If you know anything about sex magick you would know that this type of abuse, called SRA, is characteristic of other abuses that have been recalled as in the Glen Pace memo. Glen Pace even said there's no way the stories could all be made up because certain details described were identical in some parties that never met each other. These groups do rituals that often involve tramatizing children.
What I personally believe is that there was a "cult within a cult" that was doing these crimes, such as the ones from the movie "Do you know the muffin man?" What Beck described Nibley doing is not exclusive to Mormonism and has occured in other organizations. Unfornately, its a sad reality that child abusers like this infiltrate every part of our society.
And back we go to the eighties, to Phil Donahue, Satanic sex abuse in daycare centers, Repressed Memory Syndrome, cults within cults, wheels within wheels, all in the windmills of our minds.
And a new conspiracy theory is born, free, as are many of them from evidence, logical argument, or facts.
Martha Beck was caught red handed perpetrating a fraud (in a manner similar in nature to another similar situation, that of Anita Hill) and discredited.
But...not here. Not in exmoworld, a strange cross fertilization of traditional apostate sour grapes, Oprahoid pop culture liberalism, and seared conscience hatred of all things LDS.
Eric trying to ressurect not a dead horse, but an entire stable of them bespeaks the degree to which this poor soul needs a life. I wish him well in that endevor, should he decide to embark upon it.
Let's look at some of the other hilarious/ironic responses to the Beck thread:
Just because an accusation hasn't been proven doesn't mean it isn't true.
If harmony actually took this seriously, her entire anti-Mormon worldview, especially in relation to her favorite hobby horse, Joseph Smith's sex life, would collapse overnight.
Whoa, Gaz. Do you doubt all repressed memory accounts?
Given that not a single case of Satanic child abuse between the mid-eighties and mid-nineties has ever been established as legitimate, and that virtually each and every individual ever accused of such conduct was found not guilty or otherwise acquitted, and that no studies have ever found any evidence of a subcultural movement in this area, there is good reason to suspect the vast majority of them, if for no other reason than the technique and theory itself are quite clearly flawed.
However, child abuse cases are complex, and very rarely is there a situation where absolutely nothing took place.
Whether or not Brother Nibley is guilty or innocent does not make Martha Beck any less of a victim. I find it detestable that Jackson would exploit Martha Beck's victim status simply to discredit her book.
As to the first claim here, you know this how? Virtually all of the numerous cases brought to court during the height of the daycare sex abuse hysteria of the eighties and nineties were discredited (albeit after destroying numerous families and lives)
CFR?
Martha Beck is a victim, and has "victim status"?
No, I think her dead father is the victim, as well as the millions of people who may have taken her slander seriously.
P.S. Eric is a posturing, self promoting snake oil salesmen seeking sympathy and self justification at your expense.
That you do not perceive that is sad.
And then, from the maestro himself:
1. Some of Beck's siblings issued a letter in response to the publication of Leaving the Saints, in which they declare no such sexual abuse could have happened in the Nibley home.
2. Beck's book contains "misrepresentations about the church [that] are too numerous even to mention." As readers can see, the "taste" of examples Jackson mentions does not contain a single gross misrepresentation about the church, let alone "too many to even mention."
Even if one was to accept these two arguments as truth, they are hardly reasons - by any standards - to disbelieve Martha Beck's heart-wrenching accusations regarding childhood sexual abuse.
Let's see: not one of the other Nibley siblings were aware, living in the same house, for many years, of any such goings on.
Beck doesn't seem to understand a number of aspects of the Church of which she was a member.
She waited many, many years, and then, only after her father died and could not defend himself, publishes an Anita Hill-like attack on his character. No evidence, no facts, no plausible argument (given what we know of Nibley's character and mode of life) exists to back up her claims. Hence, she retreats to the now long discredited (if not simply infamous) Repressed Memory Syndrome and Hypnosis (also well known to produce distorted or imaginary memories - just as does the normal human brain over time) to substantiate her assertions.
Hint: Does an utter lack of plausible evidence and reliance on deeply unreliable and scientifically dubious subjective psychotherapeutic interventions imply what I think it most probably implies?
Actually, the reviews themselves say more about the credibility of the review authors than they say about Martha's credibility.
And this coming from someone who, like Martha, does not understand very much regarding the Church of which she was once a part (only perhaps, to a more significant degree)
Harmony's own long standing lack of credibility only serves to underscore the importance of reading the essays Daniel sourced for ourselves.
Oh well, just stomping around the trailer park, kicking up some dust after a long hiatus.
