Problematic John Dehlin, a short list

[Meadowchik]

I am going to cut against the whole framing of this post by saying that people are always free not to work for John Dehlin, follow Mormon Stories, or participate in Open Stories events. I would put myself largely in the group of non-participants. I listen to his podcast when he has a really interesting guest. I used to listen more regularly, but, honestly, the Mormon podcast world started to get more crowded, so I started to listen to other Mormon podcasts as well. I also started to listen to other kinds of podcasts.

Not that it is any of my business, but, hey, so much of what this is is not any of our personal business, but I would be interested to know about Meadochik's personal experience with John Dehlin and Mormon Stories. She is welcome not to answer my question.

I listened to MS at the beginning of my faith transition and was a participant in the Facebook group for a time. That's the extent of my personal experience with either.

In any case, "problematic" is a word I use about various things. It is an overused word. In some ways I would say it is the kind of word we use when we want to find fault with something and create a general sense of being unsettled or suspicious of it in others, without really having anything decisively critical to say, or perhaps, we don't really want to commit to or back up our negative judgment about something.

It's "problematic."

We have "concerns."

How does that apply here? I aired concerns in another thread, was asked to elaborate, and I did, with reasons, sources, and examples.

We have heard a lot about this stuff. I can't say that my mind is blown by these "issues." Of all of them, I am most concerned about the Rosebud stuff, in that I think it was very poor form. The other stuff is interesting because it amounts to "I don't like the way John Dehlin runs his business." OK. Fine. You don't have to work for him. You don't have to follow his stuff. Many times I have said that I would not work for the guy because he doesn't seem to be a particularly good boss. I am satisfied that I have made the right decision. I recommend my way of handling this to everyone else.

Everything I have heard about the Kristey Money stuff frankly seems like mildly sympathetic whinging. NDAs are fairly common and no, Dehlin is not obliged to release someone from an NDA they freely entered into (funny how so many people have problems with voluntary, adult decisions these days).

Yes, we have heard about this already. But I was asked the question and so I answered. And I guess that from an outsider's perspective, it is easy to dismiss complaints by people who were doing volunteer or part-time work. But for those involved and hurt by it, it can be a big deal.

First of all, he did earn an actual, legitimate PhD from an esteemed institution of higher learning. Placing this within the framework of a "grey area" is frankly sloppy and prejudiced. He was under no obligation to become licensed to practice within a traditional psychological counseling framework, and I am absolutely baffled that you would complain about life coaching, which, honestly, is perfectly legal. Where is the "grey area" here?

I did acknowledge his real Phd and that his coaching is legal. Perhaps you could listen to some licensed psychotherapists' opinions about this. From what I understand, there is an issue in advertising oneself as having some credentials and inviting people to benefit from them through your service without having gone through the licensure that is intended to scrutinize/regulate proper medical practice.

in my opinion it is an ethical problem.

Which women? Holding him to account how? Not men? He doesn't ban, delete, or mute men? Only women? If so, where is your evidence? You see, my impression, and it is not a flattering one of John, is that he tends to fly off the handle and ban, delete, and mute people who attack him on his own social media groups. I think it is bad, but I also haven't seen that he singles out women for this treatment.

He does seem to single women out disproportionately. For evidence, I recommend you pay attention to Mormon Enlightenment, Mormon Stories, and Mormon Stories Podcast Community Facebook groups.

There is one way in which I think this impression could come about, however, and that is in the context of this Mofluencer War in which figures like KK get angry with Dehlin for one reason or another and decide to go on a crusade against him, recruiting people like Rosebud and Kristey Money, and stoking their grudges.Then if someone shows up in one of his social media groups, armed and enflamed by this pseudo-crusade, he probably doesn't want to deal with their nonsense.

You're speaking about these women as if they have no legitimate gripe and I find that dismissive. How long does it take for a legitimate complaint to become a "grudge" or "pseudo-crusade"? Does the change happen when people get tired of hearing them complain?

I agree with you about being responsive to criticism, but I don't think people should expect that he is going to be able to satisfy their every disagreement with him and have him meet with their personal approval on their own pet issues.

Again this seems dismissive. It's not a big deal to you, so it's a pet issue. It doesn't bother you, so it's a grudge.

A perspective I see here is that Dehlin filled a vacuum at the right moment in history to become a major face for the Leavers-of-the-church and still is. The turnover on the exmo margins is pretty fast. Lots of people have listened to MS and moved on. The majority probably have no idea the kind of conflicts people have repeatedly had with Dehlin. Many women over the years have invested in joint efforts with Open Stories Foundation and Dehlin. And when many were mistreated and spoke up, they were harmed and disproportionately so. But it is a relatively small world, so being swatted by the big cat is harmful indeed.

