DiscussMormonism.com

Well , now I’m interested in what happened on 9 March 2017.

- Doc

Louis Midgley Dr. Shades • 2 hours ago • edited
Well, given my own recent clashes with Shades over his voting his approval of the disgraceful, false, nasty, utterly absurd things said by his very own well coached and rehearsed people, and his claim that those thugs had very good reason for those comments, and then the fact that Shades, playing the innocent one, claimed that he did not recognize any of those who blasted away at me. And when I explained in detail that Dr. Velho Burrinho posts on the Shades hate board as Dr. LOD, and who has since October of last year said false, insulting, nasty, and absurd things about me, including in two email messages to me, Shades just ignored all of this and went on as if none of this had happened. The obvious fact is that I have not fashioned out of thin air the contents of what I have written about Maori Latter-day Saints. And to also insist that, since I am a white male, I am a racial bigot, and this is manifest in what I have published about them.

For these and other reasons I just decided that I was not interested in more exchanges with Shades.

DanielPeterson Mod Louis Midgley • 2 hours ago
Stick with the resolution, Professor Midgley!

Vegan Burrito's position seems to be that, by virtue of being believing Latter-day Saints, we are racists. It doesn't matter how we actually treat people, and he appears to grant that we might actually like the people toward whom we're racists.

In other words, the accusation is ideologically motivated.

To hold the correct political and religious positions is to not be a racist, just as, for some, loving humanity is more important than treating actual humans decently. (I've personally observed many such cases, where strong partisans of women's rights, for example, mistreated their wives, etc.)

Lets see where do we start on this one. How about with Professor Midgley:

I offered more than once to let things drop, but you didn't. I would recommend you stick with the resolution you apparently made with Professor Peterson.

Thank you for the complement, I wouldn't exactly say well coached, or rehearsed by anyone. I would say it is more through experience with similar situations, and being very observant.

About your articles on the Maori, I never said it was made up, I did object to you thinking that your version of things was the only one that was "true" and needed a rabid defense. I also said it was up to the Maori to tell their own story. As far as you having racist behaviors, other than embracing cultural appropriation with the Maori I think you are OK with them. Now on the other hand you have exhibited many other questionable bigoted behaviors directed at me, Professor Colvin, and your infamous MLK posts. None of my criticism of you is based on the color of your skin, purely on your words and actions exhibited on SeN, and elsewhere.

Professor Peterson, you need to form your thinly veiled argument a little better about me being an anti-racist-bigot.
What you are doing and your reaction is best described by Robin DiAngelo in their book White Fragility:

"The simplistic idea that racism is limited to individual intentional acts committed by unkind people is at the root of virtually all white defensiveness on this topic,"

Sometime back I pointed out how some of your ideology is rooted in institutionalized systemic racism, in ways that you don't seem to understand. An example is your reaction was some months back to me suggesting that Brigham Young ethnically cleansed, and in fact signed a genocidal extermination order for the tribes in Utah Valley in 1850, underscores this. You said it "never happened" and it wasn't fact. From that I didn't base my judgement of you based off your skin color, it is based off your denying the event happened.

As far as me being ideologically motivated yes I am, some time ago I grew tired of not speaking up about racist actions in any form. Pretty simple.

Louis Midgley DanielPeterson 4 hours ago
Dan: I will. There was a time when Shirley Ricks could and did give us orders that we had to obey.

And I am always delighted when you refer to the Vegan Burrito.

I like it too Professor Peterson, it reminds me that you are only as funny or clever as your spellchecker.

[quote="Dr LOD"]I like it too Professor Peterson, it reminds me that you are only as funny or clever as your spellchecker.[/quote]

Got. DAYUM. :lol:

- Doc

Loudmouth Louis Midgley lies AGAIN about checking the board:

"Shades: If by "regularly" you mean a tiny glance no more than three times in ten years, and a slightly more extensive glance around your collection of rubbish the other day, then you have me pegged. One of your "well trained troops" actually announced on Gina Colvin's blog that you have assembled on your board 400 bits of evidence of my evil deeds, and they also provide me with access to your board. That just happens to be the way I accessed your board, since I could not even recall that name of the miserable thing."

So, now it's four times. Uh huh. Oh, the tangled web Louise weaves when he attempts to deceive, and deceive, and deceive.

- Doc

I also want to point out, and perhaps someone can correct my misperception if I'm misinformed, but I haven't seen The Midge ever refer to Gina Colvin as Dr. Colvin, you know, since he has such a huge stick up his ass about that sort of thing.

