It is currently Sat Jan 18, 2020 10:09 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:01 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7587
Location: Cassius University
This was mentioned in passing on Dr. Robbers's remarkable thread on the latest attempt by the Mormon Interpreter crew to pathologize people who have left the LDS Church (or "gone missing," as Midgley might say). For those who could use some context: the background is that Interpreter recently published an article by Steve T. Densley, Jr. and Garet Giles entitled "Barriers to Belief: Mental Distress and Disaffection from the Church." You can read the Dean's thread for some of the commentary on the article itself, but I was struck by the comment that Tom identified. It's from a woman (one of the very few women to ever be in Mormon Interpreter's orbit, I might add) who was actually an Editor for Mormon Interpreter! Check it out:

Jenny T wrote:
Examining exMormons alongside mental illness establishes a caste system among part-member families where those who “stay in the boat” are the supremacy and the lowest caste consists of those who chose a different path. As an exMormon, I take umbrage with this Mormon supremacy-caste system, which features so prominently in LDS discourse of late (see Elder Renlund’s recent boat fireside, Elder Corbridge’s devotional yesterday, and now this post).

ExMormons’ faith transition should not be studied with regards to mental illness (or worse, as playing Elder Renlund’s game of whack-a-mole), any more than active Mormons should be considered alongside mental illness for believing in angels, gold Bibles, or a polyandrous prophet. This juxtaposition of mental illness and belief/doubting demonizes former Mormons, just as Elder Renlund and other recent talks implicitly demonized exMormons while ostensibly seeking to strengthen doubters. This article also conveniently hints at a plausible reason for Mormonism’s embarrassingly high suicide rates: faithlessness.

I won’t be listing my reasons for leaving Mormonism here, but will suffice by saying: mental illness had nothing to do with it, and neither did “doubts.” I was an active temple-worthy stake seminary teacher the day I resigned my LDS membership. I’m a returned missionary, I taught at the MTC, and I’m a former BYU-Idaho religion faculty and Interpreter editor. So you can trust me when I say: almost all of the exMormons I know are very mentally healthy. I hang out with 108,000+ of them almost daily on the exMormon subreddit, and we have very robust and delightful discussions. We minister to one another. I find more support for women there than I ever did in my own LDS branches.
(emphasis mine)

Wow!! This is *incredible* news! So, the old-guard, heartily patriarchal power structure at Mormon Interpreter managed to chase off one of the only female participants? (Bear in mind that they canceled their pro-woman award not that long ago.) And not only did she leave the organization, she's now an apostate! How many other key people in that "community" (as it were) have "defected" over the years? It seems to me that the numbers are piling up.

As Tom pointed out, Steve Smoot has swooped in for a proposed truce, but only after rattling off a laundry list of ExMormon Reddit atrocities--one of which apparently includes commentary that "speculated about my [i.e., Smoot's] personal life (including my sexuality and my family life." (On a side note: I do seem to remember reading claims that Smoot is bisexual, though I never saw any actual evidence to support that claim. I guess it was pure speculation, then?) Smoot's solution is this:

Smoot wrote:
I’m sorry for any emotional or mental anguish you may have experienced in leaving the Church. But that anguish does not justify the utterly reprehensible behavior I see coming from the ex-Mormon subreddit. If you and other ex-Mormons want remaining Church members to afford you the goodwill and humanity you are calling for, the first step is to be morally consistent and renounce the worst of everything about being an ex-Mormon that the ex-Mormon subreddit has come to represent.


Smoot also notes that "I half expect my comment above to appear on the ex-Mormon subreddit with an attending avalanche of personal attacks and insults directed at me." No need to worry, Brother Smoot: we've got you covered here at Mormon Discussions! (Dare I bring up my old "Donkey Lips" comment?) I cannot, of course, guarantee the the "attacks" and "insults" will live up to whatever it he's imagining, but it's hard to ignore how fundamentally divisive his remarks are. It's as if he's saying, "Don't like being called 'mentally ill'? Fine, then you have to do what I say and quit the behavior I don't like!" One wonders why he didn't just write, "#sorrynotsorry." (Actually, I don't wonder: his posting is all part of the "show." Midgley, Peterson, and others are watching.)

So, yes: there is a lot going on here. We are really seeing some of the tensions roiling beneath the surface of Mopologetics here in the early part of 2019 to a degree that, to my mind, is unprecedented. We've learned that there are splinter sects of discussion boards, plus we learn that Wyatt is the real editor of Mormon Interpreter, and that the Church pays for Mopologetics. And now we get this--that a former Interpreter editor has gone apostate and has managed to find a more supportive community at ExMormon Reddit! Wow: what a devastating turn of events for the Mopologists.... Is this just the beginning of bigger things to come?

