Mary wrote:I should add also, that the brother's account of his meeting with Micklesen and his SP indicates that Micklesen was not above using his church office to threaten members on personal matters and to call their loyalty into question.
So, if anyone is a corrupt, vindictive, controlling a**hole here, it is Micklesen imho.
This is why: If the daughter really was a victim of sexual abuse and if Mikelsen really was the only perpetrator, then Karren's ex-wife was also a victim of her father. If Karren's ex-wife was a victim of her father, then her father also holds things over her head snd I see hee actions as the actions of a victim protecting a perpetrator. Possibly Stockholm syndrome. It may be that Karren's ex-wife has more to escape from than we know. But we don't know.
I base my judgements of Karren on Karren's action and Karren's words. He is the one supplying information about himself. No one else is talking. Also, I don't really feel like character is the right word. It's too, idk, too much something that connotes the way one is perceived socially. I'm not after anyone's character or reputation, I'm analyzing the actions and words of someone who has walked into the public realm to make a public accusation of the worst kind of crime. He has opened himself up to this.
Also, as for my bias: I love men. Not all men act like this. Frankly, I get along better with men than women. Always have. From my perspective, I'm working to avoid bias because I'm not assuming M is guilty until proven innocent because I'm a former Mormon or because I am invested in victims' voices being heard. But that's the problem. We're listening to someone who is proving himself to be an abusive partner. We're not listening to victims. Even if K's daughter does speak, I will already know the way her father has behaved towards his wife and family and I won't know if she is protecting her abusive father in the same way K's ex-wife might be protecting her abusive father. Victims will protect perpetrators and accuse other perpetrators. In other words, this is my assessment because I have studied how abuse in families works.
At some point we may not know if we have two victims protecting two perpetrators. Each victim a daughter and each perpetrator a father. This is why I talk about women being pawns. Victims are used like chess pieces in larger strategies. How will we ever know what really happened here?
EDITS: phone typos, finishing thoughts