Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

[_Doctor Scratch]

Could I trouble you to point me to where Will has said MI people are “yukking it up” about his behavior on this bulletin board?

Thank you.

Hi, Silver Hammer, and welcome to the board. Sure, I can fulfill your request, but would you mind answering a couple of questions first?

(1) Are you a sockpuppet for an apologist, or an apologist sympathizer?

(2) Do you understand why I put the phrase "yukking it up" in scare quotes? (And if so, what do you understand my meaning to be?)

[_MsJack]

So, when I address things that people have said and done in this thread, though mostly directed to no one specifically or in particular, that is considered as "personal."

CFR. Where have I ever accused you of posting personal attacks on this thread?

Your posts were reported for removal because they were off-topic, not because you attacked anyone personally.

You, Droopy, and anyone else who would like to argue against the OP are welcome to do so at your leisure.

...but in another forum of course.

Incorrect. I distinctly invited you to participate on this thread here:

Feel free to substantively engage the questions I posed in my OP at your leisure, Wade.

To which you replied:

Forgive me, but there are already far too many jackels rending the corpse. I would just be in the way.

You are the one who expressed disinterest in engaging the OP, and your off-topic posts were subsequently removed in accordance with Universal Rule #4.

Your "victim card" is no good here. Get over it.

[MsJack] does, however, have a point about false memory. Unfortunately, she doesn't grant the distinct possibility that it wasn't Will who was falsely remembering.

I've never heard of the "false memory" phenomenon applying to multiple people having the exact same false memory, and I did already address this.

For my own part, MrStakhanovite's testimony alone is enough to convince me that William did say it, so that section of my OP will remain. I'm not going to address any more of this weeping and gnashing of teeth over that one quote when my OP included dozens of others that prove my point just as well.

Could I trouble you to point me to where Will has said MI people are “yukking it up” about his behavior on this bulletin board?

viewtopic.php?p=449279#p449279

Read that post, particularly the last citation wherein William brags about "a small circle of otherwise respected academics" who have enjoyed some belly laughs with him over KimberlyAnn's body, which William describes as "melons in a pair of thimbles suspended from a thread."

[_Silver Hammer]

Could I trouble you to point me to where Will has said MI people are “yukking it up” about his behavior on this bulletin board?

Thank you.

Hi, Silver Hammer, and welcome to the board. Sure, I can fulfill your request, but would you mind answering a couple of questions first?

(1) Are you a sockpuppet for an apologist, or an apologist sympathizer?

(2) Do you understand why I put the phrase "yukking it up" in scare quotes? (And if so, what do you understand my meaning to be?)

I'm just trying to educate myself on this matter. I only learned about it in the past few days. So I'm trying to see what's going on. That's all. I just thought you could point me to specific places so I don't have to search blindly. I'm coming into this very cold, and really don't know where to start.

[_RockSlider]

I'm just trying to educate myself on this matter. I only learned about it in the past few days. So I'm trying to see what's going on. That's all. I just thought you could point me to specific places so I don't have to search blindly. I'm coming into this very cold, and really don't know where to start.

Silver, MsJack just gave you a link to your specific question. To come up to speed quickly, ignore all of this thread except MsJacks OP (and subsquent ones immediately following). Read her quick quotes as well as follow the provided links to see in full context.

[_Silver Hammer]

William Schryver wrote: "I don’t think you know anything about my relationships with the people you seem to think constitute “1st class apologists.”

If they are embarrassed by me, it doesn’t show in the regular conversations I have with many of them.

Is it possible, perhaps, that they don’t see things the way you do?"

Then MsJack wrote: “According to William, he feels no remorse for his behavior and the "1st class apologists" approve of it as well.”

Forgive me, but I don’t see much to support MsJack’s statement. She’s making an inference, but I don’t think it is justified. From what I can see in this example, Will didn’t say that “1st class apologists” approve of his behavior on message boards. All he said is that in his conversations with them (he doesn’t say what they talk about) he doesn’t think they are embarrassed by him. Maybe the people he’s talking about don’t even know about what Will writes on message boards.

[_Silver Hammer]

I'm just trying to educate myself on this matter. I only learned about it in the past few days. So I'm trying to see what's going on. That's all. I just thought you could point me to specific places so I don't have to search blindly. I'm coming into this very cold, and really don't know where to start.

Silver, MsJack just gave you a link to your specific question. To come up to speed quickly, ignore all of this thread except MsJacks OP (and subsquent ones immediately following). Read her quick quotes as well as follow the provided links to see in full context.

Thanks for that. It was helpful.

To save time, whose posts should I read and whose should I skip? I want to get the most story with the least amount of time and effort.

[_beastie]

William Schryver wrote: "I don’t think you know anything about my relationships with the people you seem to think constitute “1st class apologists.”