Edited to Add: How long will it be before some higher-up in the org, such as DCP or Wyatt--comes forward to clarify to everyone that "Jenny T" actually wasn't a real "editor," but was instead some low-level gopher or whatever, and thus she wasn't "important," and that her views and status as an exmo don't count for anything? I'm willing to put money on somebody coming forth to "clarify" (i.e., smear) the situation.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:32 pm 
Hermit
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm
Posts: 9317
Location: Cave
This is truly epic, professor. No doubt blood is boiling over this incident within the Interpreter hierarchy, and as you suggest, there's little chance that they'll let this "slam dunk" go "uncontested". She even quoted "Merchant of Venice"! How dare an anti-Mormon quote from the Western Canon against the practice of Mopologetics on their very own blog! From the perspective of the Interpreter leadership, this must come across every bit as bad as Mike Norton entering a temple and profaning it. Someone better screenshot her post before it gets "scrubbed". Either way, I doubt we've heard the last about this.

Well, the myriad of "defenses" that Interpreter publishes don't seem to have helped this former staff member's belief. I wonder if they'll have the stones to own up to this next time they speak with one of the Brethren. It would be interesting to learn if her time at Interpreter was neutral, failed to help, or if it pushed her positively toward the door.

_________________
FARMS refuted:

"...supporters of Billy Meier still point to the very clear photos of Pleiadian beam ships flying over his farm. They argue that for the photos to be fakes, we have to believe that a one-armed man who had no knowledge of Photoshop or other digital photography programs could have made such realistic photos and films..." -- D. R. Prothero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:33 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 6753
Location: The Land of Lorn
Ok, so you got me to go down this rabbit hole, and I read the article that this is all tied to. I came across this, and was simply flabbergasted at how they arrive at their figures. Perhaps I'm wrong? What do you think?

Quote:
Of course, some of the comfort offered outside the community of believers is false comfort, and we should be clear about that. One thing often said by online critics is that Church membership is in decline and that even Elder Marlin K. Jensen admitted that people are “leaving in droves.” However, it is not true that membership is in decline nor that Elder Jensen said that people are “leaving in droves.”2 In fact, once people started claiming that Elder Jensen had said this, it was reported in the Washington Post that Elder Jensen insisted that critics of the Church were overstating the Mormon exodus over the Church’s history. He was quoted as saying, “To say we are experiencing some Titanic-like wave of apostasy is inaccurate.”3 He is, however, concerned about people encountering troubling information on the internet and leaving the Church.

In the face of growing membership rolls for the Church internationally, critics of the Church claim there is actually a wave of apostasy simply obscured in the Church’s official numbers, since many people leave the Church and do not remove their names from the rolls. However, this speculation is refuted by the data. Attendance at other predominantly white, Christian churches in America is in decline. But researchers have noted that “there is little evidence to suggest that [The [Page 74]Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints is] experiencing similar declines.” 4 While it is true that church growth in the United States has slowed, when Americans are asked what Church they belong to, the same proportion of people, 1.9%, claimed they were Latter day Saints in 2017 as they did in 2011.

It has been reported that Christian millennials in general, not just Latter day Saint millennials, are “leaving in droves.”5 It is therefore significant to note that “Mormons are also much younger than other white Christian religious traditions. Nearly one-quarter (23%) of Mormons are under the age of 30. Fewer than half (41%) are age 50 or older.”6 In light of the fact that our church is younger than other churches and yet is not shrinking like other churches, it seems, as Mark Twain might say, the reports of the death of the Church are greatly exaggerated.


"Leaving in droves" (droves = large numbers of people)
Jensen likens "large numbers of people" to TITANIC SIZED numbers of people.

Can we be more disingenuous?

Didn't say it, OMG, he AGREED WITH IT. Saying "he didn't say it" is simply being technical to DECEIVE PEOPLE. Here is the transcript:

Quote:

Q: Has the Church seen the effects of Google on membership? Have there been…is the Church leadership aware of—and, I don’t know, maybe I’m overstating what’s going on, but it seems like the people I talk to about Church history are people who find out and leave, quickly—

A: Yes

Q: Is the Church aware of that problem? Is there anything…I mean, the new manuals would help, I guess, “inoculation” within terms of youth would help. What about people who are already leaving in droves?

A[Jensen]: We are aware. Maybe I’ll just say this: You know what, I often get this question, “Do the brethren really know?” They do.


Jensen again,

Quote:
And they realize that, maybe, since Kirtland we’ve never had a period of—I’ll call it apostasy—like we’re having right now, largely over these issues.


EX-MORMONS aren't the ones who brought up KIRTLAND, that was Jensen.

He knows how many left in Kirtland -- percentage wise. Here is Eliza Snow, who said,

Quote:
Five of the quorum of the Twelve were in this apostacy; and some in every organized quorum became disaffected.


And Lucy Smith,

Quote:
This plainly showed me that the seeds of the apostasy were already sown in the breasts of a greater number than I imagined before, just as Joseph had prophesied.

The same week, a young woman who lived with David Whitmer and pretended to be able to discover hidden things and to prophesy by looking through a certain black stone which she had found, revealed to Brother Whitmer and others some facts which gave them a new idea of things altogether. David Whitmer requested her to look through this stone and tell him what Joseph meant by saying one-third of the Church would turn against him. Her answer was that he would fall from his office because of transgression, and either David Whitmer or Martin Harris would be appointed in his place, and the one who did not succeed Joseph in his office would be a counselor to the one who did.

