Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _wenglund »

Dad of a Mormon wrote:No, his quote was posted before yours.


Your right. My mistake. In the same post that he clearly misunderstood my reference to "hearsay," he did say what you said, and that was before I corrected his misunderstanding.

Evidently, even though I was speaking aobut hearsay to Trevor and about Trevor, and even though he evidently did correctly understod the meaning of hearsay, he inexplicably mis-assumed that I was talking about "someone who witnessed the event." I mistakenly assumed that he had come to his mistaken assumption because he didn't understand the meaning of "hearsay."

I corrected his misunderstanding, and now you have corrected my misunderstandng.

Case solved. Now we can move on to things that actually matter.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

... Mr. Schryver's views on plural marriage & Feminism continued...

I would reply by simply noting that, if my observations of the cycles of humanity are any indication, I discern some logic in the notion of deliberately creating, as warranted, circumstances that result in increased progeny for some men at the expense of others.

Perhaps, from time to time, God sees things similarly.


It seems pretty clear at this point that Mr. Schryver, with his "calling and erection made sure" desires a polygamous afterlife while wishing a non-submissive woman an eternity without progeny:

If it's all the same to you, I'll imagine myself consistent with my personal desires. After all, my religion teaches me that God rewards men according to their desires.

That said, I can certainly envision the necessity, in the great beyond, of a considerable host of eunuchs to keep company with snarly women like you. :wink:


More violent imagery reserved for a defiant woman:

I've also heard that, from time to time, stray meteorites fall through roofs of houses in the American northwest, smacking insolent old women upside the head on their way to the ground.

I also recently read that this is a banner year for lightning strikes ...


Misogyny is a term used to describe the feelings inculcated in human females for the past half-century in the developed areas of the modern world. It consists of a combination malaise of self-loathing and an unrequited desire to wield and whimsically abuse the unlimited power perceived to be the sole province of men. It has maimed the better part of the past three generations of women, and its reign of terror continues unabated.


For example, beastlie has repeatedly revealed that she lives “in sin” (as it were :wink: ) with her “soul mate” rather than within the bonds of formal marriage. I can thus, with accuracy (speaking purely in terms of the accepted English definitions of words) tease dear beastlie about being a wanton fornicator, and then hint that she must certainly manifest the wages of sin in her countenance and in her life.

Am I privately grinning from ear to ear as I write such a thing? You betcha.


To a non-submissive women:

You all start to look and sound alike after a while.

Nevertheless, I corrected the error.

Cupcake.


For his defenders:

Therefore, I will not apologize (nor do I even feel contrite in the least) for the things I say here. I am actually quite careful with what I say. I have seldom, if ever, clicked the “Submit” button without having carefully re-read (and often carefully refined) the things I am about to publicize via this revolutionary medium of the online message board.


V/R
Dr. CamNC4Me
Last edited by Guest on Thu May 05, 2011 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Trevor »

Simon Belmont wrote:Whelp, I just go through performing an extensive search on both Google and MDB for the username "Trevor" with the keyword "wrong" and nothing came up, other than others saying you were wrong.

Interesting.


So, Simon, are you going to use this "thorough" research to claim that it has been proved over and over that I have never admitted to being wrong?

LOL.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Droopy »

The human memory is pretty unreliable, and we have conflicting evidence from various trustworthy sources, so I'm willing to regard the "c word" event as unresolved.


My greater concern, within the context of discussions such as this, is not when memory is unreliable, but when its in perfectly good working order but is not allowed to interfere with a working agenda.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _beastie »

Droopy wrote:My greater concern, within the context of discussions such as this, is not when memory is unreliable, but when its in perfectly good working order but is not allowed to interfere with a working agenda.


Perhaps it would be helpful if you were to read a bit about the fallibility of human memory.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Droopy »

beastie wrote:
Droopy wrote:My greater concern, within the context of discussions such as this, is not when memory is unreliable, but when its in perfectly good working order but is not allowed to interfere with a working agenda.


Perhaps it would be helpful if you were to read a bit about the fallibility of human memory.



It would be even better if you would learn not to try to morally and personally calumniate those you cannot defeat or hold your own against in critical argument.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _harmony »

Droopy wrote:It would be even better if you would learn not to try to morally and personally calumniate those you cannot defeat or hold your own against in critical argument.


Calumniate?

Does any real person use that word in real conversation?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Eric

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Eric »

I think I've finally gotten to the bottom of this. I believe harmony is conflating another poster that admittedly called her a C-word with Will:

viewtopic.php?p=147573#p147573
_Dad of a Mormon
_Emeritus
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:28 am

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Dad of a Mormon »

Eric wrote:I think I've finally gotten to the bottom of this. I believe harmony is conflating another poster that admittedly called her a C-word with Will:

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 73#p147573


Yes, but that would not explain why the others claimed to have seen it. You seem to be focusing in on harmony. harmony is not the only one making the claim.

My theory is this: one moderator (Dr. Shades?) edited the post to remove the C-word, only to be followed later by harmony who edited it further due to the blatant personal attacks. Wouldn't that explain why some have claimed to have seen the actual word and others saw it edited?
_Eric

Re: Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

Post by _Eric »

Dad of a Mormon wrote:Yes, but that would not explain why the others claimed to have seen it. You seem to be focusing in on harmony. harmony is not the only one making the claim.


The other people that claim to have seen the word all contradict each other on what they saw.

My theory is this: one moderator (Dr. Shades?) edited the post to remove the C-word, only to be followed later by harmony who edited it further due to the blatant personal attacks. Wouldn't that explain why some have claimed to have seen the actual word and others saw it edited?


Did Dr. Shades say he edited the post? I don't believe he did.
Post Reply