Louis Midgley Threatens to "Pay a Visit" to Gina Colvin

[_Dr LOD]

And I have discovered that my own ancestors were once "colonized" by people from Illinois and then Utah. And now Joanna Brooks and Gina Colvin want to decolonize my own faith, and hence seem determined to transform and deconstruct my own world(s).

Either an embarrassingly sophomoric post. Or him thinking he is clever with word play.

This is a parallel of someone saying “all lives matter” when trying to undermine the BLM/civil rights movement.

Professor Midgley is engaging in racist rhetoric in this post. To undermine the position Colvin and Brooks took in their book. He thinks he is funny and clever but is just BS.

I hope this means he is doing a review on the book. My offer is still out there for its publication.

[_Gadianton]

This is a parallel of someone saying “all lives matter” when trying to undermine the BLM/civil rights movement.

Professor Midgley is engaging in racist rhetoric in this post. To undermine the position Colvin and Brooks took in their book. He thinks he is funny and clever but is just BS.

Yep. It's like saying that dismantling the Third Reich "colonized" all those who were born into Nazi Germany. It's a worn ploy of the religious right to point out that those who ask for universal tolerance are hypocritical because they are intolerant towards the intolerant.

[_Lemmie]

Wow. Yet another version of Midgley’s stalking of Colvin, as well as another violation of Peterson’s agreement with Dr. Moore:

Midgley:

Second, there is never what you call "harsh rhetoric" on Professor Peterson's blog, unless people migrate from an especially hate-filled board to attack the faith of Latter-day Saints, which sometimes happens.

And the trashing I got from those folks on Gina Colvin's Patheos blog was entirely from haters from this hate board.

Gina Colvin could have put an end to all of that rubbish by simply posting a comment that her husband did want to meet me, and that we share common ground, and also that the Christchurch Stake President somehow knew who I was and directed me to Nathan. Since the first words from Nathan were "my wife hates you." To that very moment I was not aware that she knew that I existed. I learned a great deal about her from the conversation and took place that Sunday Morning that seems to explain why she never said a thing on her own blog to correct the ranting that took place on her blog.

Hatred is a very bad counselor indeed.

http://disq.us/p/2ar59ox

So the person being stalked could have put an end to Midgley’s onging trashing of her, if she had just done what Midgley commanded. That’s a whole new low to the stalking behavior of Louise Midgley.

[_Lemmie]

DanielPeterson Mod Louis Midgley • 8 hours ago

LM: "Gina Colvin could have put an end to all of that rubbish"

She could have. It was shameful. But she didn't.

It's a matter of priorities, I guess.

Years ago, I posted a brief and entirely civil correction of a factual error she had made about me in one of her blog entries. (I can't recall what the issue was.). I had never communicated with her before or posted anything on her blog. She deleted it. I've never communicated with her since, nor tried to post anything else on her blog.

http://disq.us/p/2ar5ebi

???? I thought Peterson was trying to rein Midgley in, not wind him up.

[_Physics Guy]

It's a worn ploy of the religious right to point out that those who ask for universal tolerance are hypocritical because they are intolerant towards the intolerant.

They should enthusiastically support our right to be intolerant of them, and campaign for federal funding and tax exemption of groups that advocate withdrawal of federal funding and tax exemption from them. In fact since these kinds of religious groups often advocate voluntary charity from individuals as a substitute for all kinds of government funding, they should just directly give money to the groups that want to restrict their right to give their money to whatever they want, since that would be principled support for the common cause of principled intolerance.

Hey, it's worth a shot. I've heard there's a hundred billion dollars just lying around.

[_Dr LOD]

LM: "Gina Colvin could have put an end to all of that rubbish"

DCP: She could have. It was shameful. But she didn't.

It's a matter of priorities, I guess.

Years ago, I posted a brief and entirely civil correction of a factual error she had made about me in one of her blog entries. (I can't recall what the issue was.). I had never communicated with her before or posted anything on her blog. She deleted it. I've never communicated with her since, nor tried to post anything else on her blog.

As I remember Professor Colvin did moderate that conversation the best she could. Much better than anything that Peterson has done. I had a coulple of posts that she didn't post. Apparently Midgley also marked posts by other people as spam on that conversation which automatically put them in a moderator bin.

Louis Midgley was caught being Louis Midgley on that post and out of the protective confines of SeN he received a dose of honest criticism of his boorish behavior.

My offer of $500 to the Interrupter Foundation for a review by Louis Midgley on Gina Colvins book on Decolonizing Mormonism, or the book Mormonism and White Supremacy by Brooks still stands.

[_Gadianton]

So the person being stalked could have put an end to Midgley’s onging trashing of her, if she had just done what Midgley commanded.

That's exactly what he's saying. It's just like in the movies, when a bank robber slips the teller a note with instructions on how to empty the vault. In retrospect, after all the patrons have been gunned down, the robber explains that the killings could be avoided if only the teller had followed the instructions on the note. But there's a distinctively Mormon twist to Midgley's version. Outside of the Church, such as in the bank robber scenario, the robber at least has the decency to pass that note and explain the connection between following the instructions and people keeping their lives. In Midgley's version, the very rule is concealed until after the fact. The person is expected to figure out what the rule is and then follow it -- that's part of the Mormon "test".

How many stories in church have you heard that are very similar to Midgley's story here?

- A Mormon boss is prepared to give a Mormon employee a big raise, but he won't do it until the struggling employee pays his tithing. The employee doesn't know his boss's plan, and learns long after the fact, the reason he didn't get his raise.

