why me Posted February 1, 2012 Author Posted February 1, 2012 Why is TBM demeaning?Because of how they use it. They use it to demean. Now should it be used that way? No. But it is.
Buckeye Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Why is TBM demeaning?Because it excludes Ute fans, Boise State fans, Liverpool fans, and any other "non-Bleus".
sjdawg Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Because of how they use it. They use it to demean. Now should it be used that way? No. But it is.I'm not sure I follow. My understanding is the term means True Believing Mormon or True Blue Mormon. Seems like an accurate way to describe someone fully engaged in the LDS Church. Just like I don't really have an issue being call an apostate (a person who forsakes his religion, cause, party, etc. ). If you use the dictionary definition that is a pretty accurate way to describe me. (the term anti-mormon on the other hand....) Edited February 1, 2012 by sjdawg
cinepro Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 If one looks at church history, one will see that apostates have always been nasty and they have caused much destruction. In fact, we can say that an apostate killed JS. And many more burned homes of their former friends among the mormons. Their is something about apostate mentality that seeks to destroy that which they once loved: the lds church.How do you define "apostate"? Because in my experience, the vast, vast majority of members who leave the Church stop coming and never look back. Those who turn nasty and try to make trouble are few and far between. 1
Pahoran Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Why is TBM demeaning?Why is "Muttley" demeaning? Why is anything demeaning?Some in the GSB have chosen "TBM" as a way of disdainfully referring to believing Latter-day Saints. It is wrapped around with various assumptions about inability to even consider questions, (especially the two or three that the speaker has decided are dispositive of the Church's truth claims.) Upon examination, it turns out that the "TBM" is actually a caricature. Sort of like a cartoon of a Jew with an enormous nose. Admittedly that's not your ox being gored either, but can you see how it might be demeaning?Regards,Pahoran
cinepro Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 I remember that the ensign from the 70's had great articles and many things were covered about the lds church that one does not see now.I don't know what happened to the Ensign, but if you look at issues from back in the 70's and 80's, they actually had some really interesting articles, some of them that could almost be called "scholarly". Now, it seems to be written at a second grade level and it's mostly, shall we say, "devotional" in nature.
cinepro Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Some in the GSB have chosen "TBM" as a way of disdainfully referring to believing Latter-day Saints. Wait, I've always thought "TBM" stood for "True Believing Mormon". If "Mormon" is another term for "Latter-day Saint", then you're saying that people get offended because "believing Latter-day Saints" are being referred to as "True Believing Mormons".So what is it about the word "true" that is offensive?As for it being a "caricature", I can't think of any characteristics of TBM's that haven't been ably exemplified even just here on this message board, let alone in wards all over the world. There are LDS who believe that way, that much, and there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that fact.Whether or not it is offensive to call them "True Beliving Mormons" and shorten it to an acronym, we'll each have to figure out, I suppose. But we should be careful about taking offense where none is intended. Edited February 1, 2012 by cinepro
sjdawg Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Why is "Muttley" demeaning? Its actually a term of endearment.
Pahoran Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Wait, I've always thought "TBM" stood for "True Believing Mormon". If "Mormon" is another term for "Latter-day Saint", then you're saying that people get offended because "believing Latter-day Saints" are being referred to as "True Believing Mormons".So what is it about the word "true" that is offensive?Are you really so obtuse that you need me to explain this to you, or are you just amusing yourself by playing word games?There is nothing offensive about the word "True." It is the expression "TBM" that is demeaning. To understand why, please read my post #55. Try to make an attempt to actually comprehend it this time.Regards,Pahoran
sjdawg Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Why is "Muttley" demeaning? Why is anything demeaning?Some in the GSB have chosen "TBM" as a way of disdainfully referring to believing Latter-day Saints. It is wrapped around with various assumptions about inability to even consider questions, (especially the two or three that the speaker has decided are dispositive of the Church's truth claims.) Upon examination, it turns out that the "TBM" is actually a caricature. Sort of like a cartoon of a Jew with an enormous nose. Admittedly that's not your ox being gored either, but can you see how it might be demeaning?Regards,PahoranI suppose I have seen it in that context but much more often I have seen it used as someone who simply believes in Mormonism.
