Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[jpatterson]

Now you are characterizing people's reactions to a 3 hour cognitive interview that no one here has finished listening to, much less have they posted their reactions.

Stop it.

I guess you missed the part where Doc has a sixth sense about these things and already knows she's lying. Why are you chiding me and not him?

[Jersey Girl]

Now you are characterizing people's reactions to a 3 hour cognitive interview that no one here has finished listening to, much less have they posted their reactions.

Stop it.

I guess you missed the part where Doc has a sixth sense about these things and already knows she's lying. Why are you chiding me and not him?

That was his reaction posted at less than half of the 3 hour interview. He'll return and post his thoughts when he finishes listening.

You aren't doing Rosebud any favors.

[Res Ipsa]

Joanna was presented with an extramarital affair that wasn’t sexual between two employees and was ending in a spectacularly bad breakup. She tried to provide a path for both to keep contributing and being part of Open Stories Foundation, Dehlin was punished and accepted he needed to resign, Rosebud tried her power play and when that failed her tune changed.

No, Joanna was presented with an extramarital affair that was sexual between the leader of the organization and a subordinate that had resulted in allegations of sexual assault.

Joanna conducted no formal investigation, and did not inform other members of the board. She then tried to pressure the subordinate into resigning, and when she wouldn't, Joanna fired her.

Thinking that Joanna wanted to have them both resign and then rehire both of them once she learned they couldn't keep their hands off each other requires a tremendous suspension of disbelief. Her plan was to rehire John and accept Rosebud's resignation and send her on her way. Rosebud, smartly, forced her hand.

Faced with the decision of getting rid of a subordinate who was great at organizing conferences and getting rid of the head of the organization who had locked everyone out of all the websites and content, Joanna made a very clear decision.

She says in the recording that the board asked her if she wanted an investigation and she said no.

[Dwight]

Hey consiglieri, did John happen to mention the illegal recording he made of Rosebud in 2012 when you guys strategized? The one he saved to possibly use later as blackmail against her?

Did he mention why that kind of sexual harassment can, you know, cause someone to behave irrationally?

You guys didn't talk about that? Oh.

Illegal recording? I am going to ask for context, please define how it is illegal. Utah and Arizona are both one party consent, there are no details you just claim there is an illegal recording.

[Res Ipsa]

You lawyered up yet, Patterson?

[Lem]

I hadn't read the current Open Stories Foundation policy on sexual harassment. Here is one part that I found very interesting:

Open Stories Foundation considers sexual or romantic advances or innuendos by persons in a supervisory or
authoritative role toward subordinates within the same department or chain of command, or by persons
having authority over staffing or salary decisions, to be harassment for which disciplinary action will be taken.

I am pretty sure this policy was instituted well after the incident under discussion. I find it incredibly disappointing that although the board member and the lawyer being interviewed know this is currently the policy, both of them said that when they recently reviewed the case documents, they "found no discrimination in Dehlin's past behavior."

They did NOT say, '...under our current policy, Dehlin's behavior would clearly be considered sexual harassment, but since we did not have those policies in place then, we cannot retroactively apply the policy in a fair way.'

No. They both unequivocally stated that their reviews NOW found no sexual harassment in his past behavior. This obvious inconsistency with their stated policy, made by both of them, unfortunately brings their motivations somewhat into question.

[Jersey Girl]

I hadn't read the current Open Stories Foundation policy on sexual harassment. Here is one part that I found very interesting:

Open Stories Foundation considers sexual or romantic advances or innuendos by persons in a supervisory or
authoritative role toward subordinates within the same department or chain of command, or by persons
having authority over staffing or salary decisions, to be harassment for which disciplinary action will be taken.

I am pretty sure this policy was instituted well after the incident under discussion. I find it incredibly disappointing that although the board member and the lawyer being interviewed know this is currently the policy, both of them said that when they recently reviewed the case documents, they "found no discrimination in Dehlin's past behavior."

They did NOT say, '...under our current policy, Dehlin's behavior would clearly be considered sexual harassment, but since we did not have those policies in place then, we cannot retroactively apply the policy in a fair way.'

No. They both unequivocally stated that their reviews NOW found no sexual harassment in his past behavior. This obvious inconsistency with their stated policy, made by both of them, unfortunately brings their motivations somewhat into question.

In their statement re: discrimination they are clearly side stepping the issue of sexual harassment.

