Duggar Family Blasted by Fans for Promoting Deadly Parenting Practices

Brace yourselves, folks. This is an upsetting story. Even in the context of the Duggar family.

Jim Bob and Michelle are promoting an ideology even more controversial than their own strict religious beliefs.

And fans are putting the Duggar family on blast.

The Duggars have been plugging an upcoming Marriage Retreat on social media.

“There is still time to register for this amazing marriage retreat! You will not regret it!”

The retreat is to take place as the Forsyth family’s Fort Rock. The problem is that this even will host Michael Pearl and Debi Pearl, authors of the deeply controversial book, To Train Up Your Child.

The book promotes forcing children to eat their least favorite foods until they “like” them, but also depriving your children of food as punishment.

Most significantly, the book encourages parents to hit their children with various objects, including plastic lengths of pipe. This abusive “training” is supposed to begin in infancy.

The methods described are a recipe for breaking a child and doing psychological damage that will last for a person’s entire life.

Except for those victims who die before they even reach adulthood.

As you can imagine, fans were horrified that the Duggars would condone such egregious child-abuse.

Fans on Facebook who are aware of the Pearls and the infamous “methods” that they promote felt crushed and heartbroken when they saw the announcement.

“This makes me so sad,” one wrote. “The Pearls literally promote hitting babies, actual babies.”

That is true. Among other things, the Pearls recommend the cruel “blanket training” that the Duggars practiced with some of their babies.

“They are child abusers. Why you would promote their evil and cruel practices is mind-boggling.”

Another disappointed Duggar fan commented, writing:

“Ahh yes, Fort Rock. Host and supporters of blatant child abusers.”

It’s difficult to argue with these commenters, even if you wanted to.

The “training” that the Pearls espouse to their followers involves using violence and fear to force children into submission.

And yes, it does begin when children are still babies.

The older that the child becomes, the harsher the physical punishments they recommend. Their pernicious book even suggests that parents might wear an object on their person as a constant reminder of the implied threat.

In recent years, police have linked three separate deaths of children to the Pearls, their book, and their ideology.

In each case, the abusive parents were convicted.

And that, of course, barely scratches the surface on the lifelong psychological damage that years of child abuse can inflict.

This isn’t the only time that the Duggars have been linked to abuse, and we don’t just mean hitting their own children or covering things up after Josh molested his sisters.

Member of the Duggar family’s church have shared shocking tales of abuse.

One survivor from the Duggar family church recently revealed that her father molested her as a child, and that the sexual abuse only stopped when he died.

That should have been the end of her suffering, but it was only part of her story.

Naturally, she suffered PTSD symptoms such as depression. Worse, in the eyes of her church and of her religiously devoted mother, she questioned her family’s beliefs.

She says that the church sent her to a “camp” where she was threatened, terrorized, and tortured for months in an effort to force her to fall into line with the church’s beliefs.

Unfortunately, it isn’t a surprise that the Duggars are promoting extreme ideology. Even though the Pearls recommend violence against children, that’s not a foreign concept to the Duggars.

Michelle has used a ruler to punish her very young children. Both producers and at least one of the Duggar children have mentioned that Jim Bob and Michelle keep a rod with which to hit their children.

There are heartbreaking, evil stories behind so many people’s broken childhoods.

The saddest thing of all of this might be that some people who come from these horrible backgrounds go on to repeat this cycle of violence with their own children.


Selena Gomez: BLASTED By Father of Suicide Victim

From the time of its debut last year, the Netflix series 13 Reasons Why has been the subject of constant controversy.

The show deals with the subject of teen suicide in a way that some critics feel might serve to glamorize the tragic act in the eyes of a very young and impressionable audience.

As 13 Reasons‘ most high-profile personnel, executive producer Selena Gomez has often found herself in the position of being forced to publicly defend the show’s subject matter.

And now, she’s receiving her harshest criticism yet from a man who knows all too well how dangerous the show’s message can be when it’s received by a vulnerable audience.

John Herndon of Livermore, California lost hs 15-year-old daughter, Bella, to suicide last year.

After her death Herndon and his wife learned that Bella had recently been watching 13 Reasons Why.

