19 and Counting

When trying to understand the relationship between media and religion it's important to understand all the various elements involved.  It's difficult to develop different religious and theological perspectives through television and media because there are so many subjective attributes to these environments.  In Christy Mesaros-Winkles article, "TLC and the Fundamentalist Family: A Televised Quiverfull of Babies", she comes to the conclusion that Christians believe in large families for various reasons such as a rejection of birth control, the need to populate the world with Christians, ect.  She also used the feminist approach to see the subjectification of women to men in a Christian dominated atmosphere.  I felt that this article relied on a perception about Christianity and misrepresented the themes and undertones of the show, grasping at straws.  While many of us understand the vagaries of religion, I felt like this went unobserved in Mesaros-Winkles article.

The cast of "19 and Counting"

At the beginning of the article Mesaros-Winkles states that, "In subsequent seasons, the religious beliefs of the family are downplayed as the show shifts its focus to the family’s large size and the daily difficulties of managing such a large family. Therefore, this analysis will focus on episodes from the first season, 17 and Counting."  It is unfair to look only at a certain aspect of the show that conforms to your argument.  While introducing the characters to the show, one reason they talked about their religious beliefs was because that was part of who they were, however, it didn't describe how religion translated into their everyday lives.  This would be more prevalent in subsequent seasons where their religious affiliation is established and the family acts as they normally would in everyday life.  This creates a limited perspective of the subject, something that can be seen in her various examples in her article.

The belief of a male headed family and wifely submission is widely explored in this article.  Mesaros-Winkles acknowledges the Duggars portrayal of "a serene, pleasant picture of life in a big, Quiverfull family."  However, she believes that this is done to captivate secular and Christian audiences alike with the family’s devotion to their children and the family unit. The courtship of Anna by Josh is used as an example of the undertones of the show.  She states there is a focus "on the male dominance of the courtship experience. The decision to date and marry is not left up to the girl, but is instead decided by her suitor and her parents."  Many viewers are indifferent to this aspect of the show, seeing it as a sweet gesture, knowing that the couple is already in love and marriage will probably happen regardless of what the father says.  The process of asking the father for permission is merely a formality.  However Mesaros-Winkles and a certain percentage of her fellow viewers seem to ask, "What kind of a female subjecting, religiously addled Christian is so ignorant and indifferent to women's rights that he must get her fathers permission to wed his daughter?"  Meanwhile, I'm almost positive that the prospect of marriage has crossed Anna's mind.  Does everyone Christian avoid the woman's regards when making decisions? No, in the end Anna still has to agree to the marriage. By choosing to force your ideas into the otherwise innocent actions of good people,  you've upped your odds for finding women subjecting not just in Christianity, but everywhere in society.

I cropped out the handcuffs

The main issue I took with this article, was that the author was bringing in personal biases rather then looking at the show in itself and attacking Christianity, not focusing on the show itself.   It's mentioned in the article that, " [The movement] places importance on creating the“right” type of Christian families, which takes on a decidedly racist overtone. This image is made up of middle-class, Caucasian families who will try to out-populate the Muslim, African and Latin American countries to keep “enemies from the gate.”"  In the episodes we watched in class I didn't see any attacks on these groups of people or any mention of anything like this.  This whole idea is coming from her own personal biases.  I failed to see how Mesaros-Winkles saw other ethnicities as enemies in the show, this was her bringing in her own bias and making them conform to the show.  The reason for this large family is established as God wanted the family to have this many children.  God's will is in no way limited to white people, Mexicans, Africans, and Asians are all subjected to God's will in determining the size of their family.  The thing that frustrated me about this argument is that it doesn't fucking matter.  Throwing out these beliefs makes perfect sense as an argument about Christians who believe that they are at war with Muslim nations, but it doesn't apply here.  The argument was so aggressive and misguided that I'm pretty sure that she was her own worst enemy at this point.

Another soldier in the fight against communism

It is an inescapable reality that you will find people who will microanalyze the relationships between people on television shows and find their own realities when reading in between the lines.  However, when I read this article I felt like it was a highly generalized and exaggerated claim from an author that is obviously anti-Christian and likes finding situations where they are wrong and females are subjectified. I honestly would like to here what other people's view on this program is.  I know this sort of entry could fall under a reading summary but I didn't opt for that and this article really irritated me.