Actual Ex-Mo Predators

[Kishkumen]

Who else besides Rosebud and Kamp is calling John a predator? If there was ever sympathy for that position on the forum, I've missed it.

Rosebud has been consistently dogpiled on by the forum members, and rightly so. We have very different memories about this.

“This forum” is not a hivemind, drumdude. Many people also read it as lurkers. Rosebud, as you may recall, is a member and participant in “this forum.”

[Fifth Columnist]

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.

I agree. The only victim I can see is John's wife ... and she has at least decided to stay married to John. And, to be clear, John's wife is not a victim because John is a "predator." She's a victim in the sense that John betrayed her trust.

The other so-called victims are ridiculous. Both Rosebud and Kamp made lots of claims but when the contemporaneous evidence was revealed it did not support them and, in fact, contradicted them!

Regarding claims of sexual harassment, the US OED defines it as:

It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person's sex. Harassment can include "sexual harassment" or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.

The problem with Rosebud's claims is that there is no evidence that the advances were unwelcome. In fact, it's plainly apparent that she readily welcomed them and only became disgruntled when JD pulled back. The problem with Kamp's claims is that there is no evidence that any sexual advances even occurred. Instead, the evidence points to her not wanting to come into the office on a work from home day.

Some here want to redefine sexual harassment to include any situation where a subordinate loses employment as a consequence of the relationship regardless of whether the sexual advances were unwelcome or not. I think that's a bridge too far. If a subordinate welcomes an affair with a supervisor and then gets fired when it comes to light, then too bad, but it isn't sexual harassment. The difference between this situation and one where the subordinate loses employment because the subordinate rejected unwelcome sexual advances is that the subordinate willingly chose to engage in the sexual behavior the former situation but not in the latter.

[Kishkumen]

I agree. The only victim I can see is John's wife ... and she has at least decided to stay married to John. And, to be clear, John's wife is not a victim because John is a "predator." She's a victim in the sense that John betrayed her trust.

The other so-called victims are ridiculous. Both Rosebud and Kamp made lots of claims but when the contemporaneous evidence was revealed it did not support them and, in fact, contradicted them!

Indeed. I sympathize with Margie. The mysteries of another couple’s love and marriage are not the kind of thing I care to speculate on. I agree that he betrayed Margie’s trust and that is awful. It is not my business how they handle that among themselves, nor will I apply the term victim to her.

Regarding claims of sexual harassment, the US OED defines it as:

It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person's sex. Harassment can include "sexual harassment" or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.

The problem with Rosebud's claims is that there is no evidence that the advances were unwelcome. In fact, it's plainly apparent that she readily welcomed them and only became disgruntled when John Dehlin pulled back. The problem with Kamp's claims is that there is no evidence that any sexual advances even occurred. Instead, the evidence points to her not wanting to come into the office on a work from home day.

Some here want to redefine sexual harassment to include any situation where a subordinate loses employment as a consequence of the relationship regardless of whether the sexual advances were unwelcome or not. I think that's a bridge too far. If a subordinate welcomes an affair with a supervisor and then gets fired when it comes to light, then too bad, but it isn't sexual harassment. The difference between this situation and one where the subordinate loses employment because the subordinate rejected unwelcome sexual advances is that the subordinate willingly chose to engage in the sexual behavior the former situation but not in the latter.

My understanding is that power dynamics are treated like the age of consent by a lot of people these days. A child cannot consent to sex has become something to the effect of “no one in a subordinate position in an employment situation can consent to sex.” My policy on the job is to keep things completely professional. I wish everyone would do the same.

[drumdude]

Who else besides Rosebud and Kamp is calling John a predator? If there was ever sympathy for that position on the forum, I've missed it.

Rosebud has been consistently dogpiled on by the forum members, and rightly so. We have very different memories about this.

“This forum” is not a hivemind, drumdude. Many people also read it as lurkers. Rosebud, as you may recall, is a member and participant in “this forum.”

To give a bit of flavor for the tone regarding Dehlin on the board way back in 2017:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=146092

Exactly how much money do people hope to make by being a John Dehlin sidekick?

The whole reddit thread [attacking John Dehlin] is an embarrassment and ridiculous. I don't recommend it.

None of these podcasters need to be a part of the Open Stories Foundation. They could go off on their own without Dehlin.

How is John Dehlin harming vulnerable people who are in crisis? What is the ___ you are talking about that Mr. Dehlin apparently is creating or repeating?

You will be happy to know that Calm and friends have taken a keen interest in this story at the MD&D board and would be happy to assist with efforts to take John Dehlin down and end that Open Stories Foundation apostasy stuff.

