Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Chap »

Simon Belmont wrote:
Chap wrote:Look, I'll help this poor man: there is a thing called Free Verse.


Oh, pardon me, Chap. Where did you say "free verse" in this quote from you:

Chap wrote:I thought this looked odd, until I realized that it was an attempt at verse.


I do not see the word "free," but I am certain you will be more than happy to point out where you stated it.


Most hamburgers are round, but some are square:

Image

Attempting to cook a square hamburger is attempting to cook a hamburger

Most verse is metrical, but some is free.

Attempting to write free verse is attempting to write verse. (In fact, it is about the only kind of verse that sloppy untalented people or kids with undemanding teachers ever attempt, though some great poets have done so too.)

By saying that I thought Belmont was attempting to write verse (a direction in which his use of irregular separate lines and two instances of rhyme seemed to point), I was of course trying to avoid the only alternative, which was that he was writing ridiculously bad prose. But you can't help some people, it seems.

[This material from Belmont is a wonderful example of one of the laws of Mopologetics: however desperate the stuff you are forced into writing, never, never stop posting. So long as you can keep going, some lurking TBM with a shaky testimony will think you are winning. Eventually your opponent will get tired or bored and give up. Then shall it be said: Well done, thou good and faithful Belmont! Thou mayest not have served a mission according to the flesh, but thou didst serve one virtually and didst smite the gentiles hip and thigh!]
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
_malkie
_Emeritus
Posts: 2663
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:03 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _malkie »

Chap wrote:[This material from Belmont is a wonderful example of one of the laws of Mopologetics: however desperate the stuff you are forced into writing, never, never stop posting. So long as you can keep going, some lurking TBM with a shaky testimony will think you are winning. Eventually your opponent will get tired or bored and give up. Then shall it be said: Well done, thou good and faithful Belmont! Thou mayest not have served a mission according to the flesh, but thou didst serve one virtually and didst smite the gentiles hip and thigh!]

True, Chap, but if you were SB wouldn't you also worry about another possibility: that an intelligent TBM lurker will think that your position is so weak that you are forced into writing childish arguments. I mean, if this is the best that a well-educated apologist can do ...
NOMinal member

Maksutov: "... if you give someone else the means to always push your buttons, you're lost."
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

malkie wrote:True, Chap, but if you were SB wouldn't you also worry about another possibility: that an intelligent TBM lurker will think that your position is so weak that you are forced into writing childish arguments. I mean, if this is the best that a well-educated apologist can do ...


Hello,

I also believe Mr. Simon has set the standard for Mopolo-swearing. I'm not sure I've seen a Moral Voice swear so much since reading the Journal of Discourses. Oh my!

V/R
Dr. Cam

Image
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_malkie
_Emeritus
Posts: 2663
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:03 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _malkie »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
malkie wrote:True, Chap, but if you were SB wouldn't you also worry about another possibility: that an intelligent TBM lurker will think that your position is so weak that you are forced into writing childish arguments. I mean, if this is the best that a well-educated apologist can do ...


Hello,

I also believe Mr. Simon has set the standard for Mopolo-swearing. I'm not sure I've seen a Moral Voice swear so much since reading the Journal of Discourses. Oh my!

V/R
Dr. Cam

Image

Careful - he might tell you to shut the fetch up!
NOMinal member

Maksutov: "... if you give someone else the means to always push your buttons, you're lost."
_Yoda

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Yoda »

MsJack wrote:
Nomad wrote:I see that you aren’t too particular about what lies you believe, as long as they further your agenda.

Thinking that a single person named William Schryver has been operating on this forum under the handles Nomad, Belinda Schryver, and Silver Hammer in addition to his Will Schryver and William Schryver handles isn't a lie. In the case of Silver Hammer it's a certainty, and in the case of the Nomad and Belinda Schryver handles, it's a theory. People aren't liars for believing in theories.

Nomad wrote:Will has, on several occasions, denied having made this post and denied posting under the name “WilliamSchryver”. How and by whom it was made to appear (earlier in this thread) that he acknowledged making the post is a mystery that remains to be uncovered. But considering how the “c***” lie was built, I wouldn’t put anything past the moderators and members of this message board.

How it was "made to appear"? I don't even know what you mean by that. As I have demonstrated to you four or five times now, it was William himself who claimed to have made the comment on Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:16 am (CST). Buffalo responded to said comment and captured the text in which William owned up to making the WilliamSchryver comment 8 minutes later. William made other comments in the thread on that same day at 8:08 AM, 8:13 AM, 9:38 AM, 9:47 AM, 9:50 AM, 11:25 AM, 11:29 AM, 11:48 AM, 11:52 AM, 12:18 PM, 12:35 PM, 12:45 PM, 1:07 PM, 1:33 PM, 1:43 PM, 1:54 PM, 2:00 PM, 2:08 PM, 2:14 PM, 2:22 PM, 2:53 PM, 3:31 PM, and 11:55 PM. He posted in the thread no fewer then 24 times that day, and has never complained about his account being hacked, so I think we can rule out the possibility that someone else was posting as him.

The only way it could have been "made to appear" that William owned up to making the WilliamSchryver comment is if the people on this forum with administrator or moderator access later went into his 5/6/11 9:16 AM post and Buffalo's 5/6/11 9:24 AM post and changed what they said. As you said in your post:

Nomad wrote:I wouldn’t put anything past the moderators and members of this message board.

