Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

[_cksalmon]

Doctor Scratch said: “I agree that he's been "ambiguous" in so far as he hasn't named any names. But he has clearly said that the MI apologists find "amusing" the things that have happened to him here. And the latest thing that has happened to him here is an extremely thorough and well-documented account of his misogynist behavior. (Which, by the way, you seem to have a neutral attitude towards.)”

Your conclusion that I have a “neutral attitude” towards “misogynist behavior” is just another example of you illogically multiplying inferences.

My brief time here has been a real eye-opening experience. I think I have learned everything I need to know about this place and how much weight to give to the things that are said here.

I thank all of you for your responses to my questions.

Wait, Hammer! You're not going to ask Schryver what group he had in mind? That seemed to be a primary focus. It would seem that that is one thing you've not learned. Why not ask him?

[_Doctor Scratch]

Doctor Scratch said: “I agree that he's been "ambiguous" in so far as he hasn't named any names. But he has clearly said that the MI apologists find "amusing" the things that have happened to him here. And the latest thing that has happened to him here is an extremely thorough and well-documented account of his misogynist behavior. (Which, by the way, you seem to have a neutral attitude towards.)”

Your conclusion that I have a “neutral attitude” towards “misogynist behavior” is just another example of you illogically multiplying inferences.

I didn't "conclude" anything. Surely a person so attentive to what's "ACTUALLY" said would have noticed this. I said, "you seem to have a neutral attitude towards" Will's misogynist behavior (emphasis added).

So why not clarify? What is your attitude towards Will's behavior?

My brief time here has been a real eye-opening experience. I think I have learned everything I need to know about this place and how much weight to give to the things that are said here.

I thank all of you for your responses to my questions.

Well, if you leave now, you'll be doing so without having returned the courtesy of answering the questions that were posed to you.

[_Trevor]

Silver Hammer was just here for damage control purposes. A transparent sock puppet with the aim of feigned inquiry ending in the preordained conclusion that nothing said here is worth taking seriously.

[_MsJack]

Wade ~ Given how you're leading this conversation away from the subject of my OP in your usual obfuscatory fashion, I am on the verge of requesting that this entire line of conversation be moved from the thread.

But, at the risk of having my response shipped off to another forum, if you look very very carefully, you will see that in the phrase you quoted above, there is no mention of the word "attack". There is only the word "personal."

Then CFR for where I ever accused you of doing anything "personal" (whatever that means to you).

The reason there was only the word "personal" is because I was only speaking to the "personal" nature of the thread. Is that more clear?

You've already failed elsewhere to explain how the thread is "personal" in nature and I won't be replying to you further on this thread. What you've claimed here is that I've accused you of doing something "personal" (whatever that means), so CFR.

I have begun addressing your question on the moved section of this thread--you know, the thread where you called me "pathetic" and intimated I was a "cry baby" and accused me of making up "poop", just more non-attacking things like that.

Things you said on your new thread will be replied to on your new thread, and I will thank you to stop trying to migrate your off-topic material back onto this thread.

Silver Hammer ~ Will get back to you in detail tomorrow.

[_beastie]

Silver Hammer was just here for damage control purposes. A transparent sock puppet with the aim of feigned inquiry ending in the preordained conclusion that nothing said here is worth taking seriously.

It would certainly appear so. And, in particular, the damage control was centered on one specific item: trying to cast doubt on the idea that respected apologists were privately enjoying Will's bad behavior. Silver Hammer didn't show any interest in the actual topic of the post: Will's offensive behavior towards women. SH just cared about absolving members of MI.

[Guest]

It would certainly appear so. And, in particular, the damage control was centered on one specific item: trying to cast doubt on the idea that respected apologists were privately enjoying Will's bad behavior. Silver Hammer didn't show any interest in the actual topic of the post: Will's offensive behavior towards women. SH just cared about absolving members of MI.

Yes, and why would we ever expect that from Maxwell's Silver Hammer?

Lyrics:
Joan was quizzical; Studied pataphysical
Science in the home.
Late nights all alone with a test tube.
Oh, oh, oh, oh.

Maxwell Edison, majoring in medicine,
Calls her on the phone.
"Can I take you out to the pictures,
Joa, oa, oa, oan?"

But as she's getting ready to go,
A knock comes on the door.

Bang! Bang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Came down upon her head.
Clang! Clang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Made sure that she was dead.

