Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[drumdude]

Also, JP when you inevitably make this into a motion picture can I please be an extra? I don't even want any lines.

Nah. Very soon I will go back to forgetting this place exists and happily live my life not caring about anything tangentially related to Mormonism.

What do you think has been accomplished by all of this? Are you measuring the number of YouTube views Mormon Stories has lost as a measure of success? Or are you hoping John's big donors are rattled and stop funding him?

[jpatterson]

Yes, complex, messy, but so long as it leads people to think JD is a bad guy who is hypocritically getting away with bad things while pretending to be a good guy, then at that point it all becomes very simple. John bad man. Rosebud innocent victim and heroic survivor.

Simple.

For someone who loves to point out logical fallacies, you really love to use them yourself.

[Kishkumen]

JP seems to be hinging on the fact that in the August 10th email, JD 'admitted' to manipulating Rosebud. Also he seems to believe that because JD engaged in 'faux sexting' the day before that JD isn't capable of complex wants and thought. JD actions must be black and white, there can be no grey area for JP. Either way I've taken some time to read through the email and this is what I have found.

I am familiar with the Dehlinism of "just." If you are familiar with John's habitual mangling of the English language, which causes all kinds of misunderstandings in his interviews and elsewhere, the emphasis is on "isn't," not "just." He is, in effect, quoting a hypothetical accuser who might say JD is just manipulating Rosebud, and then denying that this is the case. Just doesn't mean "only" in this instance. JP and Rosebud want to see an admission of manipulation that does not exist.

[Kishkumen]

For someone who loves to point out logical fallacies, you really love to use them yourself.

It's called rhetoric, sport.

[Kukulkan]

JP seems to be hinging on the fact that in the August 10th email, JD 'admitted' to manipulating Rosebud. Also he seems to believe that because JD engaged in 'faux sexting' the day before that JD isn't capable of complex wants and thought. JD actions must be black and white, there can be no grey area for JP. Either way I've taken some time to read through the email and this is what I have found.

I am familiar with the Dehlinism of "just." If you are familiar with John's habitual mangling of the English language, which causes all kinds of misunderstandings in his interviews and elsewhere, the emphasis is on "isn't," not "just." He is, in effect, quoting a hypothetical accuser who might say JD is just manipulating Rosebud, and then denying that this is the case. Just doesn't mean "only" in this instance. JP and Rosebud want to see an admission of manipulation that does not exist.

So insanity then?

[Lem]

This continued emphasis on how the victim behaved, what she thinks, how she responded, followed by multiple psychological interpretations is really getting uncomfortable. Kish, I believe, recently pointed out that such psychological evaluations of Peterson are inappropriate, I believe that assessment holds here as well.

There is arguably a case of sexual harassment here, which the Open Stories Foundation board and JD handled very, very badly, possibly even illegally. Sadly, it seems there is not much that can be done now, other than to release information. That's been done.

No matter how badly Rosebud and her supporters act, responding to the accusation of sexual harassment by repeatedly and viciously dissecting the behavior, words and actions of the victim when she was responding to said sexual harassment is very, very one-sided. This continued bashing of the victim is why victims don't come forward. I also don't agree with the continued attacks on JD. He and the board got away with something that really doesn't seem to be fixable now. Letting it go doesn't mean JD gets off scot-free, his reputation with me, at least, is severely tarnished. But it's time to let it go.

[dastardly stem]

This continued emphasis on how the victim behaved, what she thinks, how she responded, followed by multiple psychological interpretations is really getting uncomfortable. Kish, I believe, recently pointed out that such psychological evaluations of Peterson are inappropriate, I believe that assessment holds here as well.

There is arguably a case of sexual harassment here, which the Open Stories Foundation board and JD handled very, very badly, possibly even illegally. Sadly, it seems there is not much that can be done now, other than to release information. That's been done.

No matter how badly Rosebud and her supporters act, responding to the accusation of sexual harassment by repeatedly and viciously dissecting the behavior, words and actions of the victim when she was responding to said sexual harassment is very, very one-sided. This continued bashing of the victim is why victims don't come forward. I also don't agree with the continued attacks on JD. He and the board got away with something that really doesn't seem to be fixable now. Letting it go doesn't mean JD gets off scot-free, his reputation with me, at least, is severely tarnished. But it's time to let it go.

I appreciate the reasonable assessment and echo it completely.

[Kukulkan]

There is arguably a case of sexual harassment here, which the Open Stories Foundation board and JD handled very, very badly, possibly even illegally. Sadly, it seems there is not much that can be done now, other than to release information. That's been done.

Do you believe the relationship itself between the two constitutes as sexual harassment or just the fallout of the whole situation (her being fired, JD being rehired, etc.)?

[drumdude]

There is arguably a case of sexual harassment here, which the Open Stories Foundation board and JD handled very, very badly, possibly even illegally. Sadly, it seems there is not much that can be done now, other than to release information. That's been done.

Do you believe the relationship itself between the two constitutes as sexual harassment or just the fallout of the whole situation (her being fired, JD being rehired, etc.)?

Oddly if John hadn't ended their affair, by this logic the sexual harassment never would have occurred. The sexual harassment required ending the sexual relationship, apparently.

Either way you look at this, Anne must have been employed indefinitely by Open Stories Foundation once their affair started to avoid this definition of sexual harassment.

Talk about job security!

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Can one violate a policy before it existed?

It seems to be an ex post facto reus (guilty after the fact) wherein a policy that was drafted to address a situation that occurred before the policy implies guilt. To me, it just appears the board wants to avoid future sticky situations between co-workers, and if a policy is in place moving forward it makes it simpler to cut someone loose. The fact of the matter is both JD and Rosebud came clean to the board about their relationship. Nowhere, and I mean nowhere, did Rosebud state or imply sexual harassment or assault before things got weird with her wanting to get rid of JB. The fact, since we're big on facts (right JP?) is Rosebud never went full psycho until she didn't get what she wanted.

That said, JD still, imho, used his position and influence to get what he wanted, which was to get rid of Rosebud, when she became difficult. It's indisputable that the one person with any real power in this situation was JD and he straight up asked Rosebud to go away. This was a result of the choices he made, and the choices Rosebud made. But at the end of the day JD held power over Rosebud, and he got what he wanted. This is crystal clear and indisputable.

The only way around any of this was for the organization to be completely dissolved, and JD creating a new foundation with different board members and employees. I just don't think he could've avoided any of these entanglements had he done so, anyway.

- Doc