Those persons who were disaffected towards Joseph began collecting together around this girl. Soon, as this news came to his ears, Dr. Williams, the ex-justice of the peace, also became one of the dissenters, and he wrote down the revelations that were given to this girl. Jared Carter, who had always been before a good and faithful brother, lived in the same house with David Whitmer and soon invited the same spirit.

Not long after Brother Carter became one of their party, I was made acquainted with the fact, and having a great regard for him, I improved the first opportunity of talking with him to dissuade him from continuing to associate with persons who would be the means of his destruction. As I had been informed that he had declared in one of their meetings that he possessed power to raise "Joe Smith" to the highest heaven or cast him down to the lowest hell, I questioned him about the matter in the presence of my husband. Mr. Smith, not knowing what I was talking of, began to reason with Brother Carter upon the impurity of his course and warned him to speedily repent and to confess his sins to the Church, or the judgments of God would overtake him. He remained with us until midnight, acknowledged his fault, and said he would confess to the Brethren.

The next morning he was taken with a violent pain in his eyes, and continued in great distress for two days. On the evening of the second day, he rose from his bed, and kneeling down, he besought the Lord to heal him, covenanting that if he were healed, he would make a full confession to the Church the next Sabbath.

The next Sunday when the Brethren were about to open the meeting, he arose and, saying that he had done wrong, asked the forgiveness of the Church, begging to be received again into their confidence. He did not, however, state what he had done that was wrong, but his confession was received and he was forgiven.

The rest of his party were still in opposition, and they continued to meet secretly at Mr. Whitmer's. When the young woman, who was their instructress, was through giving revelations in an evening, she would jump and hop over the floor and dance with all her might, boasting of her great power until she was perfectly exhausted. Her proselytes would also, in the most vehement manner, proclaim how pure and holy they were, and how mighty, great, and powerful they were going to be.

When we held our next prayer meeting, they took no part with us, but after meeting was dismissed, they arose and made a standing appointment for meetings to be held every Thursday by the "pure church," which title they claimed. They circulated a paper to ascertain how many would follow them, and it was ascertained that a great proportion of those whom we considered good members were decidedly in favor of the new party. In this spirit they went to Missouri and contaminated the minds of some of the brethren there against Joseph, in order to destroy his influence with them. This schism in the Church, and the rage of the mob, whom we had contended with from the first, made it necessary to keep a more strict guard than ever at the houses of those who were their chief objects of vengeance.

The brethren would take their stations as a watch and stand night after night through all weather on guard to protect the lives of the Presidency, one of whom was Sidney Rigdon. He was always as fainthearted as any woman, and far more so than his own wife-for had his faith, patience, and courage been as genuine as Sister Rigdon's, he would not have been where he is now. The Twelve, many of whom were then cheerful to take the brunt of danger and hardship that he recoiled from, are now shining as much brighter in comparison to him as the light of the sun is brighter than the stroke of a tar bill. (Revised and Enhanced History of Joseph Smith by His Mother, chapter 44, p.333-339)


I think we all know what Jensen meant. Trying to claim otherwise is just stupid mopologetics. And this new article is the same tripe. But another thing caught my attention, and this is some slick use of citations to make a case for something that isn't really there. They write,

Quote:
Attendance at other predominantly white, Christian churches in America is in decline. But researchers have noted that “there is little evidence to suggest that [The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints is] experiencing similar declines.” 4 While it is true that church growth in the United States has slowed, when Americans are asked what Church they belong to, the same proportion of people, 1.9%, claimed they were Latter day Saints in 2017 as they did in 2011.


Ok. Let's go to the footnotes...

4. Daniel Cox and Robert P. Jones, “America’s Changing Religious Identity,” Public Religion Research Institute, September 6, 2017, https://www.prri.org/research/american- ... ffiliated/.

Ok. Lets go to that article...

Quote:
Although Mormons are a predominantly white Christian religious tradition, there is little evidence to suggest that they are experiencing similar declines.13 Currently, 1.9% of the public identifies as Mormon, a number identical to findings from a 2011 study of Mormons in the U.S.14

Mormons are also much younger than other white Christian religious traditions. Nearly one-quarter (23%) of Mormons are under the age of 30. Fewer than half (41%) are age 50 or older.

13 Eighty-three percent of Mormons are white, non-Hispanic.

14 Mormons in America: Certain in Their Beliefs, Uncertain of Their Place in Society, Pew Research Center, Jan. 12, 2012.


PEW:

Quote:
About the Report
The subsequent sections of the report describe the survey’s findings in more detail. Results are based on interviews conducted among a national sample of 1,019 Mormons between Oct. 25 and Nov. 16, 2011. Interviews were conducted with respondents who currently describe their religion as “Mormon.” The survey does not include interviews with former Mormons or respondents with Mormon backgrounds and heritage who no longer consider themselves to be Mormon. It also does not include Mormons living outside the United States. (According to the LDS Church, more than half of all Mormons live outside the U.S.) Full details on the survey’s methodology are included in section 5.