[drumdude]

As a huge infants on thrones fan, this sheds a lot of light on what happened and why Glenn is the only one left there. It sounds like Matt had a huge fallout with Glenn and some of the other in order to voices. It likely forced all of the in order to members to take sides on the Dehlin/Rosebud issue and since ex-Mormonism's momentum was slowing down, they just all called it quits. He calls Infants on Thrones "little", "pathetic", "cringe worthy" and seems to really regret ever being involved with them.

I find that incredibly sad.

I love Matt Long, but his bias is towards sexual assault victims and he has already decided rosebud is credible. He sees the worst sexual crimes in the world as a prosecutor. His job is to defend victims at all costs, and not to see both sides objectively. The legal system is a battle where you always present your client (even if she's not technically his client) in the best possible light, which appears what he did at the beginning of the Rosebud 3 hour tape.

I wish all of the Infants on Thrones members the best, I don't blame any of them. I'm just incredibly sad that Rosebud's BS may have caused my favorite podcast to break up.

[Dwight]

No, Joanna was presented with an extramarital affair that was sexual between the leader of the organization and a subordinate that had resulted in allegations of sexual assault.

Joanna conducted no formal investigation, and did not inform other members of the board. She then tried to pressure the subordinate into resigning, and when she wouldn't, Joanna fired her.

Thinking that Joanna wanted to have them both resign and then rehire both of them once she learned they couldn't keep their hands off each other requires a tremendous suspension of disbelief. Her plan was to rehire John and accept Rosebud's resignation and send her on her way. Rosebud, smartly, forced her hand.

Faced with the decision of getting rid of a subordinate who was great at organizing conferences and getting rid of the head of the organization who had locked everyone out of all the websites and content, Joanna made a very clear decision.

She says in the recording that the board asked her if she wanted an investigation and she said no.

I trust Joanna more than John Dehlin or Rosebud that her intentions were sincere. I also have sympathy that she noped out of the drama and left the board. I don’t buy the narrative that the Open Stories Foundation board has acted unilaterally to protect John Dehlin and shut Rosebud out. We have now that Rosebud didn’t provide evidence and in her own words didn’t ask for an investigation when offered to have one. John Dehlin is unreliable and Rosebud is unreliable and JP you are unreliable. So I will make time to listen to the recording, and I try and look at all the evidence and while I think John did bad, I am just unable to get to he is some super predator that corrupted pure innocent Rosebud and devastated her life and left it in ruins. She seems to have been a willing accomplice. The relationship seems to have started before the employee/employer thing, and yes volunteer and overseer is also problematic, but let’s not try and paint this as purely John Dehlin employed Rosebud to get her in a situation he could get sexual favors from her. The correction to the patriarchy is to not over correct, but hold both sides accountable for their own actions.

[Dwight]

As a huge infants on thrones fan, this sheds a lot of light on what happened and why Glenn is the only one left there. It sounds like Matt had a huge fallout with Glenn and some of the other in order to voices. It likely forced all of the in order to members to take sides on the Dehlin/Rosebud issue and since ex-Mormonism's momentum was slowing down, they just all called it quits. He calls Infants on Thrones "little", "pathetic", "cringe worthy" and seems to really regret ever being involved with them.

I find that incredibly sad.

I love Matt Long, but his bias is towards sexual assault victims and he has already decided rosebud is credible. He sees the worst sexual crimes in the world as a prosecutor. His job is to defend victims at all costs, and not to see both sides objectively. The legal system is a battle where you always present your client (even if she's not technically his client) in the best possible light, which appears what he did at the beginning of the Rosebud 3 hour tape.

I wish all of the Infants on Thrones members the best, I don't blame any of them. I'm just incredibly sad that Rosebud's B.S. may have caused my favorite podcast to break up.

I listened to the What We Know Pod that Rosebud and Matt Long did. Purely cause I liked Matt and what he had to say. It is tools they gave me when deconstructing McKenna Dennison that I am using to deconstruct Rosebud and her claims. It seems What We Know is defunct now and Matt Long doesn’t have his name or face attached to it, so I wonder where he stands right now. Of course I listened less cause right with Dennison they then looked at Tara Reade and Biden and were early on oh this is totally correct. Then like one week later there were details that came to light if you applied the same standard to Reade as Dennison then the thing falls apart.