Netflix's instant watch feature now offers old episodes of the TLC show "17 Kids and Counting," and....I watched the entire first season. Yes, I fell trap to the addiction, granted more than a couple years behind the rest of the country.
For those even further out of the loop than I, the show follows a smalltown, Christian family who have 17 biological children. Actually, I believe they have 19 now--but there were only 17 during the first season, when the mom, Michelle, announced she was pregnant again.
Overall, I found it very refreshing to watch a family working together, getting along, and making the most out of their lives.
Since the Duggar Parents were closely involved with the show's production, the family was portrayed in a good light for the most part. All of the Duggars recognize their uniqueness, but TLC never seemed to insinuate their lifestyle choice was bad.
Not like this person.
"The premiere episode of “17 Kids and Counting” tracked the Duggars’ “Today” trip to New York. While the family toured the city, the producers of the TLC series prompted the children to deliver their streaming impressions, and the results are very “Green Acres.” They cannot get over all the hustle and mayhem. “In Central Park there’s actually children there,” one of the boys says. “The rest of the city I didn’t see too many children, but Central Park there was a lot of kids.”
Jim Bob brought his prejudices with him, believing you can only hail a taxi if you’re waving money in your hand. Another boy is entranced by the large screens in Times Square even though some of the ads are “raunchy.” The Duggar children are not allowed to watch cable television, only obliged to appear on it."
I'll pause here for a moment, since I saw this episode. (I saw all of them.) The only prejudice involved belongs to the author of this article, who assumes a smalltown man has prejudices about the city. Jim Bob and his oldest son both tried hailing a cab for several minutes with no luck before Dad finally pulled out a wad of cash and convinced a driver to stop.
Also, just in case anyone hasn't noticed, some of the ads in Time Square are raunchy. The kid was right.
Continuing...
"A call to parenthood that would cause 99.9 percent of American couples to sneak out in the middle of the night and leave their children with a lifetime supply of juice boxes does not even appear to overwhelm the Duggars, and that has the effect of making them seem denial-prone or indifferent, even as they are shown to be paying considerable attention to the small nation state they oversee.
The Duggars home-school their children and create whole domains of responsibility rather than simply doling out chores. The laundry room, as Michelle puts it, “currently that’s Jinger’s jurisdiction.” Michelle never seems to raise her voice or even grow tense. Jim Bob manages to keep his hair perfectly combed. This is all quite mesmerizing, as if a 300-pound person suddenly landed in an ice rink during a figure skating event and performed a quadruple axel without incident."
See the article for the absurd conclusion about what close-knit family life portrayed on television supposedly does to the audience.... (Spoiler: The show "exploits divisions" among viewers.)
Obviously, I take offense over the tone this reviewer adopts. But I'm even more concerned by the fact that controversy and division HAS developed around the show, for reasons I truly cannot understand. Here is a short list of criticisms I've found from various bloggers, tweeters, and commenters. (Incluing this blog dedicated solely to commenting on the family: duggarswithoutpity.blogspot.com)
-The Duggars are exploiting their children, using the "TLC gravy train" to support them.
-They don't believe in dancing. (Weird!)
-Their children expect to find future mates through courtship (Weird!)
-They don't watch TV and have limited access to the internet (Weird!)
So, it's America's business that the Duggar's are weird?
I could defend each individual criticism of this family, but I don't think I'll waste the time. Instead, I'll admit all the controversy kind of makes me want to follow suit and do away with my TV. When paternity tests and out-of-control kids are the norm on daytime television, and Oprah and Dr. Phil make their money giving theory-based advice to moms at the end of their rope, but a family actually MAKING IT is torn down, I'm not sure I can continue to watch...