Sky Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Why is TBM demeaning?I thought I answered this in post # 33, but I'll say it again:It's not so much that "TBM" is offensive in and of itself, but it's the connotations behind it. It's the same with the term "mopologist."The way some ex-Mormons use the "TBM" label implies that we are mindless followers of the Brethren and not capable of thinking for ourselves. We are sheeple and follow a ridiculas cult. Get my drift? It can be incredibly insulting, especially for those with a thinner skin. And many TBM's and Mopologists do have great, intelligent arguments. I hope I'm one of them. But some people will automatically reject what you have to say simply if they perceive you as being a TBM or Mopologist.Of course some of us learn to wear our "TBM" badge with pride, and that's great too! Edited February 1, 2012 by Sky
cinepro Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 There is nothing offensive about the word "True." It is the expression "TBM" that is demeaning. To understand why, please read my post #55. Try to make an attempt to actually comprehend it this time.I can't speak for how others use the term, but I've never used it in an attempt to demean anyone, so I can only assume others are able to use it in a non-demeaning way as well. For example, if you were to ask me about my family, I might say "My dad is a TBM, my sister is a NOM". I love my dad greatly, and have great respect for him, but instead of describing his approach to the Church in detail, it's easier to say "TBM", and you can trust me when I say that every characteristic of belief that is commonly ascribed to TBMs is found with my dad. That's just the way he approaches the Church and the gospel.But if you choose to take it as a term of offense (when applied to other people, since I can't recall anyone calling you a TBM), go right ahead. I'm just not sure the TBMs themselves see anything wrong with it. 1
Damien the Leper Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 So we have a self-selected group of apostates advertising a survey where apostates like them hang out showing that most apostates are like them. Wow.For an encore they should go announce a survey on UFO forums and prove that over 90% of Americans believe we are being regularly visited by extraterrestrials.Don't harshly mischaracterize people you don't know. Give them the benefit of the doubt. People who have left the church haven't only left because of a problem they have. They also leave because the church creates a problem and doesn't do much to make anything better. It is naive either way to assume that the church has done wrong and that the church has done nothing wrong.
Sky Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Well, instead of saying "TBM", you could say believing LDS, or simply LDS. That would certainly be more preferable.
Senator Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Well, instead of saying "TBM", you could say believing LDS, or simply LDS. That would certainly be more preferable.Well, not all LDS are of the same stripe.Would BLDS (B - for believing) or TLDS (T -for true) or FLDS (F -for faithful not that wouldn't work) be acceptable?
Pahoran Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Don't harshly mischaracterize people you don't know. Give them the benefit of the doubt. People who have left the church haven't only left because of a problem they have. They also leave because they want to blame someone and the Church is a convenient scapegoat.There. Fixed it for you.Regards,Pahoran
Sky Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Well, not all LDS are of the same stripe.Would BLDS (B - for believing) or TLDS (T -for true) or FLDS (F -for faithful not that wouldn't work) be acceptable?LOL! I think there are enough Mormon-themed acronyms out there already, so we probably don’t need any more. But if you want to continue using “TBM”, I won’t put up a fuss over it. It’s just not my favorite term.
Damien the Leper Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 There. Fixed it for you.Regards,PahoranI also agree with this change you made, Pahoran. But I wouldn't say one way outweighs the other.I am concerned for those who have left because I want to understand what hurt them, what made them angry, why they chose to be offended, etc. I reject outrightly the arrogant assumption that someone who left the church obviously had something wrong with them (not to say that it doesn't). That is 'railing', disrespectful, and lacking in the love of Christ.
Senator Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 There. Fixed it for you.Regards,PahoranWell, in light of recent announcements of the church recognizing member attrition due to difficulties with church history, and efforts being made to address them, I'll just say that I'm glad it (the church) will not be using your apologetic. 1
Damien the Leper Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 There are two reasons that I left:Willima Schryver’s misogyny; andDaniel Peterson’s combative online persona.I found this statement on the blog a interesting...I find it to be disingenuous, as Selek would say, for someone to cite Daniel Peterson as a reason for leaving. That is just ridiculous!Person 1: Why did you leave the church?Person 2: I didn't like Daniel Peterson's 'combative' online personality.Are you freakin' kidding me?
Pahoran Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Well, in light of recent announcements of the church recognizing member attrition due to difficulties with church history, and efforts being made to address them, I'll just say that I'm glad it (the church) will not be using your apologetic.I'm sure such efforts will be helpful to some.I'm equally sure there will be others who will simply resent having their excuses taken away.Regards,Pahoran
Damien the Leper Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 I'm sure such efforts will be helpful to some.I'm equally sure there will be others who will simply resent having their excuses taken away.Regards,PahoranYour cynicism makes me laugh.
Pahoran Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 I found this statement on the blog a interesting...I find it to be disingenuous, as Selek would say, for someone to cite Daniel Peterson as a reason for leaving. That is just ridiculous!Person 1: Why did you leave the church?Person 2: I didn't like Daniel Peterson's 'combative' online personality.Are you freakin' kidding me?Exactly. While I'm sure there are those with genuine concerns who will be genuinely pleased to have them addressed, for others, any excuse will do.Incidentally Will Schryver's "misogyny" is a beat-up, the result of a highly selective presentation of carefully edited evidence provided by an expert in the ignoble art of the smear campaign.Regards,Pahoran
Pahoran Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Your cynicism makes me laugh.Your post #70 appears to vindicate my "cynicism."Regards,Pahoran
Doctor Steuss Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) I found this statement on the blog a interesting...I find it to be disingenuous, as Selek would say, for someone to cite Daniel Peterson as a reason for leaving. That is just ridiculous!Person 1: Why did you leave the church?Person 2: I didn't like Daniel Peterson's 'combative' online personality.Are you freakin' kidding me?Hi Valentinus,If LDS leaders advocate that some people have left the Church because they were offended by individuals within the Church, I’m not sure I see how it can be disingenuous when one of those individuals admits to the very thing that LDS leaders have claimed.Or am I missing something in your train of thought? Edited February 1, 2012 by Doctor Steuss
Recommended Posts