DiscussMormonism.com

“DCP” wrote:

rws: "Why is Lindsey Hansen Park always a historical consultant for such muck? As far as I'm aware, she hasn't actually published anything on the relevant historical events, has she?"

Her involvement in these things is something of a mystery. She's, umm, not exactly in the forefront of historians working on the Restoration. But she was a consultant for Under the Banner of Heaven and now for American Primeval and I expect that this won't be her last gig. She fits the desired ideological mold and, perhaps most importantly, she's now known among some of the movers and shakers in Hollywood.

rws: "And as for Peggy Fletcher Stack's article, the outrage from progressives seems hollow, given they never say anything about censorship in the Ivy League. BYU is explicit about its commitments and makes them clear from the get go. We assume religious truth as the basis of our learning. Progressive secularists don't like that, and they are using this faux outrage as a tactic to crush one of the last religious places in academia."

Diversity! Kneel before it or be crushed!

Add in the hostility and stalking that Lou Midgley is allowed to post about Gina Colvin, and you have quite a disturbing trend at the proprietor’s blog.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... qus_thread

Good grief! I wish I could say I was surprised, but then I remember that Afore is the same guy who recommended watching the video with Jenifer Lopez and Pitbull’s boner, and Afore publicly posted about how women contribute to “rape culture” by choosing how to dress.

Also, Afore is the same guy who compared young women to savory pieces of meat on the grill. viewtopic.php?p=2826165#p2826165

And finally, Afore is the same guy who read William Schryver’s abusive, misogynistic and sexually harassing comments to MsJack, and found "nothing wrong or inappropriate" with Schryver’s comments. viewtopic.php?t=118091

Psychologists will tell you that a misogynist will also typically harbor racist and homophobic attitudes. The public record certainly shows that's the case with Afore.

Afore really is the Harvey Weinstein of Mopology.

Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 10, 2025 7:20 pm

[...]Afore publicly posted about how women contribute to “rape culture” by choosing how to dress.[...]

I guess from a Mormonism-centric worldview, wherein temptation is blamed on everything but the individual feeling "tempted" (i.e. the devil, the fallen state, natural man, etc.), I guess it doesn't surprise me, but I hope you misinterpreted his remarks. If not, gross.

Tip regarding clothing, and preventing "rape culture": If you see a women dressed in a way you think is provocative... don't rape her.

The end.

I don't think anyone can say it's how women dress. Because women who are completely covered are raped, I think people are just using clothing as an excuse to justify their behaviour. I get the impression that rape can't just be about having sex, it must have something to do with the power and control to take away someone's choice because with swiping dates and hookups, if any man acts reasonably normal, I am pretty sure it wouldn't be that hard to find someone who will have sex, and there are also prostitutes available. I don't mean to sound crude but there is no excuse for rape. And I believe those that are doing it must be doing it for some sick twisted reason. I don't doubt that I am probably wrong but this is how I see it.

IWMP wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 10, 2025 8:33 pm

I don't think anyone can say it's how women dress. Because women who are completely covered are raped, I think people are just using clothing as an excuse to justify their behaviour. I get the impression that rape can't just be about having sex, it must have something to do with the power and control to take away someone's choice because with swiping dates and hookups, if any man acts reasonably normal, I am pretty sure it wouldn't be that hard to find someone who will have sex, and there are also prostitutes available. I don't mean to sound crude but there is no excuse for rape. And I believe those that are doing it must be doing it for some sick twisted reason. I don't doubt that I am probably wrong but this is how I see it.

For men it is entirely possible to have time when sex is not available. That can be frustrating but is little incentive to rape. Rape is a violent act which I am pretty sure would be done by someone wishing for the violence.I imagine there are multiple ways a person could get deeply involved in the wish for violence but without such a wish the idea of rape is simply repulsive.

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 10, 2025 9:44 pm

For men it is entirely possible to have time when sex is not available.

Why would anyone want to quote from apologists when they realize it will be deceptive (unless of course, it is Fox News)?

It couldn't be that someone is jealous that (having published something) he was not invited to be "a historical consultant for such muck.", could it?

in my opinion, LHP is very approachable, warm, and engaging. I haven't had any personal contact with Peggy, but I really liked Jana Riess the couple of times we met, and I suspect that if I had a suitable project, I might rather work with her and Lindsey than a fusty old prof from BYU. All three of these ladies are steeped in Mormon culture, and have plenty to contribute to a Mormon-related project.

But I suppose that for some folks only certain formally qualified people are fit to be consulted on Mormon matters. For example, professors of Islamic Studies and Arabic.

If I recall correctly, Dan was an expert witness on Mormon fundamentalism for the Brian David Mitchell prosecution even though he had told our forum he had no idea whether Mormon fundamentalists self-identify as "Mormon."

Consulting gigs are usually about who you know and/or being in the right place at the right time, and not necessarily being the best possible expert for the job. It's the way the world works. LHP is warm and approachable and good at building connections. That she isn't (to my knowledge) a scholar of Mormon history doesn't mean she lacks thorough knowledge of the topic. I don't think her ability to get consulting work on Hollywood projects is even a little bit of a mystery.

In my view, LHP by now may have become a respectable amateur historian. We’ll know more when her biography on Juanita Brooks is published. Although she began with her Year of Polygamy podcast by relying on Todd Compton’s book (a secondary source chock full of primary polygamy citations and quotes), LHP moved on to immerse herself in primary sources. She once explained it. She reads hundreds of pioneer diaries, and reads them all the time. I’ve heard her on her Mormon History Podcast, from time to time, explain how when she and Bryan Buchanan want to solve some mystery they go to the archives and dive in to the boxes and files. She seems to have an appetite and aptitude for historical sleuthing. And she seems to react the same giddy way as credentialed historian upon finding some new nugget. Not only that, but apparently she does some kind of fieldwork with offshoot polygamist sects. In my view, Lynzie Hansen Park has become more than “warm and bright” and merely connected, even though uncredentialed.