[_Paloma]

Just came across a fascinating foray by Professor Midgley in the comments of a blog (By Common Consent Maori, Mormons and Metageneology 2007). Thirteen years later, not much has changed. His protector then, too, was Professor Peterson (as shown in the comments ... way too much text to bring here, but it's all there for the interested reader).

https://bycommonconsent.com/2007/02/08/ ... genealogy/

Louis Midgley says:
February 19, 2007 at 12:53 am
My interest in continuing the discussion of the Maori and the Saints in New Zealand, which I had been enjoying, suddenly declined to about zero beginning with item #58. Let me explain why. I admit to not being entirely comfortable posting on a blog. My first and only previous experience doing this taught me something about blogs. It was an unpleasant learning experience. But I have enjoyed this experience. At least I did until I was taken to the woodshed by Hellmut Lotz. He thinks he has me pegged: I am, it seems, given to “hegemonic ambitions.” And, of course, I am guilty of exploiting some language in something someone posted in an effort to “validate [my] self image.” And one other expert finds me guilty of posting “a nauseating and atrociously presumptive screed.” Really. It was that bad? I had not expected that the issues raised by Sterling and others would degenerate into a parade of insults and nasty stuff. It is not difficult to spot the approaching rhetorical gutter and to sense when someone has some emotional itch they need to scratch. So unless Lotz and Costanza are gently but firmly told to get lost, I have no interest in continuing a discussion that I had previously very much enjoyed, even though I suspect that my ultra long posts may have been of little or no interest to most of those on BCC. Of course, I am aware that not everyone has the same passions or interests.

MCQ says:
February 19, 2007 at 1:05 am
I think I have already made my feelings known here but let me be the first to ask Hellmut and Costanza to play elsewhere while you continue with your fascinating posts, please.



DeRucci says:
February 19, 2007 at 7:01 am
Wow. So this thread has been going on for an unusually long time, and Professor Midgley has been the recipient of seemingly endless accolades for his interesting posts. Two people objected to what was, in fact, an off-topic post about someone’s relationship to the church. I think the threats to take your ball and go home unless the two offending parties are banished is a bit much. If two negative comments out of 50 plus gushing remarks hurts your feelings, maybe the blog world really isn’t for you.

[_Gadianton]

Holy cow Paloma! You've made a fascinating discovery!

I've skimmed through the comments and it's exactly as you've said. Midgley was greeted like a great white god on that thread, and he talked, and talked and talked, but hey, it was all good. Some people like travel logs and kitsch, and so it was as amiable of a discussion as discussions come. There was a brief hiccup, as Migdley scolded the blog for "not digging" enough. Wow, the irony, considering there is no evidence that Midgely himself really digs all that much into anything. As in his posts on this blog, he's full of superficial details. Anyway, the good folks over there let that one go and continued on. And then, Captain Jack made a grave mistake, with this post:

Thanks for that information. My father served a mission to the north island in the early 1960s. One of the highlights of my childhood was watching slide shows from his mission; I especially liked his pictures and stories from his time with the Maori. While my relationship with the LDS church has ended, I still have a soft spot for the Maori and stories about them.

Talk about letting fresh blood into the water!

With this in mind, and never wanting to miss an opportunity, I notice that capt jack indicates that, while his “relationship with the LDS church has ended,” because of some experiences in his youth, he still has “a soft spot for the Maori and stories about them.” Good. Very good. A starting point. Capt jack still remembers something that once moved his father. Excellent. This is a fine place to begin. What is this business about capt jack’s “relationship with the LDS church” having ended? This is not possible. This is simply not true. It will never end, even if he tries hard to go missing. And, in addition, he is, after all, right here on this blog with Mormon things being discussed. Why? He simply cannot leave it alone. He can’t spit or swallow.

And this is where a couple of brief criticisms of Migedly come in, and after, as Paloma quotes him, he shoots up to "cancel" the blog and go home. Notice at this point, the conversation has been going on for 10 days. Within hours of Costanza's offending remark, a poster called "Daniel Peterson" shows up to heap the praise on Midgley, and rebuff anybody who had offended the MIgle in the slightest. Where was this Daniel for the past many days, having scholarly exchanges? Oh I know, that doesn't interest him. What interests him is online combat.

This Daniel says, of Midlegy's comments to Jack,

I find it fascinating that a call to repentance — pretty much of the essence of the gospel, as I understand it, and a call to which all of us are subject without exception — or what might alternatively be described as a very mild and gracious preaching of the gospel (an obligation, in Mormon understanding, laid upon all those who have made covenants with God) is construed as a “nauseating and atrociously presumptive screed,” an attempt to “impose the meaning of some discourse with hegemonic ambitions,” and an exploitative effort to “validate” Professor Midgley’s own “self-image.”

It seems to me painfully obvious that endeavors to delegitimize even a mild public expression of mainstream Mormon belief in this fashion are themselves naked attempts at the imposition of a transparently hegemonic discourse and unmistakable evidence that, for some, tolerance is merely a one-way street.

lol. You can't make this stuff up. Maybe he should go back and read just how ordinary Captain Jack's brief mention about his church status was. There was nothing to tolerate or not tolerate.

[_Philo Sofee]

Like I say..........genuflect to the Mormon soon to be full fledged gods and always agree with their views of every subject, since they are always correct, in their minds, or face their wrath and weeping about their persecution of others thinking a wee bit different than they do.....