So if you're accusing the moderating team here of editing William's posts, I think you need to say it clearly, because that's a pretty serious accusation to make.

I would ask Buffalo to come and tell us whether or not it looks like his post (which quotes William's post) has been modified at all, but I'm sure you'll just call him a "suborned witness" if he doesn't remember it the way you want him to remember it.

By the way, I'm repeating the extent of the evidence that William made the post in question for anyone who is reading this now but hasn't kept up on this.

------------------------------

This was the entire post made under the handle WilliamSchryver on March 23, 2009:

WilliamSchryver wrote:Harmony is just bitter that the daily circle jerks in the Great and Spacious Trailer Park™ are the closest she has come to a bona fide sexual experience in over 40 years.

I simply cannot understand how her husband has resisted the urge to off himself for so long. Of all the men in human history who have felt compelled, no matter the cost, to “stick it out” with a bitch of a wife – Joseph Smith included – if anyone deserves the reward of 72 virgins in heaven, it’s that poor man.

As for the rest of you, and your compulsive obsession with your former faith and those who defend it against people like you, and in the way of expressing my sincere gratitude for your recognition of my meager efforts in the cause, I can only say: I couldn’t have done it without all you special folks here in the GSTP.

Despite our occasional spats over the years, I knew all along that you really do like me.

[Sniffles, wipes a tear, tosses the plastic trophy in the overflowing dumpster, and after exiting the trailer park once again, takes the earliest opportunity to thoroughly wash his hands and dust his feet …]

In my thread, on May 6 2011, jon asked William:

jon wrote:Will, yes or no - did you say this:

''Harmony is just bitter that the daily circle jerks in the Great and Spacious Trailer Park™ are the closest she has come to a bona fide sexual experience in over 40 years.

I simply cannot understand how her husband has resisted the urge to off himself for so long. Of all the men in human history who have felt compelled, no matter the cost, to “stick it out” with a bitch of a wife – Joseph Smith included – if anyone deserves the reward of 72 virgins in heaven, it’s that poor man.''

To which William replied on the same day:

Will Schryver wrote:LOL!

Yes. Yes, I did write that. Of course, it’s divorced from its context, like everything else has been. In its original context, it’s abundantly clear that it is a tongue-in-cheek (albeit sharply barbed) remark. But, no matter. It’s funny even on its own. A bit rough and cutting? Oh, yes. It was meant to be.

So, there you go. When confronted with the words themselves and not a question about the handle, William wholeheartedly owned it.


Nomad---I would like you to answer to this. You made the accusation. Now, what say you?

Oh...and by the way...if you are accusing the Moderators here of tampering with posts in this manner....which would go against the entire vision of free speech that Shades has fought for with this site....
then, please....take a look at the following link:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18534
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _wenglund »

Here are my final thoughts on the matter: "Boy, was I wrong."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Analytics
_Emeritus
Posts: 4231
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Analytics »

Summarizing my take on all this, the real issue here really isn't what Mr. Schryver has said, but rather the intellectual integrity of the Maxwell Institute itself. It looks like they passed the test; kudos to them.
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

-Yuval Noah Harari
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _EAllusion »

Analytics wrote:Summarizing my take on all this, the real issue here really isn't what Mr. Schryver has said, but rather the intellectual integrity of the Maxwell Institute itself. It looks like they passed the test; kudos to them.

I don't buy that Analytics. If his piece had a lot of merit and he went to the Maxwell Institute first to publish it, then they should have regardless of his personal issues. Granted, I'm skeptical of that merit piece, but I'm also skeptical of the MI's standards. He's not being hired to be a personal representative of the Church, he's seeking to contribute to the knowledge of the LDS standard works. The latter stands or falls irrespective of his personal character, and it would be wrong to ignore his views because of that.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Kevin Graham »

EAllusion wrote:
Analytics wrote:Summarizing my take on all this, the real issue here really isn't what Mr. Schryver has said, but rather the intellectual integrity of the Maxwell Institute itself. It looks like they passed the test; kudos to them.

I don't buy that Analytics. If his piece had a lot of merit and he went to the Maxwell Institute first to publish it, then they should have regardless of his personal issues. Granted, I'm skeptical of that merit piece, but I'm also skeptical of the MI's standards. He's not being hired to be a personal representative of the Church, he's seeking to contribute to the knowledge of the LDS standard works. The latter stands or falls irrespective of his personal character, and it would be wrong to ignore his views because of that.


Good point. What evidence do we really have that his work was ever slated for publication to begin with?

All we had was Will's say so. But Will has always hyped up future publications that never came to be. NAMI never advertised a future publication with his name on it, so I'm inclined to believe they didn't feel it was a worthy piece. Otherwise, why would Will need to spend so much time and effort lobbying on his own behalf, trying to court the NAMI talking heads on date nights and luncheons? Most people just submit a paper and have it judged on its own merits. Will has to spend months trying to woo these people in advance.
_Polygamy-Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8091
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Polygamy-Porter »

Where there's a Will there's a.... short black skirt...

I propose MsJack attend the next Fair conference in a short black skirt and loooooooong jacket..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7aDstrDMf0
New name: Boaz
The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
Post Reply