Sorry, but odds are that the latter is disproportionately built into your audience.consiglieri wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:07 pmNo more than I wanted people with misgivings about Rosebud or sympathy for Dehlin to call in.
Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
-
- Priest
- Posts: 317
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:54 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
- Attachments
-
- RFMDehlin.JPG (57.05 KiB) Viewed 1278 times
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
It’s interesting.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
- Doctor CamNC4Me
- God
- Posts: 9047
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
It’s literally in the name of the board.
While Joseph Smith occasionally is the topic, usually as a side topic to the main topic being discussed, the board exists for people who are interested in things Mormon. It’s essentially like a subreddit, or a board dedicated to Star Trek where people can talk about the subject - you’re equating the occasional thread dedicated to Gene Roddenberry as being obsessed with him, when in reality Gene Roddenberry, yes, is important to the Star Trek universe, but he’s taken a back seat to the Star Trek universe. Same for this board. Furthermore, talking about two people involved with a ‘Star Trek recovery group’ who are a disaster isn’t obsessing about them, per se, but rather their relationship to the broader topic of *whatever* in the Star Trek community. Their personal crap show just makes for good discussion with broader topics of patriarchy within the Star Trek universe and fandom, and real-world social issues such as stalking, threats, sexual harassment, and supersimps like yourself. It’s an interesting diversion and to find fault with that is to find fault with anyone’s interest in anything. We all have lives outside of popping in and out of this board, but the reason why we come back is because a lot of the discussions that take place here are interesting, thoughtful, funny, dramatic, or whatever and that, in of itself, is enough reason to participate.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
-
- Area Authority
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:17 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
Right. We all have our pet things that we spend inordinate amounts of time hashing and rehashing that ultimately make little differnce in the long run. Your pet thing is no worse or better than my pet thing is no worse or better than a Star Trek fan.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:24 pmIt’s literally in the name of the board.
While Joseph Smith occasionally is the topic, usually as a side topic to the main topic being discussed, the board exists for people who are interested in things Mormon. It’s essentially like a subreddit, or a board dedicated to Star Trek where people can talk about the subject - you’re equating the occasional thread dedicated to Gene Roddenberry as being obsessed with him, when in reality Gene Roddenberry, yes, is important to the Star Trek universe, but he’s taken a back seat to the Star Trek universe. Same for this board. Furthermore, talking about two people involved with a ‘Star Trek recovery group’ who are a disaster isn’t obsessing about them, per se, but rather their relationship to the broader topic of *whatever* in the Star Trek community. Their personal Crap show just makes for good discussion with broader topics of patriarchy within the Star Trek universe and fandom, and real-world social issues such as stalking, threats, sexual harassment, and supersimps like yourself. It’s an interesting diversion and to find fault with that is to find fault with anyone’s interest in anything. We all have lives outside of popping in and out of this board, but the reason why we come back is because a lot of the discussions that take place here are interesting, thoughtful, funny, dramatic, or whatever and that, in of itself, is enough reason to participate.
- Doc
That's my point. It's all the same. You're no different from me or I from you.
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
Should a kid who stole a candy bar 10 years ago still have to pay for the indiscretion? Should someone who had an affair be forced to wear a scarlet letter for 10 years or more? The problem I see with this case is that the indiscretion doesn't come close to what you and Rosebud seem to want to do as far as punishment.jpatterson wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:08 pmThis is a point very well taken.
Part of what is fascinating to me and probably triggers some of my obsessive qualities is how the above applies to John himself. In his uncompromising pursuit of taking down the church, he ultimately became many of the things he came to loathe about Joseph Smith and the church, although on a much smaller level of course. He repeated many of the same mistakes Joseph made and adopted many of the same qualities that Joseph did. I feel like I left the church and allowed myself to get sucked into a mini version of the church all over again. That's on me. But I think John has made a living of keeping people in faith crisis, keeping them in a vicious cycle of outrage and anger and using his content to do so. I think that completely contradicts what he says his mission is. I think his business model is centered on keeping people in this trauma cycle and I don't feel it's a bad thing to try and minimize his influence.