So, because 83 percent of Mormons are white, they are not experiencing similar declines? With what evidence? NONE. So this is a big NOTHING BURGER. So all of the apostasy that took place OUTSIDE of the US is not in any of these polls. Imagine that.

I found this paper super creepy.

_________________
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:19 am 
θεά
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:06 pm
Posts: 4312
Location: Des Plaines, IL
There was a "Jennifer Tonks" previously listed as an "editorial consultant":

http://web.archive.org/web/201711071426 ... oundation/

Not sure if that's the "Jenny T" now commenting.

(Also, William Schryver was an 'editorial consultant'?! As a dog returns to its vomit...)

_________________
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2019 9:53 am 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7587
Location: Cassius University
Thanks for tracking that down, MsJack. So now we know that, at minimum, she was equal in stature to Steve Smoot and Neal Rappleye at that time (assuming that this is indeed the same person).

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2019 10:05 am 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 9225
Doctor Scratch wrote:
Thanks for tracking that down, MsJack. So now we know that, at minimum, she was equal in stature to Steve Smoot and Neal Rappleye at that time (assuming that this is indeed the same person).


If I may be so bold and presumptive as to interject a tad critically towards a faculty member, but I don't think you can say that Doctor Scratch. It is clear, is it not, from the make up of both Interpreter's Board Of Trustees and Board Of Advisors that "Jenny T" could not have been equal in stature to Steve Smoot and Neal Rappleye, even if she held the same Interpreter role and/or function. By virtue of a fact that you alluded to in your opening posting on this thread - she's a woman.

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2019 10:03 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7587
Location: Cassius University
I have a question wrote:
Doctor Scratch wrote:
Thanks for tracking that down, MsJack. So now we know that, at minimum, she was equal in stature to Steve Smoot and Neal Rappleye at that time (assuming that this is indeed the same person).


If I may be so bold and presumptive as to interject a tad critically towards a faculty member, but I don't think you can say that Doctor Scratch. It is clear, is it not, from the make up of both Interpreter's Board Of Trustees and Board Of Advisors that "Jenny T" could not have been equal in stature to Steve Smoot and Neal Rappleye, even if she held the same Interpreter role and/or function. By virtue of a fact that you alluded to in your opening posting on this thread - she's a woman.


You may be right, IHAQ. Check out the latest in a pair of responses from SeN:

Dr. Peterson wrote:
These two items bring me to the theme of this blog entry:

During the time that I served as chairman of the board of the old Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), the Foundation was sometimes criticized — and I, personally, was sometimes criticized — because that board was entirely male. The implication or assumption, I suppose, was that, as a result either of conscious and deliberate policy or of subconscious gender bias, we excluded women from leadership positions in the organization.

Now, it was true, on one level, that I was strongly disinclined to put a woman onto the board simply as a token or in order to achieve better “optics.” Any candidate for the board, in my view, needed to be someone of already-demonstrated commitment to the goals and efforts of the Foundation. And the pool of such candidates who were women was relatively small: Although things may be changing, there are still today significantly fewer female Latter-day Saint academics — and significantly fewer female members of the faculty at BYU, for example — than there are male.

Nevertheless, there were several women who fit the bill and, as chairman of the FARMS board, I invited them to join our board. But they turned me down. And they turned me down for a reason that had not previously occurred to me: For a generation or two, at least, every committee at BYU (and, I’m sure, everywhere else) has sought to include women. Given the relatively small number of available women, though, the practical upshot of this is that, while a male faculty member might serve on one or two committees, a woman might be serving on three to six of them. The women to whom I spoke were simply overextended. They were unwilling to take on more.

So I resigned myself to being condemned in certain circles, at least, as presiding over a restrictive “boys-only” club.

(To be continued.)
(emphasis mine)

This is certainly an interesting story: here are the classic-FARMS Mopologists, claiming that they're aware of how it looks when they have zero women on their Board (and what about people of color, for that matter?). The crucial bit, though, is the part I highlighted: that DCP was only willing to consider women who "already-demonstrated commitment to the goals and efforts of the Foundation." Now, what do you suppose he means by that?

The sequel provides the answer:

DCP wrote:
Frankly, men tend to dominate apologetics because men are more inclined to be combative and more interested in certain styles of dispute. This really isn’t open to question, I think. It shows up in international politics, in crime statistics, in sports, and so forth. It appears already in children, when boys roughhouse and make weapons out of sticks while girls . . . play in other ways. (I’m trying to avoid political incorrectness here.) I saw a cartoon once — I haven’t been able to find it today — in which a husband is indicating how he and his wife divide up the responsibilities in their ordinary middle class home; his wife manages the house, the family budget, the family diet, the education of the children, vacation planning, and the like, while he concentrates on government economic policy, presidential politics, and appointments to the Supreme Court. Put another way: my own very level-headed and effective wife finds my more obsessive critics simply ridiculous and can’t figure out why in the world I pay them even the slightest attention.