Herndon has spoken out against the series in the past, and this week, he was asked to comment on news that each episode of the  show’s second season will feature a public service announcement from the cast encouraging viewers to seek helo if they’re experiencing suicidal thoughts.

Not surprisingly, Herndon feels the precautions are insufficient to prevent further tragedies.

“It’s like putting a Band-Aid on a broken leg. It’s not going to help,” he told Radar Online.

“The whole point of them doing this was they wanted to raise awareness about teen suicide,” Herndon added.

“The way they chose to do that was to showcase a young teenage girl being raped, being denied access to any adult’s help, watching a girl be forced to watch her friends get raped, bullying at school, being constantly turned away by people she was close to – this is how they bring awareness to teen suicide?”

“Then they finish off by rewriting of the [book’s] end to show a very graphic portrayal of suicide,” Herndon continued.

“To market this show to teens is wrong.”

Herndon added that he doesn’t feel warnings about the show’s potentially tirggering content will  “make any difference whatsoever.”

Herndon concluded his message with a parting shot directed at Gomez:

“Selena, grow up,” he said, adding that he would like the singer to “stop acting irresponsible.”


Kylie Jenner BLASTED by Fans Over Racy Makeup Names

Now that Kylie has welcomed baby Stormi Webster into the world, she’s once again back to business as usual on social media. And that means plugging her makeup.

But the makeup mogul’s new line of blushes are receiving a lot of outraged reactions.

It turns out that Kylie’s names for the makeup, targeted at very young teens, is wildly inappropriate.

Before she even became pregnant or turned twenty (which she did in that order), Kylie built a powerful makeup empire.

It started, mostly with her lip kits.

We all know that makeup is expensive and how powerful the Kardashian brand is, but few would have expected for Kylie to blossom into a titan of industry practically overnight.

Today, Kylie Cosmetics is worth so much that it’ll make your head spin — and is projected to be worth one billion dollars within just a few short years.

But not even Kylie’s juggernaut of a brand, undaunted by her months of social media solitude during her pregnancy, is immune to criticism from fans.

And they were horrified to see Kylie’s new blushes. Particularly, their names.

See if you can spot what so many fans found so troubling about Kylie’s new blush names.

Kylie Jenner New Blushes March 2018

A number of Kylie’s fans found those names and others very objectionable.

“When you have millions of teenage fans who look up to you, what do you name your new blushers? ‘Virginity’ ‘Barely legal’ and ‘X-rated’ of course.”

Considering that Kylie was dating Tyga, a grown man and a father, when she was just 17 … Barely Legal seems to be in especially poor taste.

“Really? @KylieJenner. You literally couldn’t think of ANY other names to give them?”

Users bring up that many of Kylie’s most impressionable fans are still in middle school and figuring out who they want to be.

“Seriously @KylieJenner, choose better names for your products. You have 12+ year old fans! ‘Barely Legal,’ ‘Virginity.’”

The choices that tweets and young teens make about how they view sex and sexuality should be theirs to make, not because of the influence of a 20-year-old mom.

One outspoken critic decided to go right for the jugular.

“Kylie Jenner decided to name her cheap blushes with an even cheaper names.”

Kylie’s brushes for her products have notoriously been the subject of complaints by many people who say that the brushes are poor quality and absolutely not worth the price.

“All 14 yr Olds moms will be racing to buy virginity, hot n bothered & barely legal.”

Well, that’s a little hyperbolic.

Naturally, Tyga, who Kris Jenner says is not Kylie’s baby daddy, came up again.

“Seems they’re named after her life, underage dating a 20 something dad.”

They’re still bringing him up even though Kylie’s moved on to a different no-name rapper who is several years older than she is. Come on, folks. Keep up.

Still others continued to excoriate Kylie over this.

“Kylies new blushes which are aimed to her tween/teen market, are called HOT AND BOTHERED- X RATED-VIRGINITY-BARELY LEGAL.”

Again, sexuality is fine, but these tweeters take issue with Kylie’s young and impressionable target audience.

“[What the hell] is wrong with her?”

Kylie’s an adult and a mother, now. They feel that she’s supposed to have a better sense of responsibility.

“Seems she’s getting desperate for [attention] & any way to get her name out there, even at the expense of her young fans is ok. Disgusted.”

