beastie wrote:Curiouser and curiouser.
Kishkumen wrote:
Either he is lying, or maybe his pals in the linguistics department at BYU, Oaks and Skousen, were "assigned" by Will himself to gather around a monitor at Will's house with some fresh popcorn and laugh it up while they enjoyed his crass comments? Who knows, eh?
After they laughed long and hard, they found him "not guilty."
beastie wrote:I still think there must have been some trigger event. I rarely show interest in the Book of Abraham, so I doubt it was that. I still think Nomad may be the link.
Kishkumen wrote:beastie wrote:I still think there must have been some trigger event. I rarely show interest in the Book of Abraham, so I doubt it was that. I still think Nomad may be the link.
Does a misogynist need a trigger other than your gender?
beastie wrote:Kishkumen wrote:Does a misogynist need a trigger other than your gender?
Probably not. Likely that a female simply strongly disagreeing with a misogynist with a significant ego is trigger enough. People with narcissistic traits often act as if they're impervious to criticisms of lesser beings, but, in reality, they tend to internally overact to every perceived slight.
Will Schryver wrote:Just when I think this thread can't possible get any better; any more representative (and in a relatively synthesized fashion) of the various personalities that make up the unique community of The Great and Spacious Trailer Park© ... well, I get proven wrong.
You know, beastlie, I think it would be especially appropriate, at this juncture, for you to launch in to a more detailed psychoanalytical discussion of my personality in particular, and how it relates to and is a reflection of the psyche of the "Mormon Patriarchal Male" in general. Even if you did no more than link to some of your previous comments along those lines, it would be a great benefit to our readers.
You see, I'm really hoping to make this thread a "one-stop-shopping" link for all future inquiries concerning my vulgar misogyny, etc., and since your prescient psychoanalysis of the underlying motivations has frequently been a component of these discussions in the past, I would very much like to see you elaborate further along those lines.
"… I did, in fact, obliquely refer to beastlie and dissonance (once each, as I recall) with variants on the appellative "bitch." But it was concluded that my judgment was so near to the facts of the matter that I could not be convicted by a jury of my peers."
Thank you SO much for bringing this to our attention again.
Let's look more closely at the statement in which this was embedded:
You might be interested in the fact that a couple people were once given the task of investigating the basis for the oft-repeated claim of my wanton vulgarity. What was the result of this rather exhaustive investigation? It was that, although a few minor blushes were induced (amidst the belly laughs), there was deemed to be virtually no substantive basis for the allegations; quotes were found to have been routinely taken out of context, thus entirely altering their true meaning, and a large proportion of the "vulgarities" attributed to me were entirely fabricated out of whole cloth (like, for example, the frequently repeated allegation that I called the golden-haired Kimberly Ann a "whore.")
(Kimberly does remain somewhat famous [among a small circle of otherwise respected academics] on account of my descriptions of her having once squeezed her then more voluptuous spirit tabernacle into a slinky black three-sizes-too-small dress at the 2006 Exmormon Foundation conference in Salt Lake City, which I attended. One wouldn't have believed it possible to carry melons in a pair of thimbles suspended from a thread, but miracles happen almost every day in this jaded world of cynical disbelievers.)
It was, I must confess, ascertained that I did, in fact, obliquely refer to beastlie and dissonance (once each, as I recall) with variants on the appellative "bitch." But it was concluded that my judgment was so near to the facts of the matter that I could not be convicted by a jury of my peers. LOL! Nevertheless, I have long since refrained from any similar rhetorical excesses, notwithstanding the severe violence thus inflicted against my natural tendencies.
On this thread, Will has followed silver hammer's lead and insisted that he was not referencing members of the MI with his "small circle of otherwise respected academics", some of whom were given the charge of investigating Will's behavior. Now he insists that he knows other academics, and it was, I suppose, that group that was given the charge of investigating Will's behavior. It's a very odd proposition, by the way, that respected academics who associate with the self-identified non-academic Schryver and are interested enough to investigate his behavior, and yet have nothing to do with MI. But aside from that, it is even more odd that this group of academics who have nothing to do with MI not only were interested enough to investigate Will's behavior, but were also familiar enough with me to conclude that Will justly called me a bitch.
Curiouser and curiouser.
beastie wrote:First, I want you to address this post I made above.
Your story is strained and a bit poorly patched together.
Will Schryver wrote:beastie wrote:First, I want you to address this post I made above.
What you want and what you get will be, at least in this case, two very different things.Your story is strained and a bit poorly patched together.
No, dear beastlie, my story is comprised of multiple opaque ambiguities, deliberately crafted and consciously assembled consistent with my mischievous designs to befuddle, bewilder, and otherwise bedevil you and your cohorts here in the GSTP©.
My story is comprised of multiple opaque ambiguities, deliberately crafted and consciously assembled consistent with my mischievous designs to befuddle, bewilder, and otherwise bedevil naïve members of the church, desperate for a Book of Abraham resolution.