LOL! Wow--this is like something out of Mad Men. I hope you see what's on display here, friends: Dr. Peterson is treating this cartoon, which I assume was intended to be satire, like it is reality. He says that the "fire" that fuels Mopologists is the same thing that leads to higher crime rates among men! But notice what else is going on here: in his previous entry, he noted that he was unwilling to admit any women onto the Board unless they were also "combative" and "interested in certain styles of dispute." His analogy--of boys beating people with sticks--would seem to be telling: they deliberately went looking for women who were aggressive assholes, and (what a shocker!) kept coming up empty. Another way of looking at this is that the Mopologists are/were biased against women because women are too nice. Sometimes I can scarcely believe what comes out of the Mopologists' keyboards. Hey, Dr. Peterson: Ward Cleaver called--he wants his cardigan back!

Peterson's entry continues:

Quote:
From time to time, certain folks like to criticize today’s Interpreter Foundation because its writers and its leadership are preponderantly male. And this is undeniably true. The critics’ insinuation is that, whether deliberately or out of sheer, unreflective, chauvinistic, patriarchal bias, we exclude women.

The subject has come up again lately because of a specific case involving a woman who apparently volunteered for a time to copyedit some of the manuscripts submitted to us. (We don’t have a “staff.” We have no brick and mortar office. We rely almost entirely upon volunteers.) She was, I’m told, a very good editor. Apparently, though, she backed away from volunteering for us, a few months ago, on the grounds that she was just too busy. And now she’s publicly announced that she’s left the Church. (So far as I can tell, her departure is connected to her stance on gay rights and perhaps on gender issues more broadly. I can’t really say; I don’t know her and have never met or, to the best of my knowledge, interacted with her.)


Ah, so I was right: DCP "clarifies" that she was merely a "copyeditor." (At least he admits that "gender issues" may have pushed her out; by his own admission "gender issues" are rampant within Mopologetics.)

DCP wrote:
Is it the policy of Interpreter to exclude women? Absolutely not.

But we can only engage as volunteers people who volunteer to be engaged.

We can only accept and publish manuscripts that have been submitted to us in the first place, and we have no control whatever over who sends work to us for consideration. For a few years, the Interpreter Foundation offered an annual prize designed to encourage female writers. (It was largely, though not entirely, sponsored by my wife and me.) We discovered, though, that the supply of female writing was, as an economist might say, relatively inelastic. If our prize had any effect on the number of submissions from women at all, that effect was negligible. Perhaps things would have been different if the prize had been significantly larger. I can easily imagine, for instance, that an annual prize of a million dollars might have had a measurable impact. But we did what we could.


Well, that's not really true, is it? I'm sure that Dr. Peterson is well aware of the push for "diversity" in universities across the U.S. (Heck, there is a trial involving Harvard underway that deals with this exact topic.) By "push" I mean that colleges will deliberately go out of there way to try to increase diversity: yes, there are things like scholarships and prizes, but there is also a deliberate attempt to recruit folks to come aboard. Diversity *itself* is seen as a value: simply because a women doesn't share the same aggressive, condescending approach as most Mopologists doesn't mean she doesn't have something to offer. I bet that if Peterson unpacked his ideas on what qualifies someone as "committed to the goals and efforts of the Foundation," he'd be forced to confront some ugly truths. (And their boilerplate, public answers have been especially telling: i.e., that they are all about "defending the revealed truths of the Restoration." Gee, if that's true, why is it that women avoid you guys like the plague?) Regardless, his just sitting there hoping that women will find their way to Interpreter is an awfully lazy way to address the lack of women on the Board. In fact, it makes it seem like Dr. Peterson ultimately doesn't really care that much. (Boy, no wonder that "copyeditor" left, eh?)

At any rate, his final paragraph is telling:

Quote:
But we’ve never had as many women involved as we would have liked and we would welcome more manuscript submissions from female writers. Very, very much, in fact. We like articles from a variety of perspectives; they help us to see things that, from our own point of view, we might have missed. And we appreciate input on Foundation decisions from different viewpoints. We impose no barriers whatever based on gender, ethnicity, age, academic background, nationality, place of residence, or preference in breakfast cereals. We’re simply looking to encourage and publish high quality, faithful scholarship.


(Side-note: I notice that "sexual orientation" isn't listed among the things for which they "impose no barriers.")

Sure: "simply looking to encourage and publish high quality, faithful scholarship." Might it be that their modes of "encouragement" are tailor-made specifically for a certain brand of conservative white male? There is no escaping the basic facts: nearly all of the people involved in Mormon Interpreter are white, conservative men. I see no indication whatsoever that the Interpreter leadership gives two squats about diversity, and Peterson's new blog entries offer up yet more evidence. They don't care; if they did, they would have a more diverse array of authors and contributors.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 12:58 am 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9466
Have you seen part 3 of Peterson's Stereotyping?
Quote:
What I’m saying, of course, is that men appear to be, on average and by nature, more overtly competitive than women tend to be.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... ics-3.html

:rolleyes:

What he's saying, of course, is that he has no experience in the real academic world.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:27 am 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 9225
Lemmie wrote:
Have you seen part 3 of Peterson's Stereotyping?
Quote:
What I’m saying, of course, is that men appear to be, on average and by nature, more overtly competitive than women tend to be.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... ics-3.html

:rolleyes:

What he's saying, of course, is that he has no experience in the real academic world.