I realize such a mindset opens me up to criticism and ridicule. But then I also observe here a board that spends inordinate amounts of time obsessing over peculiarities of Mormonism that will never, ever change.
So I guess I would ask many of you the same question: If everyone concedes that the church isn't going anywhere, what's the point of this board? If the church actually was founded by a sophisticated con man in the mid 1800s, what can possibly come from arguing about it now? Are you all just wanting to smear the church's name because you don't like what they're doing? Do the church's followers deserve to know or something?
What is it that you are after? Do you have a punishment in mind? If so, what is it? Are you looking to have Dehlin off the air? Also, feel free to push back against the sins of this board if you like. That's what free discussion is about.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
Yeah, because obsessively trying destroy a person’s life over a 10-year old incident involving someone else is exactly like chatting on a message board.jpatterson wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:29 pmRight. We all have our pet things that we spend inordinate amounts of time hashing and rehashing that ultimately make little differnce in the long run. Your pet thing is no worse or better than my pet thing is no worse or better than a Star Trek fan.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:24 pm
It’s literally in the name of the board.
While Joseph Smith occasionally is the topic, usually as a side topic to the main topic being discussed, the board exists for people who are interested in things Mormon. It’s essentially like a subreddit, or a board dedicated to Star Trek where people can talk about the subject - you’re equating the occasional thread dedicated to Gene Roddenberry as being obsessed with him, when in reality Gene Roddenberry, yes, is important to the Star Trek universe, but he’s taken a back seat to the Star Trek universe. Same for this board. Furthermore, talking about two people involved with a ‘Star Trek recovery group’ who are a disaster isn’t obsessing about them, per se, but rather their relationship to the broader topic of *whatever* in the Star Trek community. Their personal Crap show just makes for good discussion with broader topics of patriarchy within the Star Trek universe and fandom, and real-world social issues such as stalking, threats, sexual harassment, and supersimps like yourself. It’s an interesting diversion and to find fault with that is to find fault with anyone’s interest in anything. We all have lives outside of popping in and out of this board, but the reason why we come back is because a lot of the discussions that take place here are interesting, thoughtful, funny, dramatic, or whatever and that, in of itself, is enough reason to participate.
- Doc
That's my point. It's all the same. You're no different from me or I from you.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
-
- God
- Posts: 2259
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
This reminds me...something I totally forgot about. I started a thread a couple of days ago asking what is good and bad about Mormonstories. your take would be quite appreciated there. One thing about John and mormonstories is they have tried to paint the Church as harming people..which it might have. But there are plenty of people who swear the Church has been a godsend, and provides nothing but goodness and benefit. How do we weigh the good against the bad? Same type of idea with Mormonstories...how do we consider the good and bad and draw a conclusion as to whether it is ultimately hurting or helping?jpatterson wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:08 pmThis is a point very well taken.
Part of what is fascinating to me and probably triggers some of my obsessive qualities is how the above applies to John himself. In his uncompromising pursuit of taking down the church, he ultimately became many of the things he came to loathe about Joseph Smith and the church, although on a much smaller level of course. He repeated many of the same mistakes Joseph made and adopted many of the same qualities that Joseph did. I feel like I left the church and allowed myself to get sucked into a mini version of the church all over again. That's on me. But I think John has made a living of keeping people in faith crisis, keeping them in a vicious cycle of outrage and anger and using his content to do so. I think that completely contradicts what he says his mission is. I think his business model is centered on keeping people in this trauma cycle and I don't feel it's a bad thing to try and minimize his influence.
I realize such a mindset opens me up to criticism and ridicule. But then I also observe here a board that spends inordinate amounts of time obsessing over peculiarities of Mormonism that will never, ever change.
So I guess I would ask many of you the same question: If everyone concedes that the church isn't going anywhere, what's the point of this board? If the church actually was founded by a sophisticated con man in the mid 1800s, what can possibly come from arguing about it now? Are you all just wanting to smear the church's name because you don't like what they're doing? Do the church's followers deserve to know or something?
This place is mostly about sharing ideas related to Mormonism.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
When John Dehlin starts a cult with 12 million members, I think a discussion board with a few dozen active members investigating everything about John Dehlin might be warranted.
