I by and large refuse to acknowledge the existence of that Former Alaskan Governor who ran as vice- president a while back and keeps pretending that she’s going to save the country. She’s a terrible person, but even worse than that, she’s the new brand of terrible person who makes her entire living by pretending that she’s going to do something while continually doing nothing. And also she says very, very stupid things.
So it should come as no surprise that Former Alaskan Governor said some very stupid things about the weeping, open wound that is Jim Bob, Michelle and Josh Duggar’s collective sexual abuse case (yes, Jim Bob and Michelle, I hold you as accountable for your daughters’ assault as your son. At least those assaults that occurred after the first and second time he confessed.)
Former Alaskan Governor took to her Facebook page to promote her daughter’s blog, and call out Lena Dunham. Wait, what?
HEY LENA, WHY NOT LAUGH OFF EVERYONE’S SEXUAL “EXPERIMENTS” AS YOU HAUGHTILY ENJOY REWARDS FOR YOUR OWN PERVERSION? YOU PEDOPHILE, YOU
Huh. See in a previous life (aka 2000 - 2003) I was an English Education major with plans to become a high school English teacher. So my immediate reaction is not to jump to Dunham’s defense or even explain the developmental and therefore legal differences between a 7- year- old and a 15- year- old, but to point out the illogical conclusions in Governor’s argument. Specifically that Dunham isn’t being rewarded for her perversion. Possibly you could argue that Dunham’s show, which deals explicitly with sex and the naked female form, is a result of and a contribution to an increasingly perverted society which values sexual exhibitionism more than sexual modesty. But at no point did anyone say, “Oh, you looked at your sister’s vagina when you were 7? Here’s one million dollars!” Moving on.
I’m not defending the Duggar boy’s obvious wrongdoing over a decade ago. The main victim in any story like this isn’t the perpetrator, it’s the innocent ones so harmfully affected. I’m not an apologist for any sexual predator, but I’m sickened that the media gives their chosen ones a pass for any behavior as long as they share their leftwing politics. Case in point, they suggest Lena Dunham’s sexual assault on her sibling is cute, and she’s rewarded for it with fame and fortune. Meanwhile, they crucify another, along with an entire family.
Yeah, there’s a lot going on here. My Speech and Debate teacher would not be pleased at all. Let’s get this out of the way:
1.) Whenever you say “I’m not (blank), but (blank)”, you’re almost always whatever you just said you weren’t. Like no one ever says they’re not racist, and then says something that isn’t racist.
2.) Josh was 15- years- old when the assaults stopped, and is now a 27- year- old man. Continuing to refer to him as a boy downplays his culpability. When coupled with the above statement, the implication is that you don’t actually think his actions were that bad.
3.) Re: Dunham and her wealth, see above.
4.) “Crucify” is a very specific thing. And while I’m sure you’re trying to draw comparisons to the Late, Great J.C., hyperbole is not your friend in these situations.The argument then becomes about how the Duggars have been punished which so far amounts to “They had their TV show canceled. Maybe.” Even people who still support the Duggars won’t feel overly sympathetic to that “crucifixion.”
What else have you got?
The Duggar debate needs to shift from solely the boy’s obvious wrongdoing when he was 14 years old to now include:
See now I might actually agree with you. One case of sexual assault is heartbreaking and tragic and one too many, but also doesn’t really have the scope to address the societal causes of sexual assault or how to prevent it. It’s wildly uncomfortable, but we should be having a national conversation about treating pedophilia as a mental illness. Should we loosen restrictions on what therapists need to report so non- offending pedophiles can seek treatment? Can we effectively treat pedophiles that have offended with psychological and/ or medical methods? How can we lift the secrecy and shame that surrounds too many victims causing them to feel as if they’re responsible for the assault? Should the statute of limitations be lengthen on these cases to allow for proper prosecution? I’m sure that Former Alaskan Governor and I won’t agree on all of the treatments, but I’m surprisingly thrilled to see that she wants to move the conversation to other areas. Specifically to
1) The shocking, unethical leak of a private, legally protected counseling document by a politically motivated law enforcement official. Media - time to go after her or him for illegalities and for destroying the public’s trust in law enforcement.
2) The media’s hell-bent mission to go after the entire Duggar family for one member’s wrongdoing, while giving a total pass to perverted actions of someone like Lena Dunham - or any other leftwinger celeb caught doing awful things. Remember reports of the pedophile billionaire our former democrat president has been friends with and hung out with on the pedophile’s “orgy island” full of underage girls?
hollow, political gesturing and unsubstantiated, unnamed accusations at “democrats.”
*Sigh.* This is my fault really, Former Alaskan Governor. I should have know never to underestimate your ability to take something verging on a salient point, and turn it into self- serving rage inducement. I said before that you say very, very stupid things, but I’m pretty sure that’s only because you think about things in a very, very stupid way.
But you, despite your best efforts, accidentally made a good point. You called out Lena Dunham because you thought it would expose the “liberal” media’s hypocrisy, and get a win for your side. The classic “Look, one of your guys did something wrong” approach. What you don’t seem to realize is what you’re really advocating for is increased investigations into possible cases of sexual misconduct. That cases like these should be thoroughly investigated by the police, the facts of the case reviewed, and ultimately an objective judgement passed regarding if something improper took place. Were both in favor of that. The difference is, I’d be perfectly happy to have Dunham’s and her parent’s actions laid out to be judged. Can you say the same about Josh, Governor?