What I see is a replication of a lot of the church patterns. It is voluntary, after all. If people don't like it, they can leave.

[Meadowchik]

John doesn't owe anybody Crap. How entitled are YOU to think you deserve any type of response to the BS "criticism" he receives.

Once again, the enemies of Mormon Stories have surfaced to hurt John. A cycle as predictable as Cicadas. But in this case it is rats.

I am just as entitled as anyone else here who wants to speak their mind about Mormon-related issues. This is a Mormon-related issue. I was asked to elaborate on my thoughts and I did. And they are informed from years of observation and listening to other people.

John Dehlin is a public figure who has benefitted and continues to benefit from that status. He is not entitled to be free from criticism.

Something important here is that many of the complaints come from people close to him, who worked with him, who were actively engaged in the joint work. Other complaints come from people who were invited to give feedback, or people who were earnestly engaged in similar work who engaged in good faith in his communities. Not rats. Contemporaries. Fellow Post-Mos and ExMos. Other people who want the best for people leaving the church and learning from their experiences.

[Dr Exiled]

Tavares, John Dehlin's #1 fan, needs to calm down.

[dastardly stem]

I' surprised what's come out with regard to the Rosebud stuff. I imagined the two had a very unhealthy relationship, but there was so little there every time Rosebud or someone else went on a binge complaining about John because of it. I feel largely settled on what went down. It wasn't just an unhealthy relationship on both sides, there was an element of power imbalance that was obviously used to benefit the man in power, while they were supposed to work together. It was sexual harassment. And granted, I doubt John saw it that way or sees it that way still. The evidence seems clear.

Kristy Money? I can't figure out what that's about exactly. I would very much guess her podcast got little attention and as a result brought in little to no money. It sounds like she came out later to complain John obviously got money but she did not. I don't see that she has ever presented any sort of agreement they had. That she happens to be a woman only helps the perception that John likes to or is able to exploit women, but i'm not seeing anything.

The life coach thing? I can't figure out how that's an issue either. He has a PhD. It feels a little slimy for people to get paid for being a life coach when, it seems to me, we're all just living life and coaching each other, but whatever. Some life coaches are bilking people, no doubt. I don't think he is. I'd be happy to see something concrete though.

The blocking women, deleting and muting? I don't think that's a thing he does to women who criticize. He does it to men and women who criticize. That only plays if its true, outside of Rosebud, he has used women. But those accusations, as in Kristy Money, feel really weak to me.

That he announced Michael Quinn? Sorry that's not a complaint that means anything to me. Feel free my man. If he did so knowingly before Quinn's family, I mean off-putting and weird. But, he runs a community and announces Mormon news. That's part of his job. my guess is he jumped on it because it's big news to his audience...and he didn't realize the family had not yet made note of it.

I will say when he adds things, as he did with Rosebud, that he must be in control of everything, that people must do as he requests or whatever...there's a personal problem. But, I don't have any position to talk to him about that.

Take him or leave him. It seems to me complaints about him are overblown. But he's built something and is profiting nicely now it seems. I don't' think that's good reason to throw weak complaints at him though.

[drumdude]

I'm completely on John's side on the Rosebud issue, but everything else I think meadowchik has completely correct.

John comes off very insincere and cringe when you dig deeper than the surface level persona he puts out there. Case in point, he loves to talk about how much money he walked away from at Microsoft as if he was a martyr, when he knows damn well he loves all the fame and attention he got out of it and wouldn't have gotten any of that at Microsoft.

[Meadowchik]

I' surprised what's come out with regard to the Rosebud stuff. I imagined the two had a very unhealthy relationship, but there was so little there every time Rosebud or someone else went on a binge complaining about John because of it. I feel largely settled on what went down. It wasn't just an unhealthy relationship on both sides, there was an element of power imbalance that was obviously used to benefit the man in power, while they were supposed to work together. It was sexual harassment. And granted, I doubt John saw it that way or sees it that way still. The evidence seems clear.

Kristy Money? I can't figure out what that's about exactly. I would very much guess her podcast got little attention and as a result brought in little to no money. It sounds like she came out later to complain John obviously got money but she did not. I don't see that she has ever presented any sort of agreement they had. That she happens to be a woman only helps the perception that John likes to or is able to exploit women, but i'm not seeing anything.

The life coach thing? I can't figure out how that's an issue either. He has a PhD. It feels a little slimy for people to get paid for being a life coach when, it seems to me, we're all just living life and coaching each other, but whatever. Some life coaches are bilking people, no doubt. I don't think he is. I'd be happy to see something concrete though.

