Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[The Stig]

How…fanciful…

Eight times...that's a lot of fanciful.

[consiglieri]

You counted!

Are there no homonyms?

[consiglieri]

Did she misplace her Thesaurus?

[pistolero]

My favourite line:

They lack self-awareness...

I'll openly admit that I lack plenty of this. But that's another story and I'm not important or interesting enough to have my own thread.

I really feel bad for her. She's so self-unaware that she probably doesn't even know who Rosebud is. Will she continue with this for the rest of her life? It feels like she's in such a terrible place. I can't imagine not being able to get over something like this after such a long time. Things had gone quiet during recent months. Of late, JD has been quite low profile and hasn't done anything particularly outrageous or stupid. I wonder what her triggers are that cause her to decide to write another masterpiece for her website?

It seems clear that the only person she is hurting is herself. That sounded incredibly Mormon of me, I think I'm going to puke.

[SaturdaysVoyeur]

All this sneering mockery of Rosebud is pretty damn rich coming from a bunch of people who believed well into adulthood that America was settled by Jews in 600 BC, and we know this because of the tingly feelings we got by reading a book "translated" from a nonexistent language off of plates nobody ever saw.

Most people figure out that fairy tales are just stories by about the age of 10, so I don't think any of us here have any business pointing fingers about gullibility or immaturity or the inability to let go of delusions.

Clearly, Rosebud has some mental health issues (the cutting, the grandiosity, etc.), but maybe she would have been able to let this go a long time ago if she didn't have her frenemies (Kwaku, Kate Kelly, James Patterson) egging her on. They're using and manipulating a vulnerable woman simply to further their own vendettas against Dehlin.

I mean, you want to talk about "can't let it go"? Patterson was employed by Dehlin years ago. Got pissed off because Patterson believed Dehlin owed him complete and honest information about Dehlin's sex life. Who does that?? Who asks their boss about his sex life and then feels utterly entitled to an honest answer---and then proceeds to hound that ex-employer for years? It's weird and creepy. Frankly, it's weird and creepy that Patterson then sought out contact with Rosebud. A healthier woman might have considered a restraining order.

Odd, how we never mock Patterson for being a pathetic bunny boiler who can't let it go. Just Rosebud, who at least has the excuse of being in love with Dehlin. But, of course, she's female and Patterson's male. He gets plenty of pushback for his lack of evidence, but he never gets degraded, called crazy and obsessed and compared to Glenn Close.

But, yes, she overused the word "fanciful." Ha, ha! What a crazy bitch! Isn't that hilarious?

Ugh.

[Lem]

All this sneering mockery of Rosebud is pretty damn rich coming from a bunch of people who believed well into adulthood that America was settled by Jews in 600 BC, and we know this because of the tingly feelings we got by reading a book "translated" from a nonexistent language off of plates nobody ever saw.

Really. You think you know everyone’s back history here?

And did you read everything Rosebud has openly and voluntarily revealed here and on the old board? Because “sneering mockery” doesn’t capture how her posting history played out here, at all.

Clearly, Rosebud has some mental health issues (the cutting, the grandiosity, etc.), but maybe she would have been able to let this go a long time ago if she didn't have her frenemies (Kwaku, Kate Kelly, James Patterson) egging her on. They're using and manipulating a vulnerable woman simply to further their own vendettas against Dehlin.

I mean, you want to talk about "can't let it go"? Patterson was employed by Dehlin years ago. Got pissed off because Patterson believed Dehlin owed him complete and honest information about Dehlin's sex life. Who does that?? Who asks their boss about his sex life and then feels utterly entitled to an honest answer---and then proceeds to hound that ex-employer for years? It's weird and creepy. Frankly, it's weird and creepy that Patterson then sought out contact with Rosebud. A healthier woman might have considered a restraining order.

Odd, how we never mock Patterson for being a pathetic bunny boiler who can't let it go. Just Rosebud, who at least has the excuse of being in love with Dehlin. But, of course, she's female and Patterson's male.

i don’t think you have read this thread too consistently. Also, we usually let other people tell their own stories. Once they release the details voluntarily, then of course they’re fair game, but you’re revealing a lot here that doesn’t seem like you have the right to do.