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
I am not sure what you are saying exactly, but my reaction to what I am guessing you are saying that picking your battles wisely and acting proportionally is not defeatist or cynical. Rather, it is wise. It does not pay to be quixotic in life. Happiness does not follow tilting at windmills.dastardly stem wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 2:52 pmYes and it's a dreadful way in life. It's a life filled with cynicism and defeat.
Part of this may stem (no pun intended) from the McKenna Denson experience. There you had a truly troubled and unreliable victim whose abuser actually did have a track record of using his position to take advantage of sister missionaries. In this case I know of no other credible accuser. If there is something that is missing, it is the corroborating evidence that John Dehlin is a sexual harasser. Since we know J. Bishop types exist, and his abuse never caught up with him, we are inclined to think that there are others and suspect that anyone who has an emphatic and persistent accuser may in fact be guilty. It is deeply unsatisfying not to have a just resolution. So, something seems to have been missed.Your sig quoting Rosebud says it all, though. She makes allegations and feels no obligation to support them. I can't fault the board or anyone who couldn't take it seriously, even though, with Lem, I can agree there seemed to be something missed there, at least.
Maybe if you had been in Joanna Brooks' shoes you would have done something different. Maybe some people who are unhappy right now would feel better about the outcome you brought about. Maybe Rosebud would have become Executive Director of an Open Stories Foundation with an empowered board of directors. Maybe she would not have felt she needed to threaten John Dehlin with accusing him for the rest of his days. Perhaps she would not have gotten into trouble with the franchise situation.
Different outcomes were possible, and maybe other people would be happier with those outcomes. At this point I have a hard time saying anything but this: John Dehlin and Rosebud would have been prudent not to have become romantically involved in any way. Obviously, it was bad for both of them and the fall out from that unwise choice has reached much farther than many would prefer, unless those people stand to benefit in some way from the trouble.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
- Doctor CamNC4Me
- God
- Posts: 9047
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am
Re: Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations
Well. Not really. It’s one thing to deconstruct a *fake story and to obsessively verify whether or not it’s true, and then argue the point on an obscure message board because you enjoy the challenge of arguing for the sake of arguing - and thus learning happens -* Russell M. Nelson’s harrowing airplane story, for example - and it’s another to want to destroy the man. with regard to John Dehlin, he occasionally becomes a topic here, mostly because Rosebud pops in to make vague accusations. I’d argue most people here are kind of anti-Dehlin because they’re not fans of a cult of personality, but the same can be said of anyone trying to turn a buck off their Mormonismor ex-Mormonism. Taking up a cause to the point of activism is political, and that’s where I’d say you and the participants diverge. Most here don’t have the energy to politicize their activities here to the point of activism.jpatterson wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:29 pmRight. We all have our pet things that we spend inordinate amounts of time hashing and rehashing that ultimately make little differnce in the long run. Your pet thing is no worse or better than my pet thing is no worse or better than a Star Trek fan.Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: ↑Wed May 05, 2021 3:24 pm
It’s literally in the name of the board.
While Joseph Smith occasionally is the topic, usually as a side topic to the main topic being discussed, the board exists for people who are interested in things Mormon. It’s essentially like a subreddit, or a board dedicated to Star Trek where people can talk about the subject - you’re equating the occasional thread dedicated to Gene Roddenberry as being obsessed with him, when in reality Gene Roddenberry, yes, is important to the Star Trek universe, but he’s taken a back seat to the Star Trek universe. Same for this board. Furthermore, talking about two people involved with a ‘Star Trek recovery group’ who are a disaster isn’t obsessing about them, per se, but rather their relationship to the broader topic of *whatever* in the Star Trek community. Their personal Crap show just makes for good discussion with broader topics of patriarchy within the Star Trek universe and fandom, and real-world social issues such as stalking, threats, sexual harassment, and supersimps like yourself. It’s an interesting diversion and to find fault with that is to find fault with anyone’s interest in anything. We all have lives outside of popping in and out of this board, but the reason why we come back is because a lot of the discussions that take place here are interesting, thoughtful, funny, dramatic, or whatever and that, in of itself, is enough reason to participate.
- Doc
That's my point. It's all the same. You're no different from me or I from you.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.