Two women are making similar claims, at great personal cost to themselves, and the common factor is John Dehlin's behavior. Are those two women over exaggerating the facts? I still think so. Is there something potentially wrong that John is doing, and needs to fix? I think so. Is it worth talking about? I think so.
I am not suggesting that John can't criticize the Mormon church. John is allowed to be a hypocrite. So are Mormon church leaders. What I am suggesting is that John apply the same standards of transparency and informed consent that he seeks from the Mormon church, to his donors and staff. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? Why should a special exception be made for Dehlin to shield him from criticism? Because it's embarrassing for him and hurtful to Margi? It's surely been embarrassing for Rosebud and Kamp...
drumdude, I am unable to not think the difference between John Dehlin and the LDS leaders is important. One claims to speak for God and to demand extensive real life obedience from you. The other, John, does not. I think the demand or need for transparency are entirely different. I have no need to understand John's poor choices or sins like I do not need to know your sins.
Huck,
Unlike John Dehlin, you and I are not running a non-profit nor are we soliciting donations. We're also not hiring and managing staff at a non-profit. I think that difference too, is important.
Informed consent is what I'm talking about, not exposing sins. John could have stolen a candy bar at a 7/11 - that has nothing to do with his non profit business. John could have relations with prostitutes and, again, nothing to do with his business. I could care less. Improper behavior at the workplace, on the other hand, is completely salient.
John Dehlin wants donors to the Mormon Church to be adequately informed. I want donors to John Dehlin and the people (especially women) who may work under him to also be adequately informed. Two women now have lost their jobs and had their reputations ruined, and I sincerely hope there won't be a third.
drumdude, I am unable to not think the difference between John Dehlin and the LDS leaders is important. One claims to speak for God and to demand extensive real life obedience from you. The other, John, does not. I think the demand or need for transparency are entirely different. I have no need to understand John's poor choices or sins like I do not need to know your sins.
Huck,
Unlike John Dehlin, you and I are not running a non-profit nor are we soliciting donations. We're also not hiring and managing staff at a non-profit. I think that difference too, is important.
Informed consent is what I'm talking about, not exposing sins. John could have stolen a candy bar at a 7/11 - that has nothing to do with his non profit business. John could have relations with prostitutes and, again, nothing to do with his business. I could care less. Improper behavior at the workplace, on the other hand, is completely salient.
John Dehlin wants donors to the Mormon Church to be adequately informed. I want donors to John Dehlin and the people (especially women) who may work under him to also be adequately informed. Two women now have lost their jobs and had their reputations ruined, and I sincerely hope there won't be a third.
drumdude, I find myself with uncertain mixed reaction with all of this. I see your point that Dehlin is more a public figure who influences people so comes under more scrutiny than you or I. That is reasonable.
I think Dehlin may take advantage of injured individuals more than he perhaps realizes. I hope he has or runs into some true friends to help him learn to deal better with that.
I see a couple of women beating themselves over the head crying they are martyrs. I hope they find honest friends to help them.
I am baffled trying to think of 40 dollars an hour as abusive employment. It is well better than many people have to deal with. Of course if the person has skill sets making higher paying jobs available then being pushed out of the 40 hour job is good guidance.
drumdude, I find myself with uncertain mixed reaction with all of this. I see your point that Dehlin is more a public figure who influences people so comes under more scrutiny than you or I. That is reasonable.
I think Dehlin may take advantage of injured individuals more than he perhaps realizes. I hope he has or runs into some true friends to help him learn to deal better with that.
I see a couple of women beating themselves over the head crying they are martyrs. I hope they find honest friends to help them.
I am baffled trying to think of 40 dollars an hour as abusive employment. It is well better than many people have to deal with. Of course if the person has skill sets making higher paying jobs available then being pushed out of the 40 hour job is good guidance.
A lot to agree with here.
Rosebud and Kamp seem to have made a lot of stuff up, but there are a lot of important details in the screenshots they both offered as evidence. Everything they said related to pay seems completely frivolous to me. As well as everything that was insinuated about Dehlin being physically or sexually abusive.
I think they wanted John to suffer some sort of criminal or civil punishment for what he did. That’s the only motivation I can think of for how they went about telling their stories so untruthfully. But being a cheater and a jerk and a horrible boss is perfectly lawful.
In hindsight they should have just released the evidence as is and let the community decide for themselves how to interpret it.
Carah had a hard time containing her animosity and I think her desire to refute Rod Meldrum was too much so she quit.
Yep, that's verbatim what Jenn Kamp's filings that were uploaded said happened.
I assume Jenn took this directly from what Carah said on her podcast. Seems Jenn can get things right when it is in her best interest. Her lying is not compulsory like Trump's. She has the free agency to insert her lies whenever it best meets her narrative, although she is unable to keep all the lies coherent in her narrative.
Two women are making similar claims, at great personal cost to themselves,...
