine " seems to fit more.
BTW, care to guess how many grandkids they end up with?
“Clown car” references the classic circus sight gag where a tiny little car enters the ring, stopping by a concealed hatch to allow the illusion of an impossible number of clowns getting out of it.
I understand the origin. Just IMO “vending machine” is more apropos.
I don’t watch the show because children hurt my brain, but I have one question:
“How do they AFFORD those kids?”
I make decent money and I know I can’t afford even one kid, how the hell do they do it?
Think green roast beef shower curtains, flapping in the breeze of a queef like giant elephant ears.
This is where the outrage comes from for me…the Quiverfull movement is horribly degrading to women. The family shouldn’t be admired for this.
I don’t really hate them (I just find them super creepy) and I’m not really outraged. But I don’t think it’s true that they value children, or at least they don’t seem to especially value the children they actually have. As Larry Mudd says, they are not motivated by their love of kids, but instead by their devotion to their religion and desire to create as many new members for their church as possible.
Whenever I see the show I’m struck by the fact that the parents hardly seem to really know the kids. They don’t spend much, if any, time one-on-one with the kids, and the younger ones especially are more or less being raised by older siblings. With so many kids they all seem to get sub-par schooling and their food doesn’t seem very nutritious. As far as I can tell, none of them ever have anything of their own or anything special (like a birthday cake or something).
Of course there are other families that work the same way (and there used to be even more), and this is hardly the worst thing that has ever happened to kids. It’s not abuse or neglect. But to me it doesn’t seem very fair to the kids, and it doesn’t seem like a lifestyle that should be lauded. They certainly don’t seem like ‘good people that value family’ to me.
[quote=“etv78, post:92, topic:602283”]
Two things:
1)Michelle’s best friend is pregnant w/#19, I bet she thought,"OH NO, we can’t be tied!"snipQUOTE]
IMHO, she is fit to be tied.
I’d REALLY rather not.
ETA: Some of my “outrage” also comes from my belief that the world is overpopulated, and no couple should be having this many kids.