I want this to be over with for sure...But I do want to clarify how I think this letter may be useful, something I haven't noticed before.
Point of the letter:
"We do not support John Dehlin"
Allegations include:
"John Dehlin has long used Mormon and x-Mormon women to mask his bad behavior."
I don't know the extent of this...But I think it's true or has happened.
"He has used our talents, time, movements and reputation to bolster his brand and enrich himself."
That seems true. But in the realm of social media influence that's part of the game. So nothing nefarious or problematic there.
" He takes advantage of vulnerable people in crisis, who are in legitimate need of help and community."
meh...A bit vague and pretty difficult to demonstrate, I'd think. I know it was hard, but I wouldn't categorize my loss of faith as a crisis. John does though, so perhaps at least a little bit of truth here.
"When women come forward with critiques of his behavior or allegations of wrongdoing he retaliates by lashing out at them and attempting to publicly discredit them."
This is definitely spot on. His mindset has most certainly been, when women have offered complaints that he is innocent and they are wacky or otherwise problematic.
"We aren’t people who protect the Mormon Church, and we also don’t protect men who put the community at risk— whether they are Mormon or not.
We have had enough."
Fair enough.
"Many of us have worked with him in the past, and want to make clear that we no longer do and don’t encourage any other women to do so. It’s not safe. We refuse to be used as a mask for abuse."
This feels like an uncalled for ambiguous attack. "Abuse" is a pretty strong word and I don't know that it applies very well. But people use words to their advantage and I can't always tell what they mean. It's vague and pretty useless.
"We think it’s a better use of everyone’s time and investment to support other folks building community and providing resources for exiting Mormonism. If you need therapy, you should seek out a professional who is actually licensed by the state to provide those services. If you need community (as we all do), you should seek out people who don’t regularly tear down women who disagree with them. It’s time we reconsider giving so much energy and support to someone who has the potential to do so much harm."
To be fair many people have to the potential to do a ton of harm. And surely we shouldn't be giving someone support who causes harm. But not much is said here. I mean true, but vague a bit and little odd.
"John Dehlin often attempts to paint criticism as an “attack” and is an expert at making himself the victim."
yes. True.
"This is not an attack. It’s a clarification of values. Our values are to support and believe women."
Ok.