Same with Goosey Lucy and Foxy Loxy. They wanted to alert us that the sky was falling and to seek revenge on John Dehlin and perhaps gain a slice of the Open Stories pie. They selflessly risked being exposed as two brazen hussies holding daggers behind their backs.
“I was accused of sexual harassment” is not something one is obliged to advertise in order to achieve the elusive status of “informed consent.”
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.
How the crap does someone with a PhD in psychology have the self-awareness and social media filter of a high school kid?
It'd probably pay dividends to hire a consultant to review anything intended for public posting. Good gravy.
Seriously. What happened to the Open Stories Foundation decision, posted some years back, to not respond to repeated claims that had already been addressed?
3) Call me a “cheater” or whatever you want. But know….I’ve had sex with one woman my entire life - Margi. I’m not saying that’s good or bad. That’s just a fact.
Rosebud and I started to have feelings for each other….yes. Back in 2011….as Open Stories Foundation board members…before she started working for the Open Stories Foundation as an employee. I ended the relationship in 2012 when she propositioned me for sex (and I declined). Even Rosebud admits we never had sex. Those are her words. Yes it was horrible, terrible judgement on my/our part as fellow board members and as work colleagues. And super harmful to our families and to the Open Stories Foundation. I messed up and I take full responsibility for my part. But folks should know what you mean when you say “cheater.” I’m not sure it’s the traditional meaning of the word.
That didn't help at all. Saying "I take full responsibility" then following it immediately by "but..." clearly means they don't take full responsibility. And that sentence that he "ended the relationship in 2012" is just laughable given all the details that have been posted.
I can't even imagine how horrible it must feel to be the wife of a man who openly posts that, then argues that he didn't really cheat, at least not in the traditional sense.
And this?
I’ve had sex with one woman my entire life - Margi. I’m not saying that’s good or bad. That’s just a fact.
Oh dear god. What an ass. File this under "how to publicly make sure your wife knows you couldn't care less about her."
How the crap does someone with a PhD in psychology have the self-awareness and social media filter of a high school kid?
It'd probably pay dividends to hire a consultant to review anything intended for public posting. Good gravy.
Seriously. What happened to the Open Stories Foundation decision, posted some years back, to not respond to repeated claims that had already been addressed?
That didn't help at all. Saying "I take full responsibility" then following it immediately by "but..." clearly means they don't take full responsibility. And that sentence that he "ended the relationship in 2012" is just laughable given all the details that have been posted.
I can't even imagine how horrible it must feel to be the wife of a man who openly posts that, then argues that he didn't really cheat, at least not in the traditional sense.
And this?
I’ve had sex with one woman my entire life - Margi. I’m not saying that’s good or bad. That’s just a fact.
Oh dear god. What an ass. File this under "how to publicly make sure your wife knows you couldn't care less about her."
I also loved the redirection of the criticism. It wasn’t quoted here but he said “I know I’m not perfect, I know I’m not the smartest.” Classic gaslighting and redirection from the topic being discussed, enough to make a church apologist proud.
It wasn’t until I started describing the details of this case to my significant other that I really started to empathize with the women’s perspective.
Somewhere between “believe all women no matter what” and “she’s just a crazy woman, it’s all false” lies the real truth. In my opinion, having seen what Dehlin has written both in public and in private.
“I was accused of sexual harassment” is not something one is obliged to advertise in order to achieve the elusive status of “informed consent.”
And the Mormon church is not obliged to tell church members in Africa that it excluded black people from temple ordinances and the priesthood, yet John Dehlin keeps arguing that they should.
“Informed consent,” whatever that is, is a core John Dehlin value that he has built a podcast empire on and then refuses to apply to himself.
“I was accused of sexual harassment” is not something one is obliged to advertise in order to achieve the elusive status of “informed consent.”
Yeah, there situations in which informed consent appropriate. Should Jenn Kamp have to disclose “I sued my former employer because I was sexually harassed” in every job interview for the rest of her life?
Nah.
he/him we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.
The details are out there, so in my opinion the 'informed consent' part is done. Which is why I was so surprised to see Dehlin post such details as earlier in this thread. This 2019 board statement was sufficient, in my opinion:
....Over the past few years we have noticed that every 6 months or so a few members of the community will launch baseless attacks on either individual podcasters or on the Open Stories Foundation – usually with the intent to smear reputations or undermine confidence in Open Stories Foundation operations. When this happens, we are always caught between: 1) not wanting to give attention to false allegations, and 2) wanting to defend ourselves. We have consistently found that trying to decide how to respond to these baseless allegations often consumes an incredible amount of time and energy in ways that do not contribute to the mission of the Open Stories Foundation, and that lead to staff and board burnout. Consequently, going forward it will be our policy to not respond to baseless allegations. Instead, this letter will be provided in response to such attacks.
As always, if active donors have any concerns, we welcome your questions, feedback, etc. at openstoriesboard@gmail.com.