Personally, I believe kids should be aware of "raunchy" stuff and then be given good reasons not to participate in it--rather than made to believe evil doesn't exist at all. (After all, how can we expect to combat immorality if we don't even know this particular enemy is lurking.) Growing up, I was given straight answers for any questions I had as well as access to the internet, TV, books, articles, movies, and whatever else so I could learn to answer questions about WHY Mom and Dad believed what they believed. Oh, and we danced.
But, I would like to point out that today's parents are terrified their kids are going to get pregnant/get someone else pregnant. They've heard the entertainment industry can convince young minds of anything (that is, if a cartoon character on a package of cigarettes doesn't). Parents are confronted with statistics about violence in song lyrics, video games, movies, etc. And, even if their kids don't do drugs or bring a gun to school, parents have bought the idea that all kids will get into trouble. It's just what they do. The best WE can do is hand them condoms and set up internet monitoring so we can be aware when they're misbehaving. And, over coffee with friends, we can cluck our tongues and lament, "something has to be done about our youth."
But, then, why do we criticize the Duggars for their abnormal children? The Duggar kids are not sexually active, nor are they violent. They aren't disrespectful, like a normal teenager. They aren't rebellious and impossible, like "normal" kids.
Meanwhile, the parents are self-supporting--raising all of their kids with their own money. (And they were doing this BEFORE the "TLC gravy train" pulled into the station.) And they've developed a way to divide responsibilities which makes their household run like clockwork in a manner the "Desperate Housewives" can't fathom. In fact, I find it interesting that the author of the above article compared the Duggar's to a nation-state... but was NOT suggesting we could learn something about fiscal AND personal responsibility from this debt-free, neighbor-loving group. Instead, the writer only obsesses over their strangeness...
I agree, the Duggar's are weird. But, in a fallen, depraved world which causes many to step back in alarm and demand "change," why is that a bad thing?
The author's conclusion was weird. She says it's going to make everyone feel good about themselves, basically. But her complaints in the article, that the mom doesn't raise her voice (Oh my!) and the family generally have it all together, seem to indicate that she's not upset about people feeling smug, but about people feeling put down by how great the family is.
ReplyDeleteNever seeing Mrs. Duggar raise her voice over 17 kids makes people feel guilty for yelling at their two kids. Seeing little boys scandalized by raunchy material makes parents wonder if their lax attitudes have something to do with their teenage sons's sex lives. Seeing other people do well messes up the idea that *we* can't.
That's why we love seeing pictures of celebrity cellulite. That's why we tempt dieting friends with ice cream. That's why we discourage Christian friends from following convictions we don't want to think about.
If we can make good people look bad or weird, then we can feel comfortable with our low standards. We tell ourselves that that's just "the way the world is" and never challenge ourselves to do anything greater than what we did yesterday.
because people want to be like everybody else! :D
ReplyDeletethe most fun about Entertainment weekly website is the comments not the reviewers....it shows you you arent like everybody else but those comments persuade you to form their opinionlol
I have a lot of respect for Michelle Duggar. She's very humble and doesn't pretend to know the "right" way to live; she just lives the way she feels she should. And even if she isn't as patient in person in real life as she is on camera, she comes across as a genuinely good person to me.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I do see why people disagree with their extreme version of courtship. They don't kiss before marrying or spend time alone together... how can you know if you want to marry someone you don't spend time alone with or ever kiss? I feel like people should bond to a certain extent before deciding to spend the rest of their lives together. All that isn't to say that it's WRONG, I just can easily see some potential issues.
Then there's the whole issue of extremely risky pregnancies. I have no idea what the Duggars' financial situation is, but the costs of keeping a premature baby in the hospital for months is astronomical. It could be that they didn't need the TLC money, and now they do. (Which isn't a judgment, just a possible fact.) It's their business what they do with their money, and I don't think their kids are terribly exploited. (16 and Pregnant on the other hand... good GRIEF what an exploitative show!)