While I appreciate the point you're making, and I really enjoy your posts, may I ask one small favor? It's interesting to hear your anecdotal evidences and experiences, but that's all they are, so could you stop there without overgeneralizing? It's getting pretty old to read over and over in your posts "how women are," and "how men are,' as though people can always be divided into two separate homogeneous groups on the basis of gender, on any point. I have yet to read in a post about "how women are" that matches me at all, so there's an anecdotal account that differs, if you're interested.

reminds me of 'Fatal Attraction'

[Kishkumen]

Drumdude, that’s great. I don’t see how you have responded to the material you quoted from my post. Your artisanal selection of quotes is cute.

[drumdude]

Drumdude, that’s great. I don’t see how you have responded to the material you quoted from my post. Your artisanal selection of quotes is cute.

I'm speaking mainly to the lurkers, since you won't answer the question about who else is calling John a predator and also morphing my argument that "the forum dogpiled on Rosebud" to the strawman "the forum is a hivemind."

[Kishkumen]

I'm speaking mainly to the lurkers, since you won't answer the question about who else is calling John a predator and also morphing my argument that "the forum dogpiled on Rosebud" to the strawman "the forum is a hivemind."

So, I think I explained this sufficiently. If you are having trouble understanding what I said, maybe you should read it again. I don’t have to accuse anyone in order to make a point, after all. The point that is being made is that Rosebud’s assumed role of victim finds lots of open venues, and so it is important to distinguish between real predators and victims, and those caught up in a kind of Münchausen syndrome where they pretend to be victims and falsely accuse others of being predators to win sympathy, attention, and notoriety.

I am sorry that you took this personally and felt the need to defend your honor.

[drumdude]

More rabid John Dehlin haters (the guy just can't catch a break!):

https://www.reddit.com/r/Mormon/comment ... ailed_not/

"Rosebud" is and was a grown woman. If she wants to make her issues against Dehlin known, she can. As everything currently stands, it seems that she is primarily being used as ammunition in petty drama stirred up by Kawaku

If you’re regularly making out with someone, employee or not, isn’t getting handsy pretty much expected at some point?

But reading this is just confusing - words like "grooming" are used to convey that she had no agency, like a minor. But she was a highly educated adult woman, so isn't that just flirting?

How old is Rosebud? It says she was married so I’m assuming this is a mature woman. Women can’t participate in this stuff and then after something pisses them off suddenly start claiming sexual abuse. It’s revisionist history.

Charges leveled from an anonymous source really are not fair. Among the charges leveled is that JD created MS for his personal gain. No Duh. This is not a secret, not illegal and not immoral. So why is it included in the litany?

Give brother Dehlin a break. At least he wasn't fuckin the maid in the barn

All joking aside, I think it's obvious that John has been believed from the beginning, and has the overwhelming majority of people's support. Rosebud has never had more than a couple loud voices supporting her- the few that come to mind are Kwaku, Patterson, and Jenn Kamp. And everyone knows just how much credibility those people gave her position.

[drumdude]

I'm speaking mainly to the lurkers, since you won't answer the question about who else is calling John a predator and also morphing my argument that "the forum dogpiled on Rosebud" to the strawman "the forum is a hivemind."

So, I think I explained this sufficiently. If you are having trouble understanding what I said, maybe you should read it again. I don’t have to accuse anyone in order to make a point, after all. The point that is being made is that Rosebud’s assumed role of victim finds lots of open venues, and so it is important to distinguish between real predators and victims, and those caught up in a kind of Münchausen syndrome where they pretend to be victims and falsely accuse others of being predators to win sympathy, attention, and notoriety.

I am sorry that you took this personally and felt the need to defend your honor.

I don't take it personally, I just think you're misremembering. I find it odd that you feel you were among the minority on the issue, when you were clearly in the majority. Because of that the thread as a whole seems a bit vindictive and like beating a dead horse.

[Marcus]

While I appreciate the point you're making, and I really enjoy your posts, may I ask one small favor? It's interesting to hear your anecdotal evidences and experiences, but that's all they are, so could you stop there without overgeneralizing? It's getting pretty old to read over and over in your posts "how women are," and "how men are,' as though people can always be divided into two separate homogeneous groups on the basis of gender, on any point. I have yet to read in a post about "how women are" that matches me at all, so there's an anecdotal account that differs, if you're interested.

While I appreciate your quoting my comment, please note that my irritation over rosebud's overgeneralizations is about her overgeneralizations.

My opinion on the other matter, which I have stated repeatedly, is that Dehlin had a subordinate fired as a result of a sexual interaction with her, and that I consider that to be sexual harassment.

How badly the victim behaved, which seems to be kishkumen's approach, does not mean they cannot be a victim. Personally, I find K's support of Dehlin through victim blaming to be pretty sickening. I thought we were past that but apparently not.