[SaturdaysVoyeur]

All this sneering mockery of Rosebud is pretty damn rich coming from a bunch of people who believed well into adulthood that America was settled by Jews in 600 BC, and we know this because of the tingly feelings we got by reading a book "translated" from a nonexistent language off of plates nobody ever saw.

Really. You think you know everyone’s back history here?

It's a discussion board comprised almost entirely of ex-Mormons. I don't really need to know everyone's personal backstory to be familiar with the stupid crap that we believed for stupid reasons long past the age when children figure out that Santa Claus isn't real.

But, ok, my apologies to anyone who left Mormonism before the age of 10. Better now?

And did you read everything Rosebud has openly and voluntarily revealed here and on the old board? Because “sneering mockery” doesn’t capture how her posting history played out here, at all.

Yes, she was obnoxious, I'll grant you that. I had forgotten just how much so until the old board was recently integrated onto this one. I read at least some of the old Rosebud threads at the time, but I don't think I ever posted on any of them, because I didn't believe there was anything to her story at all. I thought the entire thing was a fabrication until the Mormonism Live episode revealed the affair actually did happen.

But, yes, she made a pest of herself. She was grandiose. She copped an attitude with anyone who challenged her, claiming she was merely "documenting her story" for all the historians she thought would someday be interested. It's sort of my point that she's clearly unwell.

I'm not seeing how any of that makes it ok to be an asshole to a mentally ill woman for cheap-shot reasons like overusing the same word.

i don’t think you have read this thread too consistently. Also, we usually let other people tell their own stories. Once they release the details voluntarily, then of course they’re fair game, but you’re revealing a lot here that doesn’t seem like you have the right to do.

Everything I've said about James Patterson is based entirely on what he's posted here and elsewhere around the Internet. He's posted his anti-Dehlin crusade to ex-Mormon Reddit ad nauseum. So, by your standards, he's "fair game," right?

Are you suggesting it's normal to pursue a vendetta against one's former employer for years on end? So, why don't the same rules apply to him as apply to Rosebud?

[Lem]

Really. You think you know everyone’s back history here?

It's a discussion board comprised almost entirely of ex-Mormons. I don't really need to know everyone's personal backstory to be familiar with the stupid crap that we believed for stupid reasons long past the age when children figure out that Santa Claus isn't real.

But, ok, my apologies to anyone who left Mormonism before the age of 10. Better now?

No. You’re making the same stereotyping mistake, but now you are excusing yourself.

And did you read everything Rosebud has openly and voluntarily revealed here and on the old board? Because “sneering mockery” doesn’t capture how her posting history played out here, at all.

Yes, she was obnoxious, I'll grant you that. I had forgotten just how much so until the old board was recently integrated onto this one. I read at least some of the old Rosebud threads at the time, but I don't think I ever posted on any of them, because I didn't believe there was anything to her story at all. I thought the entire thing was a fabrication until the Mormonism Live episode revealed the affair actually did happen.

But, yes, she made a pest of herself. She was grandiose. She copped an attitude with anyone who challenged her, claiming she was merely "documenting her story" for all the historians she thought would someday be interested. It's sort of my point that she's clearly unwell.

I'm not seeing how any of that makes it ok to be an asshole to a mentally ill woman for cheap-shot reasons like overusing the same word.

You’re really not getting my point. When I said “sneering mockery” doesn’t accurately describe how her posting history played out, I meant it in the same way you originally used it. You’re saying “sneering mockery” described how she was treated, I am saying no, that’s not accurate. Many, many people here listened carefully and thoughtfully to her story, gave her the benefit of the doubt for a long time, and interacted with her in good faith, a position she rarely reciprocated.

i don’t think you have read this thread too consistently. Also, we usually let other people tell their own stories. Once they release the details voluntarily, then of course they’re fair game, but you’re revealing a lot here that doesn’t seem like you have the right to do.

Everything I've said about James Patterson is based entirely on what he's posted here and elsewhere around the Internet. He's posted his anti-Dehlin crusade to ex-Mormon Reddit ad nauseum. So, by your standards, he's "fair game," right?

ZzZ cAre you suggesting it's normal to pursue a vendetta against one's former employer for years on end? So, why don't the same rules apply to him as apply to Rosebud?

Again, you miss entirely my point! I’m not comparing Rosebud to Patterson, YOU are. If he has posted himself information about all of the things you said about him, as well as Rosebud about her specific details, then ok. I am saying that I haven’t seen it.

