Re: “Peter Pan” is Unmasked as Mike Parker
Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2023 5:38 am
Internet Mormons, Chapel Mormons, Critics, Apologists, and Never-Mo's all welcome!
https://discussmormonism.com/
It also reveals a fundamental error conservative Mormons are making in how they understand positionality and intersectionalism. Granted there are far too many people that claim to be progressive with similar misunderstandings.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Tue Mar 07, 2023 6:48 pm
The problem is, as you state, that you’ve never read anything from the NNL blog. Parker drones on and on about lying and duplicity, yet he himself appropriated the persona of a black LDS man from Birmingham, AL. This is bananas. Especially so considering the era in which we live where Mormons have openly, secretly, and socially persecuted black people. It’s not only in bad taste to use a black man as an avatar, but one has to wonder if Parker did so in order to deflect any criticism - did he think using the identity of a black man would afford him a social shield from criticism? Regardless, an anonymous handle would’ve been sufficient for the task at hand, but to flesh it out as a black man in these racially charged times is stupidity manifest. Mike Parker who currently teaches an adult religion class in the Hurricane, Utah, area is goddamn fool.
- Doc
This list, and the attitudes behind it, are telling, and for me, it points to what may be the motive for the "Richard Nygren" minstrelsy. Parker seems like the kind of person who cannot sympathize with or understand people who don't share his politics, and so he ridicules and dehumanizes them. If I may be allowed to speculate: I think that Parker pretended to be a Black man from Alabama because he assumes that his critics--especially the folks *here* at DiscussMormonism.com--are a bunch of "Libtards" who are so afflicted with "wokeism" that they think Black folks are beyond reproach. The idea being, I guess, that if he were to pose as Black, that he'd gain an advantage of some kind. It's the kind of warped and dishonest and exploitative racism that you saw in cases like Rachel Dolezal and Andrea Smith.drumdude wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 2:45 amLook up mike-parker.org on the way back machine.
You will find some gems like this:
TOP 30 INDICATIONS YOU LIVE IN A LIBERAL STAKE:
30. Most of the men have long hair; most of the women have short hair.
29. Members frequently use the term, "international church."
28. The singles' ward has better Home/Visiting Teaching statistics than
the family wards.
27. The flagpole hasn't been painted since Ezra Taft Benson was prophet.
26. The flag hasn't quite made it up the flagpole since Ezra Taft
Benson was prophet.
25. Flag? What flag?
24. No bubble perms on women (or men--see #30).
23. Very few, if any, men are wearing white shirts.
22. Most members of the Bishoprics, High Council, and Stake Presidency
sport facial hair in one form or another.
21. The Relief Society President attends PEC. Every week.
20. There are no lawyers or orthodontists in high-profile leadership
positions.
19. Primary children are permitted to "drum" when singing "Book of
Mormon Stories."
Corollary: Primary children are permitted to shout "Sun-BEAM!"
(You know when.)
18. No "Rush is Right" bumper stickers in the parking lot.
17. No faded "Happiness is Family Home Evening" bumper stickers in the
parking lot.
16. No 1970's-era station wagons or vans in the parking lot, with or
without the aforementioned bumper stickers.
15. None of these aforementioned station wagons or vans can be found at
the neighborhood PriceCostco.
14. The Laurels don't flirt with the missionaries--the Beehives do.
13. No ward picnic on or around July 24.
12. Portraits of past Relief Society presidents are prominently
displayed in the foyer--but no apostles.
11. Nobody in a leadership position uses a Franklin Day Planner.
10. The red punch actually tastes good.
9. The Relief Society doesn't own a lace doily tablecloth.
8. The Stake President is quoted in the local liberal rag.
7. During the weekly announcement from the pulpit, the Ward Magazine
Rep pushes "Sunstone" and "Dialogue."
6. None of the Young Women wear hair bows, floral print dresses, or
lace collars.
5. Ezra Taft Benson is never quoted in any meeting (not even the
"Pride" talk).
4. The Relief Society Presidency all wear Birkenstocks to church on
Sunday.
3. Multi-whole-grain sacrament bread.
2. The General Handbook of Instructions is supporting the broken leg
on the bishop's desk.
1. Members prefer to be called "Mormons" rather than "Latter-day
Saints."
Yuck.
DCP wrote:I actually agree with you and, if I had gone on, would have said that I think it highly unlikely, realistically speaking, that anybody ever has been or ever could be purely evil. In fact, a completely bad person may not even really be fully imaginable. In any case, I'm guessing that Mafiosi love their children. I expect that der Führer really liked his German shepherd, Blondi. (What? You expected him to own a French poodle?)
I think you are giving him too much credit. He assumes his readers know nothing about the facts, and he spins from there. No need to concoct an elaborate alternate narrative.dastardly stem wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 6:12 pmI know I'm way behind here, but I just read Peterson's blog post about this stuff. Apparently he think Everybody Wang Chung told Robert Boylan that Richard Nygren was the author of the blog. And then something about Everybody Wang Chung posting in Peterson's comments section. Boylan then said it on a podcast or something and Mike Parker and perhaps others ran with it since it perhaps offered some convenient cover?
How far off am I now?
I would enjoy seeing someone offer an explanation for this whole mess, though. Sounds like Parker is quite a weenie.
This.Kishkumen wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 6:13 pmI think you are giving him too much credit. He assumes his readers know nothing about the facts, and he spins from there. No need to concoct an elaborate alternate narrative.dastardly stem wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 6:12 pmI know I'm way behind here, but I just read Peterson's blog post about this stuff. Apparently he think Everybody Wang Chung told Robert Boylan that Richard Nygren was the author of the blog. And then something about Everybody Wang Chung posting in Peterson's comments section. Boylan then said it on a podcast or something and Mike Parker and perhaps others ran with it since it perhaps offered some convenient cover?
How far off am I now?
I would enjoy seeing someone offer an explanation for this whole mess, though. Sounds like Parker is quite a weenie.
Either that, or he's saying the real fraud is that someone created an account under Richard Nygren and tried to post a couple of comments on his blog.Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑Wed Mar 08, 2023 6:57 pmWait….What?
DCP is blaming me for the whole Richard Nygren affair? Good Lord.
Folks, you can’t make this stuff up.
Admittedly, I'd still be curious to learn where Boylan got his information from. I have no reason to doubt it'd be Parker, but it'd be nice to have some sort of confirmation.Moreover, I’m reasonably confident that I know who is behind the fraud: It’s good old “Everybody Wang Chung” himself.