His assertion that fewer women are involved in sport, industry, politics etc, that they are “by nature” less competitive, is one of the most chauventistic and bias confirming opinions he’s ever wasted his breath on. The reason fewer women are involved in those areas a is not due to their “nature”, it’s because men barred them from participating in them for generations.

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:50 am 
Hermit
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm
Posts: 9317
Location: Cave
Doctor Scratch wrote:
men tend to dominate apologetics because men are more inclined to be combative and more interested in certain styles of dispute. This really isn’t open to question,

Another cartoonish caricature from nearly a quarter of a century of malevolent stalking.

_________________
FARMS refuted:

"...supporters of Billy Meier still point to the very clear photos of Pleiadian beam ships flying over his farm. They argue that for the photos to be fakes, we have to believe that a one-armed man who had no knowledge of Photoshop or other digital photography programs could have made such realistic photos and films..." -- D. R. Prothero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 5:04 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3829
Is DCP serious or is he just trolling in an attempt to generate clicks (revenue for himself)? Is it really possible for someone to hold such misogynistic, scientifically incorrect and "old fashion" views about women in this day and age? I wonder if this is DCP's #Metoo Moment?

We've all seen the locker room environment, hostility and disdain many Mopologists hold for women, both in and outside the Church. For just a few examples out of many:

DCP's support of Will Schryver's verbal sexual assault on several MDD women posters: http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 31&start=0

DCP's misogynistic and highly offensive defense of LDS rape culture: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=33462

DCP being kicked off multiple Facebook accounts for shaming and publicly outing a victim of rape:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=50693

DCP's unfortunate and embarrassing (and subsequent attempts to cover up) experience watching Pitbull dancing with J.Lo while sporting a boner: http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... =1&t=24196

Folks, you can't make this stuff up.

_________________
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014


Last edited by Everybody Wang Chung on Sun Jan 27, 2019 7:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 6:55 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 9466
DCP wrote:
Frankly, men tend to dominate apologetics because men are more inclined to be combative and more interested in certain styles of dispute. This really isn’t open to question, I think.

Maybe it depends on how one defines apologetics.


At the Maxwell Institute, under the "About Us" and "Personnel" links is this information:

The Executive Committee: 3 of the 5 are women.
The Advisory Board: 4 of 11 are women.
Past Board members: 1 of the 4 shown is a woman.
Institute Scholars: 4 of 13 are women.

DCP wrote:
Now, it was true, on one level, that I was strongly disinclined to put a woman onto the board simply as a token or in order to achieve better “optics.” Any candidate for the board, in my view, needed to be someone of already-demonstrated commitment to the goals and efforts of the Foundation. And the pool of such candidates who were women was relatively small: Although things may be changing, there are still today significantly fewer female Latter-day Saint academics — and significantly fewer female members of the faculty at BYU, for example — than there are male.

Nevertheless, there were several women who fit the bill and, as chairman of the FARMS board, I invited them to join our board. But they turned me down.


Apparently the current Maxwell Board doesn't have the problem that the past FARMs and now current Interpreter Board seems to have. Peterson seems to think it's a supply side issue, but that clearly doesn't hold for others in the market.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 7:09 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm
Posts: 3829
Great post, Lemmie.

Does DCP have even a shred of credibility or honor left? His lying is certainly pathological.

Does anyone know how many women serve on the board of FAIR?

DCP wrote:
Nevertheless, there were several women who fit the bill and, as chairman of the FARMS board, I invited them to join our board. But they turned me down.


Has it ever occurred to DCP that the reason these women turned him down was because his reputation preceeded himself?

It is very interesting that shortly after DCP left the MI, many prominent and qualified women scholars joined the MI. Maybe these scholars were just waiting for DCP to leave?

_________________
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:15 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7587
Location: Cassius University
Peterson is a gender essentialist: he thinks that a person's gender traits are inscribed at birth and that they persist throughout one's life. Partly, this is just a fundamentalist and ham-fisted interpretation of the words of the Prophets, such as the Proclamation on the Family. All that document says, though, is that "gender is eternal." As we discussed on the TK Smoothie thread, isn't not quite clear what this ultimately means (even if the Mopologists want to claim that it's clear). E.g., what will happen in the next life to folks like Ru Paul or Caitlyn Jenner? If their gender is "eternal," how would you expect them to turn out in the next life? I presume that they understand their own gender identities better than anyone else. And, anyways, I'm sure that DCP and the other hardcore Mopologists have met men that seem "effeminate," and women who seem "manly," and even if not, there is this device called "television" and so the apologists ought to have at least encountered some of these folks via that medium. (Case in point: I always thought that Elder Packer came across as kind of effeminate...)