And yes, same rules apply. If you think I don’t think that, then you really haven’t been reading the thread.

Bottom line, you’re jumping to stereotypical assumptions in your defense of Rosebud. It’s simply the flip side of the coin to those using stereotypical assumptions to attack Rosebud. Both are knee jerk reactions and both have many untrue and unkind parts.

[SaturdaysVoyeur]

It's a discussion board comprised almost entirely of ex-Mormons. I don't really need to know everyone's personal backstory to be familiar with the stupid crap that we believed for stupid reasons long past the age when children figure out that Santa Claus isn't real.

But, ok, my apologies to anyone who left Mormonism before the age of 10. Better now?

No. You’re making the same stereotyping mistake, but now you are excusing yourself.

You're picking nits that aren't even worth picking. Most of us---not all, I know!---believed the Silliest Story Ever Told long past when it should have been obviously false. That ought to instill a little humility for the human capacity to cling to nonsense for emotional reasons.

Clearer now? No....no, of course not, is it? Because I think you just want to pick nits with me for some reason.

You’re really not getting my point. When I said “sneering mockery” doesn’t accurately describe how her posting history played out, I meant it in the same way you originally used it. You’re saying “sneering mockery” described how she was treated, I am saying no, that’s not accurate. Many, many people here listened carefully and thoughtfully to her story, gave her the benefit of the doubt for a long time, and interacted with her in good faith, a position she rarely reciprocated.

No, "sneering mockery" referred to the handful of posts made since this thread was resurrected. I was not referring to the entire reaction to her for the last decade, or even to the entirety of this one thread. I'm not really sure how it could have been interpreted otherwise, but now I've spelled it out.

I’m not comparing Rosebud to Patterson, YOU are.

Ding, ding! You're correct! I am comparing them!

If he has posted himself information about all of the things you said about him, as well as Rosebud about her specific details, then ok. I am saying that I haven’t seen it.

I'm pretty sure everything I included about Patterson was stated by him right here in this thread and in the "Problematic John Dehlin" thread. (And on Ex-Mormon Reddit, and on Medium, and on Rational Faith. He's been prolific about it. His story in his own words is not hard to find.)

And yes, same rules apply. If you think I don’t think that, then you really haven’t been reading the thread.

Couldn't you mix it up a little? I know you are, but what am I? Takes one to know one? If you like it so much, why don't you marry it? Or are you just going to stick with: "You obviously haven't read the thread!"

Yeah, I have. I'm not sure why sometimes, but I have read the thread. James has gotten pushback about his lack of evidence. He's gotten a lot of pushback, but not of the gendered variety that he's a crazy stalker and a bunny boiler. I don't think it would be fair or kind to treat him that way either, but I do think it's pretty weird and obsessive to be on such a rampage against your former employer for so long. Or to have expected your employer to tell you anything about his sex life in the first place. Or to contact the total stranger your boss had this affair with. Or to paper the Internet for years with accusations about your former boss.

It's weird. In some ways, much weirder than continuing to obsess over a former lover who dumped you.

Bottom line, you’re jumping to stereotypical assumptions in your defense of Rosebud. It’s simply the flip side of the coin to those using stereotypical assumptions to attack Rosebud. Both are knee jerk reactions and both have many untrue and unkind parts.

Now, wait, who hasn't read the thread here? 'Cause I've never been on Team Rosebud. Not in the sense that I've ever believed she was sexually harassed or assaulted by Dehlin. Until a few months ago, I didn't believe they'd had any relationship at all.

But I do have a lot of compassion for her, especially after I listened to her "forensic interview." She got screwed over by Mormonism. She had a bad relationship with a married man where she got hurt. And now I think she's being used and manipulated by this collection of other people who don't really care anything about her, but she's a useful tool in their quest to attack Dehlin.

That doesn't make her allegations true. All evidence suggests they are actually false. But I do get the sense she's very vulnerable and I think taking cheap shots about things like her word usage is unnecessary and assholish.

[drumdude]

So your point is that James writing a handful of posts online criticizing his former boss is equal to Rosebud spending almost a decade of her life slandering a former lover across hundreds and hundreds of posts in dozens of places.

I think Lem is making a fair point that perhaps you don’t understand just how long Rosebud has been at this. It has nothing to do with James being treated differently because he happens to have a penis.