If they are embarrassed by me, it doesn’t show in the regular conversations I have with many of them.

Is it possible, perhaps, that they don’t see things the way you do?"

Then MsJack wrote: “According to William, he feels no remorse for his behavior and the "1st class apologists" approve of it as well.”

Forgive me, but I don’t see much to support MsJack’s statement. She’s making an inference, but I don’t think it is justified. From what I can see in this example, Will didn’t say that “1st class apologists” approve of his behavior on message boards. All he said is that in his conversations with them (he doesn’t say what they talk about) he doesn’t think they are embarrassed by him. Maybe the people he’s talking about don’t even know about what Will writes on message boards.

You must have overlooked this citation that Ms. Jack shared in her OP:

Will:

You might be interested in the fact that a couple people were once given the task of investigating the basis for the oft-repeated claim of my wanton vulgarity. What was the result of this rather exhaustive investigation? It was that, although a few minor blushes were induced (amidst the belly laughs), there was deemed to be virtually no substantive basis for the allegations; quotes were found to have been routinely taken out of context, thus entirely altering their true meaning, and a large proportion of the "vulgarities" attributed to me were entirely fabricated out of whole cloth (like, for example, the frequently repeated allegation that I called the golden-haired Kimberly Ann a "whore.")

(Kimberly does remain somewhat famous [among a small circle of otherwise respected academics] on account of my descriptions of her having once squeezed her then more voluptuous spirit tabernacle into a slinky black three-sizes-too-small dress at the 2006 Exmormon Foundation conference in Salt Lake City, which I attended. One wouldn't have believed it possible to carry melons in a pair of thimbles suspended from a thread, but miracles happen almost every day in this jaded world of cynical disbelievers.)

It was, I must confess, ascertained that I did, in fact, obliquely refer to beastlie and dissonance (once each, as I recall) with variants on the appellative "bitch." But it was concluded that my judgment was so near to the facts of the matter that I could not be convicted by a jury of my peers. LOL!

viewtopic.php?p=369575#p369575

[_RockSlider]

To save time, whose posts should I read and whose should I skip? I want to get the most story with the least amount of time and effort.

Well I suppose that if one was to only read one thread, this one tends to capture one of William's three pillars of ugliness quite well (vulgarity, misogyny and his fifth columnist war).
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9005&start=0

MsJack has highlighted the misogyny pillar quite well right here, and unfortunately some of his better fifth columnist wars were lost in the MAD archieving/board change. But a very recent one with David B happened over there in just the last month or so.

[_Silver Hammer]

MsJack: "Read that post, particularly the last citation wherein William brags about "a small circle of otherwise respected academics" who have enjoyed some belly laughs with him over KimberlyAnn's body, which William describes as "melons in a pair of thimbles suspended from a thread."[/quote]

Forgive me again, but I'm just trying to get the hang of this thing. I don't get how everything works. I couldn't find where William says "respected academics" he knows where enjoying belly laughs over KimberlyAnn's body. If it was on the page you linked, I missed it. Can you help me out in finding the quote you were talking about?

Thanks.

[_beastie]

Forgive me again, but I'm just trying to get the hang of this thing. I don't get how everything works. I couldn't find where William says "respected academics" he knows where enjoying belly laughs over KimberlyAnn's body. If it was on the page you linked, I missed it. Can you help me out in finding the quote you were talking about?

Thanks.

For the second time, from Ms Jack's original post:

This is a direct quote from Will:

You might be interested in the fact that a couple people were once given the task of investigating the basis for the oft-repeated claim of my wanton vulgarity. What was the result of this rather exhaustive investigation? It was that, although a few minor blushes were induced (amidst the belly laughs), there was deemed to be virtually no substantive basis for the allegations; quotes were found to have been routinely taken out of context, thus entirely altering their true meaning, and a large proportion of the "vulgarities" attributed to me were entirely fabricated out of whole cloth (like, for example, the frequently repeated allegation that I called the golden-haired Kimberly Ann a "whore.")

(Kimberly does remain somewhat famous [among a small circle of otherwise respected academics] on account of my descriptions of her having once squeezed her then more voluptuous spirit tabernacle into a slinky black three-sizes-too-small dress at the 2006 Exmormon Foundation conference in Salt Lake City, which I attended. One wouldn't have believed it possible to carry melons in a pair of thimbles suspended from a thread, but miracles happen almost every day in this jaded world of cynical disbelievers.)[

It was, I must confess, ascertained that I did, in fact, obliquely refer to beastlie and dissonance (once each, as I recall) with variants on the appellative "bitch." But it was concluded that my judgment was so near to the facts of the matter that I could not be convicted by a jury of my peers. LOL!

This is the link to that quote:

viewtopic.php?p=369575#p369575

Note the underlined and bolded section.