But I do wonder about going through with a high-risk pregnancy. The babies often have health issues that will follow them the rest of their lives and, even if the family can afford the medical costs, on a societal level I'm astounded how much we spend bringing babies into the world. Why not adopt?! There are so many beautiful children in the US alone who need a home. Again, I'm not saying people should be required to adopt (yikes!) or not allowed to get fertility treatments or go through with high-risk pregnancies, I'm just saying it's something to think about.
I also get a little worried when teenagers aren't SOMEWHAT rebellious. Teenage years are a time that you start thinking for yourself. I wonder how much these kids are challenged to think for themselves. That doesn't apply just to the Duggar family. I also think that the Duggar family is very fortunate not to be part of generational poverty. I could go on a whole rant about cyclical poverty, violence, etc. but I will refrain :)
All of these are just thoughts, not criticisms of that specific family.
Oh also Amanda, interesting info about teens and sex:
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/teens-smarter-about-condoms-than-adults-are/
As you can guess, I am a big fan of comprehensive sex education. I think the above info shows it's not a terrible idea. Yay for successful education! Imagine if comp sex ed was practiced even more widely! I'm sure this is a very controversial topic, but I had to mention it.
You asked, "How can you know whether you want to marry someone if you never spend time alone or kiss?"
ReplyDeleteIf I may offer the perspective of someone who didn't "court," but appreciates the principles behind it: courtship is based on the idea that the "must-haves" for a successful marriage really are pretty simple. In the interest of bottom-lining, I would say marriage requires "Two people who are doggedly, unwaveringly committed to eachother."
Mainstream beliefs say this requires "compatibility," so people take tests/quizzes to guage their chances. They read horoscopes, examine their mate's body language, and a whole host of other things to try and guarantee relationship success.
But those who choose courtship rely on a mutual foundation which they have been building upon all their lives. That is, both the man and the woman are trying to become more like Christ. If they're committed to this task, they have enough in common to make a marriage work, such as striving for selflessness and unconditional love for others. Sometimes this requires laying feelings aside even when the going gets tough (the inspiration for this blog). But, this is why asking whether the person is someone you "want" to marry actually is the wrong question. Nobody WANTS to be selfless all the time. At one point, I wanted to marry Luke (and I'm glad I did), but I don't feel like loving him 24/7. So, since feelings shift and people change, the relationship must be built on something more permanent.
Thus, the agreement to apply biblical principles to the relationship. Christ came as a servant, and when two people immitate His example, they grow to trust eachother in very deep ways. They have a solid place from which to build (including the ever-important "kissing" aspect). :) Courters agree that love and marriage aren't chance encounters with the "right one"--love is an intentional choice to pour into another person...
If that sounds like a recipe for disaster, consider that people practice the process all the time--with their children, even before they meet them. Parents make a conscious decision to satisfy the needs of that child, even though it may do NOTHING to deserve it. In fact, some children grow up to disappoint their parents repeatedly--but what do Mom and Dad insist?..."I'll love my child until the day I die, regardless."
It's very beautiful, actually. Parents don't wait to see whether their kid is a Scorpio or Gemini to decide whether to love them. They don't ask, "Is this the kind of kid for whom I WANT to be a parent?" We recognize committment to parenthood doesn't require compatibility. Instead, we begin serving our child regardless, and it's the act of pouring ourselves out that actually encourages the feelings to follow. The result is what most consider to be the strongest bond in the world--that between parent and child. But it's only the strongest because very few people apply the same principles to their marriage in order to develop equally strong bonds with their mate.
I should mention attraction and a sense of compatibility in other areas aren't BAD things. I'm still convinced my husband is the sexiest, funniest, most loyal man in the world, and I know we're perfect for eachother. :)
ReplyDeleteBUT, there are times I would SWEAR he's the devil himself, and it's those times I have to go back to our foundation...
(Sometime maybe I'll post about some of our conversations during our early dating years, and how we decided to "take the plunge." I kind of stopped the "My Background" posts out of the blue...along with the Wednesday Letters. Oops.)