DCP, of course, will want to make the case using numbers, claiming that these are outliers and that, generally speaking, his observations would still hold up, in the aggregate. Again, though: the LDS Church teaches that gender is eternal. Still, you have to follow his theological arguments to their logical end: if he's an essentialist, then that means that gender was sort of "implanted" into people by Heavenly Father, and that HF therefore "implanted" aggressive manliness into far more men than women, though from time to time, HF would sometimes implant more docile genders into some men, and more bellicose genders into some women. Kind of interesting when you think of it that way. That would mean that when he and his Mopologist friends were seeking out female candidates to join FARMS, they were actually looking for women that have "manly" eternal genders.

Well, whatever the case may be, DCP's latest blog entry is patently ridiculous:

SeN wrote:
That competitiveness, coupled with the fact that, at least until very recently, considerably more men than women have served as missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — service that routinely puts them into situations where they’re obliged to expound, advocate, and defend the claims of the Restoration — goes a long distance toward explaining why men predominate in online and other debates about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.


Lol. Right: so the Church itself limited women's participation in the mission field, and so that's the reason why so few women were qualified for work with FARMS. (It's the Church's fault, in other words--not his.)

This, though, is a classic:

DCP wrote:
I think that I may have told this story before, but it’s apropos here in any case:

I developed the reputation, during my mission in Switzerland, of being able to hold my own rather well in what we missionaries called a “Bible bash.” Accordingly, one day while I was serving in the mission home at Pilatusstrasse 11 in Zürich, I received a call from a pair of missionaries in the city. They had set up an appointment that evening with an investigator who was a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses — and with a high-ranking official of that group who would be debating them. Could I possibly come to help?

I wasn’t exactly happy about the prospect, but they really felt they needed me. So I went. And, quite frankly, it was a slaughter. The Jehovah’s Witness official wasn’t particularly good, and, by the end of our roughly two hours of “discussion,” I felt that I had actually humiliated him.

Which I absolutely hated.


LOL!! Yeah, right! He "hated" it so much that he now points to this as one of the defining prerequisites for doing Mopologetics, and he himself has continued doing it for what, close to 50 years?

Anyways. Lemmie, is, of course, right. One assumes that the shifting diversity at the New Maxwell Institute is connected to the nonstop litany of complaints and accusations that the Mopologists have rained down since 2012.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:17 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm
Posts: 21281
Location: Koloburbia
Dr. Peterson wrote:
Frankly, men tend to dominate apologetics because men are more inclined to be combative and more interested in certain styles of dispute. This really isn’t open to question, I think. It shows up in international politics, in crime statistics, in sports, and so forth. It appears already in children, when boys roughhouse and make weapons out of sticks while girls . . . play in other ways.

This difference can also be spotted in university students who are asked to write a paper for publication. Women will instinctively search for a keyboard rather than a tripwire and demolition ordinance like well trained and established male apologists would seek. These women are demonstrating a trait more akin to that of a Maxwellite rather than a true son of the Interpreter.

_________________
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 6:16 am 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 9225
Dr. Peterson wrote:
Frankly, men tend to dominate apologetics because men are more inclined to be combative and more interested in certain styles of dispute. This really isn’t open to question, I think. It shows up in international politics, in crime statistics, in sports, and so forth. It appears already in children, when boys roughhouse and make weapons out of sticks while girls . . . play in other ways.


It’s interesting and illuminating that Peterson sees the field of Mormon apologetics as a childish boys game.

Reading between the lines here I’d suggest Peterson was bullied at school and was somewhat envious of the “Jocks”. He seems to be compensating for his own perceived lack of sporting prowess whilst young by putting forward the suggestion that Mormon apologetics is some kind of mortal hand-to-hand combat, thereby satisfying his insecurity around manliness.

The fact is, female apologists are SO much better in putting forward a reasoned argument precisely because that childish combativeness is absent. Why would a woman put herself forward to play stick and stones with Peterson when she can have a grown up conversation with critics instead?

Not only that, but he is flatly wrong about a woman’s ability to be competitive - has he not watched the Olympics Winter and Summer)?

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 7:14 am 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 9225
Quote:
I think that I may have told this story before, but it’s apropos here in any case:

I developed the reputation, during my mission in Switzerland, of being able to hold my own rather well in what we missionaries called a “Bible bash.” Accordingly, one day while I was serving in the mission home at Pilatusstrasse 11 in Zürich, I received a call from a pair of missionaries in the city. They had set up an appointment that evening with an investigator who was a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses — and with a high-ranking official of that group who would be debating them. Could I possibly come to help?

I wasn’t exactly happy about the prospect, but they really felt they needed me. So I went. And, quite frankly, it was a slaughter. The Jehovah’s Witness official wasn’t particularly good, and, by the end of our roughly two hours of “discussion,” I felt that I had actually humiliated him.

Which I absolutely hated.

I told the two missionaries that they should never, ever, call me in for such a debate again.

