Steve Benson gets his panties in a wad when called out

[_The Nehor]

I think I'm going to cheer Steve Benson on for the same reason many critics applaud Meldrum.

[_Ray A]

I think I'm going to cheer Steve Benson on for the same reason many critics applaud Meldrum.

The problem is that Benson doesn't have the ability to throw ex-Mormons into severe cog. diss. They disbelieve as much as he does. It's only his approach many don't like.



.

[_The Nehor]

I think I'm going to cheer Steve Benson on for the same reason many critics applaud Meldrum.

The problem is that Benson doesn't have the ability to throw ex-Mormons into severe cog. diss. They disbelieve as much as he does. It's only his approach many don't like.

The problem is that Meldrum doesn't have the ability to throw Mormons into severe cog. diss. They believe as much as he does. It's only his approach many don't like.

[_Ray A]

It's only his approach many don't like.

Which is why FAIR has spent so much time rebutting his theories.

You need to get with the times, Nehor. Put aside your playstation for a while and read the FAIR blog.

[_Nightingale]

... Benson and SLCabbie attacked me viciously on those threads. Benson repeatedly insinuated I was stupid - he may have actually simply asserted it, but it's been too long for me to remember the details, so I'll use "insinuate" - SLCabbie told me I was so stupid I was likely the product of incest.

I recall rancorous discussions, if not these precise details. I was new at RfM at the time, If I recall correctly, and for a long time had to just read the bio section as I couldn't handle the lively debates and personality clashes. I'm sorry this was your experience beastie. I have always found you to be one of the more calm, balanced, rational and informed posters. I have nothing like your knowledge of Mormon doctrine and especially your special areas of interest. I remember your discussions there with Ray A about the Book of Mormon and I do recall that you were jumped on quite regularly no matter how factual or objective your remarks. I never did understand why that happened.

This is a good example of how people's experiences differ and how our varied perceptions are formed by said experiences. Many people leave Mormonism without problems and don't detest it. Others have such disturbing times within it and/or difficulties in the leaving of it that they have much different reactions. If I am remembering Mercury's back story remotely correctly, it is understandable that he would have intense feelings about it. But even in intensity I prefer things to be accurate.

Basically I was/am trying to say that if you make a statement that is not borne out by obvious facts your point is lost. If you want people to see your point of view and be informed by it you need to be accurate in your statements.

Back to your comments, beastie - I have had a very different experience with the two posters you name. It's true that I have not had a vigorous discussion with them on any points of disagreement. Maybe that would change things, I don't know. All I can do is speak from my own experience and form my conclusions based on that. But they are subject to change, given evidence or at least reason.

I'm not saying we have to like Benson or anyone else. I'm just saying, again, that when making a criticism, depending on our motive, it would be more convincing if we kept to facts and avoided mischaracterizations or exaggerations. If we care about accuracy that is. I think it is a good thing to strive for when we're criticizing Mormonism for faulty "truth claims".

[_Nightingale]

Here is the RfM post (by Steve Benson) discussing the reddit post:

http://www.exmormon.org/boards/w-agora/ ... 1260574189

This is the link from the OP here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/commen ... ta_ad_for/

It sounds in subsequent posts that Mercury is saying he is "exmormon missionary" and so he is the one who made these comments about Benson. Did I get that right?

[_beastie]

Thanks, NG.

It's been a while since I've participated on or even read RFM, but my last experiences seemed to demonstrate, to me, a type of group-think that is enforced by a very vocal group of posters. If a poster dares to disagree with the group-think, that poster is often treated severely. In the aforementioned discussion, SLCabbie actually told me that the Board Had Settled the Joseph Smith Question, and the answer was: malignant narcissist, and my blathering on about the viability of Vogel's pious fraud theory was proof of my incestual upbringing. I'm very sure that not all posters on exmormon feel comfortable with the "group think", nor would they agree with pronouncements about that group-think, but the small group of vocal defenders of the group think make it difficult to defy the group-think. At least, that's the only conclusion I can draw from my experience. Obviously I'm not a defender of the faith, so they couldn't be attacking me on that basis. It had to be simply that I defied what a certain, very vocal subset of RFM posters had decided was the group-think that had to be adhered to.

I haven't read the entire RFM thread about benson, but I strongly agree with this poster's assessment:

Steve enjoys and invites conflict and controversy. It's nearly impossible to have a peaceable exchange of ideas with Steve because he responds to everything with sarcasm and insults. I'm not sure what motivates this, but if Steve were to examine his online behavior honestly, I think he would find that he generates a lot of the drama himself.

and later commonsense said:

You're just trying to avoid the real issue, which is your aggressive behavior. You don't fool anybody but the newbies, Steve. I remember when I first read this board & thought people were just picking on you because you're a mini-celeb, too. Sadly, I was wrong, and you know that in your heart, unless you're a lot more damaged than even I suspect.

I can't state strongly enough how much I agree with this assessment. I don't mean this is an ugly way, but to be frank, I had heard that Steve was having marital problems and other personal problems, and I personally attributed his troubling behavior to those stressors. However, I can see how someone else might interpret those problems as symptomatic of a sense of entitlement and superiority, the result of being part of Mormon Royalty. Whatever the reason, Steve is very prone to sarcasm and insults when his opinion is challenged. I cannot imagine ever wanting to attempt in serous discussion with him again, and as long as his voice dominates RFM (which I don't know if it does anymore, it did at one point), it's not a board I will bother with, either.

[_Mercury]

It sounds in subsequent posts that Mercury is saying he is "exmormon missionary" and so he is the one who made these comments about Benson. Did I get that right?

That is correct. Run back to the chittering horde on RFM and give them the news.

[_Mercury]

Reading briefly over the RFM post this morning reminds me of the silly behavior the RFM cliques engage in. Once you get on their bad side by calling out the tool known as Steve Benson you are a marked man, subject to the "fair game" tactics of the "SLcabbie and friends" gestapo.

What I find most damaging for steve is that instead of confronting my accusations of elitism he simply latches onto a sarcastic comment which he chooses to willfully process as if I was attributing it to him. This tactic is beyond silly and speaks to steves inability to properly engage a critical opinion, instead he does not get that I was making fun at him and wonders "when did I say that!?. He then launches (and is still locked into) a demand for me to source a sarcastic comment.

I guess all one needs to do to shut Steve down is invoke sarcasm and invective. This it seems is a taste of his own medicine, so it adds a flavor of irony, which I am sure Steve would not be able to detect since sarcasm itself is hard for him to detect and deal with.

[_Yoda]

The sense I get about the RfM board, in general, is that it is really not designed to be a debate board.

It truly is set up as a "recovery" board. Former church members and disenchanted or confused church members are really just encouraged to post their rants, and receive pats on the back for posting their rants and their personal stories.

That's not a slam to the board. That is just the pure intent of the board, itself.

It is not set up for debates, discussions, etc.

It is a completely different beast.