Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

[_consiglieri]

what led you to believe that you had the right to display it in such a manner, and to get the attention of the publisher?

I don't know, Simon.

Maybe a little thing called the freaking First Amendment?

[_consiglieri]

Simon ~ Why did I do it?

Because none of you would.

You are totally awesome!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Trustee-in-Trust of the MsJack Fan Club)

[_Simon Belmont]

Simon ~ Why did I do it?

Because none of you would.

William has been bragging for years about how his fellow apologists and saints have nothing but love and admiration for his vulgar, lewd and misogynist behavior. And the majority of you sat around and pretended you didn't hear him.

You want someone to blame for what happened on this thread, other than William? Blame yourselves. If you really are representatives of "the Church of Jesus Christ," this should have come from one of you. You should have seen that your brother's path was a self-destructive one and reprimanded him out of love and concern for him.

MSJack, I apologize if my comments and questions seemed hostile. They were not intended that way at all. I sincerely wanted to know more about your thought process regarding this thread. You and I are, apparently, quite different in this respect. While there are misogynists, misandrists, and general misanthropists all over the Internet and in our every day lives, I do not feel it is my responsibility to formally point out or speak out against these behaviors and attitudes.

As to what gave me the right to do any of this:

Everyone is welcome. Every opinion is welcome.

That's what gave me the right.

In the same light, does not anyone here have the right to say whatever he or she wishes, even if her or his attitudes represent misogyny, misandry, or general misanthropy?

I sincerely hope that answers your questions.

It does, and of course I do not question you doing what you feel is the right thing to do. I just wanted to find out more.

[_asbestosman]

While there are misogynists, misandrists, and general misanthropists all over the Internet and in our every day lives, I do not feel it is my responsibility to formally point out or speak out against these behaviors and attitudes.

You just focus on speaking out against behaviors and attitudes which are derogatory towards the church, right?

In the same light, does not anyone here have the right to say whatever he or she wishes, even if her or his attitudes represent misogyny, misandry, or general misanthropy?

Sure, everyone can choose to do as they wish. They just don't get to choose the consequences.

Simon, I'm not trying to be critical of you. I'm just trying to let you know how critics will read your words and why they may not think too highly of your replies--it has little to do with you being a faithful Mormon in my opinion (although I believe there is some tribalism here).

MsJack
I did tell Will what I thought of his behavior. Will made it clear that he doesn't care what I think. As I am not his ecclesiastical leader, I didn't think there was anything else for me to do. I am also not connected with any apologetic organizations and was under the impression that they already knew of Will's antics. I therefore believed there really wasn't anything else I thought I could do except ignore his bad behavior. Were my assumptions and actions correct? Perhaps not.

[_Simon Belmont]

You just focus on speaking out against behaviors and attitudes which are derogatory towards the church, right?

Yes, but that's why I qualified it with formally. The difference is that I am speaking out against anti-Mormonism on MDB with largely anonymous posters, and MSJack composing a formal write up of a behavior, using a real life identities.

Which is fine, since she felt that was the right thing to do.

Sure, everyone can choose to do as they wish. They just don't get to choose the consequences.

Then what's the fun of free speech? (just kidding)

[_Yoda]

If you really are representatives of "the Church of Jesus Christ," this should have come from one of you. You should have seen that your brother's path was a self-destructive one and reprimanded him out of love and concern for him.

I think that another point to be made is that LOAP, David, and Abman all did confront Will about his behavior. He made it clear that not only did he not care about their opinions, but in the case of LOAP and David, he actually accused them of having a personal vendetta against him over other unrelated issues.

Basically, Will turned a blind eye to council. That is why I have little sympathy for the consequence of his actions.

[_RockSlider]

Basically, Will turned a blind eye to council. That is why I have little sympathy for the consequence of his actions.

get a CLUE

William in the trailer park with his own written word.

[_MsJack]

Simon ~ The questions that you're asking now, I feel like I addressed pretty thoroughly in my OP, particularly the "Introduction" and "Conclusion" sections. I explained why I don't go after every single example of misogynist behavior that I see on the Internet, and I explained why I felt that this kind of behavior is especially inappropriate for someone who wants to make serious scholarly contributions to an academic field.

That was why I went above and beyond those answers in my last response to you. I assumed that you'd already read my OP and were asking for more information.

asbestosman & liz3564 ~ In my comment to Simon, I noted that only a "majority" of apologists seemed to be ignoring William's antics. With that, I meant to imply that I had seen a minority protest his words. I apologize for not making that clearer.

I don't like to refer to events that took place in private, but I do know of a few who made significant effort to raise concerns with William. The people I know who tried were rebuffed, ignored, or demonized by him as "apostate-sympathizers." The efforts of these people were not unappreciated by me, but it did not look like private attempts at intervention were doing much to change him.

In fact, I asked a few of them about this thread after I posted it and the prospect of calling wider attention to the matter through a blog version. Their response was basically, "We tried to warn him about this, and he wouldn't listen, so have at him."

[_RockSlider]

"We tried to warn him about this, and he wouldn't listen, so have at him."

oh, so it was really

MsJack, in the trailer park, with William's enormous ego


ouch!

Please don't hurt me no more!

[_Yoda]

Simon ~ Why did I do it?

Because none of you would.

You are totally awesome!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Trustee-in-Trust of the MsJack Fan Club)

Can I join the club, too? ;-)