The man had been defeated in debate, but he was no closer to accepting the Gospel at the conclusion of the evening than he had been before. Nor was their investigator. The Spirit had been palpably absent. It was a horrible evening, and I’ve never forgotten it.

None of which means that the truth shouldn’t be contended for or defended. But it certainly does suggest that we should be very careful about how we do that.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... ics-3.html

Whilst Peterson has not forgotten the lesson from his missions about how to handle apologetic discussions, his previous recent musings on the subject - citing combat, testosterone, sticks and stones, and manly disputations, show that he learned nothing from it.

From the comments:

Quote:
Lora D. Mills 13 hours ago

Hello Daniel. If you don't like the criticism of your opinion you could always cite a decently reputable article about sexual differences, such as the following:
https://www.psychologytoday...
Then again, you probably don't need to. As a woman it is likely that I made that suggestion because women are expected to do things such as cite "reputable" and scholarly articles more often than men are. I wonder why that is?

Actually, I don't wonder; I'm making a point. In fact, it is almost required that women cite men's opinions in order to justify our own. We aren't published in academia nearly as often. We don't serve on faculties nearly as often (as you stated). In general (and as usual), as with almost everything women do except those things that men can't do, (like bear a child) we have to "work twice as hard to be considered half as good, smart or valuable," to pseudo-quote the Women's Movement. (Which, by the way, I am NOT a proponent of.) When we do state our opinions authoritatively, like men do, many women also feel almost obligated to apologize for doing so, or we find it necessary to justify our opinions by citing the same or similar opinions of men, just to be taken seriously.

Now, this inequality in our collective expectations and appraisals of womens' competence, intelligence, abilities, and value to society at large, and to certain endeavors specifically, is something that I think many men in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints HONESTLY recognize, feel bad about - to some degree or another - and make well-intentioned attempts to correct or somehow make up for, no matter how endearingly lame such gestures often are. (Don't worry; it's not [entirely] your fault.) I do wish there were better ways to explain this phenomenon to non-members who ask me, "What made you decide to convert to a church that treats women so unequally?" That's actually a very mild example of the way some people accuse the Church of misogyny.

On the other hand, it is still a statistical truth that women are not even asked to offer our testimonies in Sacrament meetings without our husbands. If a woman is single, she is so rarely invited to share her testimony during Sacrament that it is a truly remarkable event when one of us IS asked.

I would love to write for the Church. I have a strong and extraordinary testimony of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, the Book of Mormon, the Restoration of the true Church through the Prophet Joseph Smith, and of Heavenly Father's gracious and undying love for all of us, His precious children. I hold a graduate degree in theology but lack the "practical experience" to be hired to write professionally. So, how does a "girl" break into writing for the Church? Any suggestions? Sir?

Ouch!

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 8:06 am 
θεά
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:06 pm
Posts: 4312
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Quote:
They had set up an appointment that evening with an investigator who was a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses — and with a high-ranking official of that group who would be debating them. Could I possibly come to help?

A woman would never even be asked to come along on such an endeavor, no matter how knowledgeable of the Scriptures she was or how good she was at debating.

_________________
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 7:53 pm 
Hermit
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm
Posts: 9317
Location: Cave
Quote:
I wasn’t exactly happy about the prospect,


Oh brother, he hated the thought of being the biggest bull moose in the forest. sure. On second thought, I've read that some moose have antler racks that are so huge that they are painful for the moose. Maybe that's the same kind of thing?

_________________
FARMS refuted:

"...supporters of Billy Meier still point to the very clear photos of Pleiadian beam ships flying over his farm. They argue that for the photos to be fakes, we have to believe that a one-armed man who had no knowledge of Photoshop or other digital photography programs could have made such realistic photos and films..." -- D. R. Prothero


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 9:46 pm 
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am
Posts: 7587
Location: Cassius University
Wow: check out this outburst from Pahoran/Kiwi57:

Sic et Non Comments Section wrote:
LDM: "On the other hand, it is still a statistical truth that women are not even asked to offer our testimonies in Sacrament meetings without our husbands. If a woman is single, she is so rarely invited to share her testimony during Sacrament that it is a truly remarkable event when one of us IS asked."

On the other other hand, I have never, ever, in any ward in any stake in any country, seen a man stand up in Church on Mothers' Day and wonder aloud why fathers weren't getting more attention. But I have seen women on Fathers' Day stand at the pulpit and say that they thought mothers should be celebrated more.

Funny, that.

_________________
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Has an "Interpreter" Editor "Defected" from the Team?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:48 pm 
θεά
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:06 pm
Posts: 4312
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Pahoran wrote:
On the other other hand, I have never, ever, in any ward in any stake in any country, seen a man stand up in Church on Mothers' Day and wonder aloud why fathers weren't getting more attention. But I have seen women on Fathers' Day stand at the pulpit and say that they thought mothers should be celebrated more.

Funny, that.

Help, help, men are being oppressed!

_________________
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bret Ripley, Google [Bot], It occurs to me . . ., Meadowchik, Stem and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group