The blocking women, deleting and muting? I don't think that's a thing he does to women who criticize. He does it to men and women who criticize. That only plays if its true, outside of Rosebud, he has used women. But those accusations, as in Kristy Money, feel really weak to me.

That he announced Michael Quinn? Sorry that's not a complaint that means anything to me. Feel free my man. If he did so knowingly before Quinn's family, I mean off-putting and weird. But, he runs a community and announces Mormon news. That's part of his job. my guess is he jumped on it because it's big news to his audience...and he didn't realize the family had not yet made note of it.

I will say when he adds things, as he did with Rosebud, that he must be in control of everything, that people must do as he requests or whatever...there's a personal problem. But, I don't have any position to talk to him about that.

Take him or leave him. It seems to me complaints about him are overblown. But he's built something and is profiting nicely now it seems. I don't' think that's good reason to throw weak complaints at him though.

To put it in very simple terms, he generates a product that people consume. He is also an influencer and employer. Like any other product, thought leader, or employer, people give feedback. This is feedback.

[dastardly stem]

I' surprised what's come out with regard to the Rosebud stuff. I imagined the two had a very unhealthy relationship, but there was so little there every time Rosebud or someone else went on a binge complaining about John because of it. I feel largely settled on what went down. It wasn't just an unhealthy relationship on both sides, there was an element of power imbalance that was obviously used to benefit the man in power, while they were supposed to work together. It was sexual harassment. And granted, I doubt John saw it that way or sees it that way still. The evidence seems clear.

Kristy Money? I can't figure out what that's about exactly. I would very much guess her podcast got little attention and as a result brought in little to no money. It sounds like she came out later to complain John obviously got money but she did not. I don't see that she has ever presented any sort of agreement they had. That she happens to be a woman only helps the perception that John likes to or is able to exploit women, but i'm not seeing anything.

The life coach thing? I can't figure out how that's an issue either. He has a PhD. It feels a little slimy for people to get paid for being a life coach when, it seems to me, we're all just living life and coaching each other, but whatever. Some life coaches are bilking people, no doubt. I don't think he is. I'd be happy to see something concrete though.

The blocking women, deleting and muting? I don't think that's a thing he does to women who criticize. He does it to men and women who criticize. That only plays if its true, outside of Rosebud, he has used women. But those accusations, as in Kristy Money, feel really weak to me.

That he announced Michael Quinn? Sorry that's not a complaint that means anything to me. Feel free my man. If he did so knowingly before Quinn's family, I mean off-putting and weird. But, he runs a community and announces Mormon news. That's part of his job. my guess is he jumped on it because it's big news to his audience...and he didn't realize the family had not yet made note of it.

I will say when he adds things, as he did with Rosebud, that he must be in control of everything, that people must do as he requests or whatever...there's a personal problem. But, I don't have any position to talk to him about that.

Take him or leave him. It seems to me complaints about him are overblown. But he's built something and is profiting nicely now it seems. I don't' think that's good reason to throw weak complaints at him though.

To put it in very simple terms, he generates a product that people consume. He is also an influencer and employer. Like any other product, thought leader, or employer, people give feedback. This is feedback.

That's fine. I think it's more helpful feedback if there is actual substance to the complaints. I meant only to give my impression of the complaints. I don't think they hold very well based on the evidence.

If John takes this and improves in some way, great. I should let that stand.

[Meadowchik]

That's fine. I think it's more helpful feedback if there is actual substance to the complaints. I meant only to give my impression of the complaints. I don't think they hold very well based on the evidence.

If John takes this and improves in some way, great. I should let that stand.

A primary thing with Money, Kelly, and Rosebud and others that deserves censure is how he responds to dissent. With Rosebud, he pushed her out. With Money just acknowledging that she didn't get paid for the work, he pushed her out. With Kelly expressing some support for Money, he cut her off and blocked her.

[Tavares Standfield]

With Money just acknowledging that she didn't get paid for the work, he pushed her out.

MONEY DID NOT PRODUCE REVENUE

Why should she get paid for providing exactly $0 to the success of the organization? Do you live in the real world? You know, where people are compensated based on what value they provide. Money produced no money. Therefore, no compensation.

But I'm glad to see that you and Kate Kelly's laptop are operating from the same playbook.

[dastardly stem]

That's fine. I think it's more helpful feedback if there is actual substance to the complaints. I meant only to give my impression of the complaints. I don't think they hold very well based on the evidence.

If John takes this and improves in some way, great. I should let that stand.

A primary thing with Money, Kelly, and Rosebud and others that deserves censure is how he responds to dissent. With Rosebud, he pushed her out. With Money just acknowledging that she didn't get paid for the work, he pushed her out. With Kelly expressing some support for Money, he cut her off and blocked her.

Good point.