Back in school again Maxwell plays the fool again.
Teacher gets annoyed.
Wishing to avoid an unpleasant
Sce, e, e, ene,

She tells Max to stay when the class has gone away,
So he waits behind
Writing fifty times "I must not be
So, o, o, o.."

But when she turns her back on the boy,
He creeps up from behind.

Bang! Bang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Came down upon her head.
Clang! Clang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Made sure that She was dead.

P. C. Thirty-one said, "We've caught a dirty one."
Maxwell stands alone
Painting testimonial pictures.
Oh, oh, oh, oh.

Rose and Valerie, screaming from the gallery
Say he must go free
(Maxwell must go free)
The judge does not agree and he tells them
So, o, o, o.

But as the words are leaving his lips,
A noise comes from behind.

Bang! Bang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Came down upon his head.
Clang! Clang! Maxwell's silver hammer
Made sure that he was dead.

Silver Hammer Ma, a, an.

[_cksalmon]

Yes, and why would we ever expect that from Maxwell's Silver Hammer?

Ha!
That was an indirect subject of amusement to myself and another.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Like I said earlier, Will's claim about a "small circle of otherwise respected academics" implicates everyone by naming no one. I don't really buy it, personally, I think it's one of Will's flights of fancy. But the impression it gives is objectionable to me. Undoubtedly, I think the righteous indignation around here is going a bit far, especially considering this isn't a one-sided affair, and especially since this is supposed to be some bastion of free expression. I could ask a hundred more times why any of these people are even bothering with Will. Why is Kevin Graham bothering? Or harmony? Or KA? Why is anyone bothering, if they know Will to be a bad dude who is looking for controversy online? Just let it go, is my advice. Will's not going to change things up, so be the bigger person and forget it. I don't see him as an up-and-coming anything, really, and if he is, so what? Judge whatever arguments he publishes and move along. It's the Internet. You really don't know each other. Let it go, in my opinion.

I think Ms. Jack explained the "why" quite well. Will isn't just another rude yahoo on the internet - they're a dime a dozen on all sides. Will is, apparently, an up -and-coming apologist. Remember the stink with the "Metcalfe is a Butthead" episode? Remember the legs that story had? Now imagine the "Schryver is a vulgar misogynist who said the following things" story, and the legs that one will have.

in my opinion, Ms. Jack has done serious apologists a favor, by giving them a heads-up on what skeletons will rattle if Will is, indeed, as he implies, and as the noise surrounding his presentation supports, being groomed as a serious Book of Abraham apologist.

So it's less about getting apologies, though those are being demanded, and more about thinking Will S. somehow will reflect poorly on a huge swath of people who write about Mormon studies or apologetics? That would be akin to judging everyone here by the behavior of Scratch, then. In my view Will's damaged his own utility. But it's a limited utility, most people don't have any idea who he is. It's likely to stay that way.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Cksalmon said: “You're not tracking with his point. While William Schryver names no individual members of the group designated as a "small circle of otherwise respected academics," he claims that group's joint approval.”

This is not correct. In the quote that was given, Schryver says that a certain person is “somewhat famous” among an unnamed “small circle of otherwise respected academics.”

He says nothing that would suggest this group of academics approves of anything at all. The statement says no more or less than what it says: that because of a description Schryver made of her, this person is “somewhat famous” among a small group of people.

I must admit that I am becoming more and more intrigued by the fact that EVERYONE who has conversed with me so far on this topic is doing the EXACT SAME THING: quote a statement from Schryver, insist it says something it doesn’t, then get defensive and offended when the illogic of their unwarranted inferences is noted. I did not expect to see what I am seeing.

I sent you a private message. If you need help discovering how to open and read it please let me know.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Doctor Scratch said: “I agree that he's been "ambiguous" in so far as he hasn't named any names. But he has clearly said that the MI apologists find "amusing" the things that have happened to him here. And the latest thing that has happened to him here is an extremely thorough and well-documented account of his misogynist behavior. (Which, by the way, you seem to have a neutral attitude towards.)”

Your conclusion that I have a “neutral attitude” towards “misogynist behavior” is just another example of you illogically multiplying inferences.

My brief time here has been a real eye-opening experience. I think I have learned everything I need to know about this place and how much weight to give to the things that are said here.

I thank all of you for your responses to my questions.

Scratch is hyperbolic, he's a character and you need not bother with him. People here for the most part don't take him seriously. But your questions are far from answered. Check your messages and get back to me. Thanks.