Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

[_MsJack]

MnG ~ For the record, I don't agree with harmony here (though I don't grudge her for her feelings on the matter; I haven't been the target of William's worst abuse). When people apologize, I'm willing to stop bringing something up. If they only apologize for a small part of what they have done wrong, I'll still stop referencing that small part. For the most part, I've tried not to bring up this thread in general. Most of the commentary I've made on it since it died down has been in response to attacks on me due to the fall-out from it.

I honestly wasn't aware that William had offered a full apology for the "champion bitch" comment. Like Blixa, I was expecting a new thread on this forum, as promised by William.

But, like Kishkumen, I kind of feel like his new denial of having said it at all and false accusations against the moderators and posters on this forum renders his old apology null. I'll note them both when I update this thread.

I do agree that you are a class act, and I'm glad that you post here.

[_Chap]

... I kind of feel like his new denial of having said it at all and false accusations against the moderators and posters on this forum renders his old apology null. I'll note them both when I update this thread.

Well, yes ...

Now we know that he is not only an admitted verbal abuser of women, but also a person willing to withdraw his admissions and make fantasy claims about people altering his posts to insert rude words if he thinks he can get away with it.

I think most people will think that if it was possible for him to sink even lower than he did when he used the 'b' word, he has now managed to achieve that feat.

[_Dr. Shades]

Now we know that he is not only an admitted verbal abuser of women, but also a person willing to withdraw his admissions and make fantasy claims about people altering his posts to insert rude words if he thinks he can get away with it.

I wonder if there is anyone on MD&D who believe him.

[_Chap]

Now we know that he is not only an admitted verbal abuser of women, but also a person willing to withdraw his admissions and make fantasy claims about people altering his posts to insert rude words if he thinks he can get away with it.

I wonder if there is anyone on MD&D who believe him.

Well, the posts I copied earlier in the thread show that the only reactions to his post saying that the 'b' word was substituted for 'wench' in his posts on this board by wicked moderators were expressive of incredulity. Those posts were deleted by the MADmods on the grounds of 'derailing', though his original post was left in place.

Nobody posted to support Schryver by saying things like "Yeah! Altering your posts so you seemed to call Emma Smith a 'prize b***h' is just the kind of thing those apostates on the other board would do!'.

[_3sheets2thewind]

Now we know that he is not only an admitted verbal abuser of women, but also a person willing to withdraw his admissions and make fantasy claims about people altering his posts to insert rude words if he thinks he can get away with it.

I wonder if there is anyone on MD&D who believe him.

Of course they believe him. I mean, isn't everyone here, except Bcspace and whyme, Sons Of Perdition?

When the whole fiasco with MI and DCP went down and the picks and torches came out, all I could envision was a silhouette of "Human Centipede"

[Guest]

-

[_beastie]

You would think that online defenders of the faith would have long ago recognized Will as a liability and distanced themselves from him. Instead, they have retrenched and circled the wagons around him. All this only makes sense if one remembers that MDD is not really about defending the faith. It's about defending the apologists, as Shades pointed out long ago.

It's almost like a sub-religion within a religion.

[Guest]

-

[_beastie]

Or a cult within a cult. It is almost like they actually view themselves as modern day Danites or some kind of religious order that exists outside of LDS Church control. I guess after being the people that GAs send questioning members to for so long and being the people that GAs rely upon for answers to the tough questions has got to their heads.

Cult doesn't seem to fit though because like the LDS Church their cult of DCP/Mopologetics seems to lack a charismatic leader. At least Mormonism had one at one time.

Thanks,

Hasa Diga Eebowai

I've been thinking some more about this, about why so many (not all) defenders of the faith have fallen into this phenomenon: defending apologists instead of the faith. I wonder if what happens is this:

1 - faithful member learns troubling information about the history and/or claims of the LDS church
2 - faithful member cannot tolerate the idea of the church even possibly not being true
3 - faithful member desperately turns to apologists to help salvage their faith, not so much by providing sound answers, but instead by reassuring the member that people far more educated and intelligent than they have thoroughly studied the matter and determined that belief in the LDS church is justified, despite said problems
4 - faithful member feels tremendous relief at being reassured that it's ok to still believe, which was the faithful member's goal all along
5 - faithful member feels loyalty, gratitude and devotion towards apologists for enabling him/her to continue believing, which is what he/she really needed
6 - apologists are criticized by either critics or other faithful LDS or even by GAs
7 - faithful member reacts protectively towards apologists, because admitting their problems and possible errors means that the horrible Pandora's box might be opened again

This is the only way I can make sense of how they've defended Will when his behavior is so clearly indefensible.

[Guest]

-