- Doc

Professor Midgley says:

I was quite recently called a racist merely because I am a white male.

It goes way beyond that simplification.

If that is the only reason he feels that someone would think of him as racist then he should have absolutely no problem whatsoever writing a good and accurate review of Colvins book.

have been thinking about this and the answer if not all that clear. This last round has for me, for reasons that I will not go into, gotten to me. This has never happened before. I have wondered if it is my age, or if it is the extent and absurdity of the nasty, utterly false stuff about something to which there are witnesses of all sorts of witnesses

It got to him because he realized he was appropriating and exploiting the Maori to shore up his religious beliefs. My accusation messed with his core identity. Join the club Louis the traditional LDS narrative on the Lamanites did the same thing to a whole bunch of people including the Maori. Mopologetic Jedi tricks just make it worse.

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 19, 2020 5:17 pm

I also want to point out, and perhaps someone can correct my misperception if I'm misinformed, but I haven't seen The Midge ever refer to Gina Colvin as Dr. Colvin, you know, since he has such a huge stick up his ass about that sort of thing.

- Doc

Oh, didn't you know...... in Mormonism a woman cannot possibly be a "real" Dr., women are always supposed to be lesser and subordinate to men. To Lou there can be no woman even near his celestial targeted greatness, not in this life, and not in eternity. His own wife will never be a Mrs Elohim. Only a Mrs Midgley, even after Elohimhood. Women in Mormonism will always be subserverient to the men. For eternity.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4962611831

LCM- I have done nothing to Gina Colvin at all, except praise an essay which she and a faithful Maori woman had written, and also disagree with her on the very same things on which her husband happens to share my opinions.
And one even both allowed and watched an earlier dress rehearsal of the onslaught of nasty, absurd, insulting, fully false stuff directed at me, and then upvoted that rubbish when it was posted on Gina's own blog, and then claim that those who posted that rubbish had very good reasons--even what he called "superior argumentation"--for doing so, while also claiming that I have I been naughty, among others, to Rodney Meldrum, Gina Colvin and himself.

Wasn’t Midgley saying on SeN saying he was trying to triangulate between Professor Colvin and her husband and undermining their relationship?

At least how I was taught one of the worst things someone could do was undermine a marriage this was usually illustrated through the example of an affair. But I had a CES institute director expand that into things very similar to what Midgley was doing with his comments about Colvin’s relationship. In an attempt to harm her.

Child: gets caught with hand in cookie jar.

Parent: hey! get those dirty hands out of the cookie jar! they're dirty, and it's almost dinnertime!

Child: what!?! I was only checking to see if we needed more cookies!!! You're being quite unfair!

Dr LOD wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 24, 2020 8:30 pm

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... 4962611831

LCM- I have done nothing to Gina Colvin at all, except praise an essay which she and a faithful Maori woman had written, and also disagree with her on the very same things on which her husband happens to share my opinions.
And one even both allowed and watched an earlier dress rehearsal of the onslaught of nasty, absurd, insulting, fully false stuff directed at me, and then upvoted that rubbish when it was posted on Gina's own blog, and then claim that those who posted that rubbish had very good reasons--even what he called "superior argumentation"--for doing so, while also claiming that I have I been naughty, among others, to Rodney Meldrum, Gina Colvin and himself.

Wasn’t Midgley saying on SeN saying he was trying to triangulate between Professor Colvin and her husband and undermining their relationship?

At least how I was taught one of the worst things someone could do was undermine a marriage this was usually illustrated through the example of an affair. But I had a CES institute director expand that into things very similar to what Midgley was doing with his comments about Colvin’s relationship. In an attempt to harm her.

Here’s more of the “nothing” Midgley has done to Colvin, which I agree he does in an attempt to denigrate her.

In other words, even though Midgley knows nothing, he made up a full and fully disparaging, if utterly false, background story:

Who-me?-Midgley:

what got to me was that the owner of the blog knew that those who were posting rubbish were flatly wrong, since it involved her own husband, and she did not put a stop to it by telling the truth, since she was fully aware of the truth. The fact is that her Bishop, Stake President, and Area President have done what they could and have held out hope right up to the point that she resigned from the Church of Jesus Christ. And I also know that her husband holds out hope for her despite everything. I was simply stunned to find out that I have become something of a issue between them. I told her husband that I was surprised to learn that she even knew my name.

http://disq.us/p/2a1xfyn