Actual Ex-Mo Predators

[Marcus]

The Facebook thread seems to be having the same discussion we are.

...Someone actually said that one survivor was taking out her trauma from childhood SA onto Dohn (implied to be the TRUE victim) bc she couldn't process it in an otherwise healthy way. It might be the grossest form of gaslighting I've ever seen.

[drumdude]

The Facebook thread seems to be having the same discussion we are.

...Someone actually said that one survivor was taking out her trauma from childhood SA onto Dohn (implied to be the TRUE victim) bc she couldn't process it in an otherwise healthy way. It might be the grossest form of gaslighting I've ever seen.

Do you have a link to it?

[Marcus]

The Facebook thread seems to be having the same discussion we are.

Do you have a link to it?

Facebook sucks! How do you link to just one comment? I think this might work...

https://www.Facebook.com/josh.weed3/pos ... 1350832864

[malkie]

Do you have a link to it?

Facebook sucks! How do you link to just one comment? I think this might work...

https://www.Facebook.com/josh.weed3/pos ... 1350832864

I believe that you copy the link from the comment's timestamp.

[Marcus]

Facebook sucks! How do you link to just one comment? I think this might work...

https://www.Facebook.com/josh.weed3/pos ... 1350832864

I believe that you copy the link from the comment's timestamp.

Oh thank you. I will file that away for future use.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ngl, I didn’t know who Brad Kramer (?) was. I had to google ‘his name + exmormon’, and something hit - that he’s Jewish-Mormon? Mormon-Jew? Jewish-Mormonish? I’m not sure how to appropriately arrange the descriptors, so my apologies if it’s offensive.

Is that the guy?

- Doc

[Kishkumen]

John Dehlin has made many bedfellows of exMormons and apologists on this issue. Their convictions and ideology couldn’t be farther apart. That says something about John, not his critics. When many on both sides agree John is problematic, that seems to me to be something more than narcissism run amok. Again, just my opinion.

For the record, I don’t think he is evil or a monster and anyone using those words (if anyone is using those words) is being childish and reductionist.

Yeah, John has detractors. Shrug. I am not sure what that is supposed to prove. And the word "problematic," while safely non-committal in its note of disapproval, might also be characterized as a weasel word. It is one of those things people say to add their vague and obligatory brow furrowing at the right time. Newsflash: almost anyone could be called problematic. The question is what motivates people to do so.

So, throwing aside all of the fretful chin-stroking of the prudent disapprovers, let me get back to the actual point of this thread which is this: Is John Dehlin a predator?

The answer is no. There is no evidence that John Dehlin is a predator. He may be many other imperfect, gauche, or off-putting things, but he is not a predator. He may have problems in his marriage. He did have an affair of sorts with Rosebud. He made the mistake of asking Jen Kamp to come to work, when she clearly preferred earning a big paycheck entirely on her own terms. He may have not paid the Kristy Money, or whatever her name was, the surplus greenbacks she was not getting through the anemic popularity of her podcast.

He may be a jerk.

He is not a predator.

[Kishkumen]

Saying a person's problems with sexual harassment and how they treat women don't rise to the level of "Kimball and Bramer" inappropriately minimizes the issue. It's fallacious reasoning.

Yes, I agree Rosebud has serious issues, but the bottom line for me is still that Dehlin got her fired after he had a sexual encounter with her. He's handled the aftermath of this sexual harassment of Rosebud very badly, as has she, but that doesn't excuse his behavior, nor the behavior that multiple other first-hand, documented reports have shown.

The issue of this thread, which I chose as the thread's author, is this: John Dehlin is not a predator.

Distinguishing between what Dehlin is and what Dehlin is not does not "inappropriately minimize the issue."

It is not fallacious reasoning.

To equate sexual predation with John Dehlin's faults does "inappropriately minimize" sexual predation, while inappropriately exaggerating John Dehlin's actual problems.

And I thought it was worth doing because Dehlin critics of the sloppier and more vehement sort have been known to use the rhetoric of sexual predation in John's case. There was even that infamous website where he was accused of being a child predator.

I would go further and say that John does not have victims. He has detractors. He has people he has fallen out with. He has people with whom he has had differences. He has undoubtedly behaved poorly toward others at times.

John Dehlin does not have "victims."

But a specious narrative of heroic victimhood is exactly what Rosebud and Kamp have abused in order to attack John Dehlin incessantly. I would argue that neither person, nor Kristy Money, is a victim of John Dehlin. So, where are the victims of John Dehlin? I don't see any. I doubt there are any.

[Kishkumen]

The Facebook thread seems to be having the same discussion we are.

...Someone actually said that one survivor was taking out her trauma from childhood SA onto Dohn (implied to be the TRUE victim) bc she couldn't process it in an otherwise healthy way. It might be the grossest form of gaslighting I've ever seen.

This lacks context to the point of being utterly useless. I see a farrago of fashionable accusations strung together to gin up outrage.

It has become so overdone as to undermine serious discussions of real problems.

[huckelberry]

John Dehlin has made many bedfellows of exMormons and apologists on this issue. Their convictions and ideology couldn’t be farther apart. That says something about John, not his critics. When many on both sides agree John is problematic, that seems to me to be something more than narcissism run amok. Again, just my opinion.

For the record, I don’t think he is evil or a monster and anyone using those words (if anyone is using those words) is being childish and reductionist.

Yeah, John has detractors. Shrug. I am not sure what that is supposed to prove. And the word "problematic," while safely non-committal in its note of disapproval, might also be characterized as a weasel word. It is one of those things people say to add their vague and obligatory brow furrowing at the right time. Newsflash: almost anyone could be called problematic. The question is what motivates people to do so.

So, throwing aside all of the fretful chin-stroking of the prudent disapprovers, let me get back to the actual point of this thread which is this: Is John Dehlin a predator?

The answer is no. There is no evidence that John Dehlin is a predator. He may be many other imperfect, gauche, or off-putting things, but he is not a predator. He may have problems in his marriage. He did have an affair of sorts with Rosebud. He made the mistake of asking Jen Kamp to come to work, when she clearly preferred earning a big paycheck entirely on her own terms. He may have not paid the Kristy Money, or whatever her name was, the surplus greenbacks she was not getting through the anemic popularity of her podcast.

He may be a jerk.

He is not a predator.

drumdude you report that you have spent a good deal of time with evidence but your reports about that evidence are short and very vague. It seems to me if you are going to the trouble of reviewing this you could be more forthcoming about specifically what you see and what you see that indicating.

Am I too lazy to read through piles of reports? Well I am not attached to John Dehlin. I am generally not able to sit through one of his interviews. In general problems with exmormons is a subject which is important to me. I know nothing of an exmormon community but a few exmormon friends are valuable. I think internet communication has helped awareness and helped people think. The urge to look to leaders appears to create possibilities of danger.