Those are some valid points — and, honestly, the line “barely legal” has only gotten creepier with time.

But let’s play devil’s advocate for a moment. Kylie is trying to sell a product.

Not only does she need to draw attention to it (outrage is free advertising, folks), but she wants to sell it to her target audience.

A lot of people buying Kylie’s makeup are going to want to feel more empowered and more sexual. (And hey, more power to them)

After a certain age, plenty of girls stop wanting to buy makeup that’s called Rainbow Stardust or whatever. That’s a normal stage in development.

So maybe Kylie’s secret to success gets her some hate on social media.

It’ll still help her where it counts — and that’s in her bank account.

Remember that Kylie is a mother herself … which means that she’s earning for two.


Newsweek Gets Blasted for Inflatable Penis Cover

For its November 17 issue, Newsweek has published a cover story that focuses on the #MeToo movement.

Focusing on the fact that women now feel empowered to speak out against famous men who have acted inappropriately over the years (from Harvey Weinstein to Kevin Spacey to Louis C.K.), the publication asks:

#MeToo is taking down powerful men in all fields. Is Donald Trump next?

But it does so alongside the photo of a pin popping a penis balloon, prompting many Internet users to ask: WTH?!?

Why must the implication here by that women are actively hurting men by simply calling them out for sexual harassment or assault?

Women don't have some problem with penises. They have a problem with guys who act like dicks, basically.

Scroll down for a look at what people are saying about this controversy:

1. The Controversial Cover

The controversial cover
It’s not hard to see why folks have an issue with this image, right?

2. So, the Problem is That Men Have Dicks?

So the problem is that men have dicks
And women should fix that problem by injuring said dicks? Is that the message here?

3. These Women Were Assaulted

These women were assaulted
They just want justice. Not revenge.

4. Tone Deaf… to the Max

Tone deaf to the max
This cover is just missing the entire point.

5. All the Nope

All the nope
This isn’t our favorite saying, but we agree with the sentiment.

6. BOOM!

This one says it all.

View Slideshow

Kim Kardashian Blasted for Jackie O Photo Shoot, Face Darkening

In what ought to come as a surprise to absolutely no one, Kim Kardashian is under fire for her latest photo shoot.

That’s what happens when you darken your features… get made up to look like Jackie Kennedy Onassis… and claim to be America’s real First Lady.

Indeed, Kardashian checked off of these controversial boxes this week upon posing with daughter North West for Interview Magazine.

The photos (above and below) depicted Kardashian rocking some 1960s chic hairstyles and clothing, while clearly dressed to resemble President John F. Kennedy’s famous wife.

In response to the pictorial, critics have hopped on Twitter and taken issue with Kardashian for pretty much every aspect of this shoot.

First, there were cries over how Kim seemingly darkened her skin tone, just a few months after she was slammed for doing the same thing in a series of beauty ads.

hating on Kim

“I would obviously never want to offend anyone,” said the mother of two at the time, explaining:

“I used an amazing photographer and a team of people. I was really tan when we shot the images, and it might be that the contrast was off…

“I have the utmost respect for why people might feel the way they did. But we made the necessary changes to that photo and the rest of the photos.”

But this wasn’t the only criticism Kim has received for this spread.

Many are also in shock that editors actually dared to compare Kardashinan with Jackie Kennedy, a graceful woman whose husband was assassinated.

more kim hate

Finally, there were those social media users who were offended over the notion of Kim as the First Lady.

This is still the woman who got famous by banging Ray J on camera, right?

Who often poses naked? Who has never met a cleavage close-up she didn’t snap and share?

What, exactly, makes her Presidential in any way, shape or form?

kim screen shots

Photographer Steven Klein said his goal was to “capture feminine beauty as an expression of empowerment and self-respect” with this shoot.

And also “to highlight Kim in a chic manner that is retrospective of a time and yet modern.”

Kardashian, meanwhile, has said she will “treasure this shoot forever.”

But perhaps she will think differently after reading through her mentions today.

What do YOU think of the blowback featured here?

Deserved because Kim’s skin really does look darker and it’s ridiculous for her to be made to resemble Jackie Kennedy?

Or is this much ado about nothing?