Jump to content
CA Steve

Rob Porter, and Mormonism's #MeToo Moment

Recommended Posts

I think it was Elder Joe J. Christensen, emeritus 70, who said that Bishops are shepherds but not veterinarians, meaning they should guide you to people who can help you but they shouldn't be the one that is your therapist or give extensive counselling. My bro. who was a Stake Clerk for 5.5 years was saying that bishops get taught by LDS social services once or twice a year (that was here but how that plays out other places, who knows) but with that people should go to the police first then deal with the church second

Share this post


Link to post

Bishops are trained to go outside (to family services at  least) for counseling that is out of their ecclesiastical range.   If it is true that a bishop cautioned one of the wives not to mess up Porter's career, that is just awful.   Bishops should immediately pull TR of the alleged perp (which in some cases will be both if they are making counter allegations) when a spouse or child identifies abuse and help both spouses with counseling to assess the situation, including help with housing and referral to the community domestic violence shelter.  And they are allowed to do minimum investigation for disciplinary purposes (so asking those around them, extended family what they know if the stories are different).  If bishops did this the first time,  second times might not happen.   Bishops also should tell abused spouses to call the police if it happens again and press charges --- there is research that if there is no substance abuse element or mental illness, a single arrest and overnight stay stands a good chance of stopping the behavior permanently, even if they are not thereafter prosecuted.   This is one of those cases in which being able to record the bishop's words and complaining about it up the chain might have eliminated the current church embarrassment, and might have prevented the abuse of the second wife entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I know the Deseret News is eating crow over this article from last year (but the "update" by the original author is an honest attempt to deal with what must be an awkward situation):

 

Meet the Mormon helping run Donald Trump's White House

 

By all accounts, Porter really presented himself well and was able to impress many people in high places.  But he obviously had a dark side and temper that has been his undoing.  I just feel bad for the women he has beaten who didn't get the support they needed and watched his star rise.  It's possible Porter was excommunicated and we don't know about it, but if his Church leaders knew about the abuse and he wasn't disciplined, that would be a travesty for the Church.

honestly with these high profile cases, I would hope the Church would comment on his disciplinary situation.I heard he wasn't active but if that's true he plays up the active Mormon angle but clearly he isn't living a stellar LDS lifestyle , mormon enough to look it but not mormon enough to be it

Plus that St. George, UT politician barfbag who purchased illicit services from this SLC doxy, who flipped on him, looks like

Share this post


Link to post

Here is a lengthy interview by Anderson Cooper with one of Rob's ex-wives.  She is amazing and very articulate.

 

Edited by Robert F. Smith

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Here is a lengthy interview by Anderson Cooper with one of Rob's ex-wives.  She is amazing and very articulate.

?????!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

This has been picked up by various new outlets. WaPo, SLC Trib and now CNN.

Rob Porter, and Mormonism's #MeToo Moment on CNN

From the article.

 The recent spate of threads on Bishop's interviews have peripherally touched on this subject. 

Maybe it's time to consider that bishops, for all their good intentions are not in a position to be a counselor in all matters. I have anecdotal experience where the same sort of responses these women were given, were also given to women I know. Where bishops encouraged the women to stay in abusive relationships. Am I judging all bishops by this? No, but should bishops even be put in a position where they have to advise abused spouses on how to proceed? It is my opinion that the moment a bishop suspects a woman has been abused or when a woman brings such an accusation to him, he needs to recuse himself from the situation and advise the parties to get professional help. If he suspects physical abuse happens then it needs to be reported to the authorities.

If they are of mind to, bishops can even pay for the professional help.  If the abuser refuses or continues to abuse, the victim then needs to be sent to the police dept.  The bishop needs to assure her that it is never her fault, and that abuse is always unacceptable, unchristianlike conduct.  In fact, the abuser may need to go before his stake president and high council.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, CA Steve said:

This has been picked up by various new outlets. WaPo, SLC Trib and now CNN.

Rob Porter, and Mormonism's #MeToo Moment on CNN

From the article.

 The recent spate of threads on Bishop's interviews have peripherally touched on this subject. 

Maybe it's time to consider that bishops, for all their good intentions are not in a position to be a counselor in all matters. I have anecdotal experience where the same sort of responses these women were given, were also given to women I know. Where bishops encouraged the women to stay in abusive relationships. Am I judging all bishops by this? No, but should bishops even be put in a position where they have to advise abused spouses on how to proceed? It is my opinion that the moment a bishop suspects a woman has been abused or when a woman brings such an accusation to him, he needs to recuse himself from the situation and advise the parties to get professional help. If he suspects physical abuse happens then it needs to be reported to the authorities.

Recusing himself in terms of offering advice on the relationship, sure; but stay as a spiritual (encouraging the individual to seek God's peace and inspiration) and emotional support and physical if need be If arrangements for separate living quarters or a trip to stay with parents if needed.  The bishop might turn out to be the only available person a victim can turn to if they have been isolated from their own family and friends by their spouse, it would be unfortunate to remove that support just in case they might say something wrong.  

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, cinepro said:

I know the Deseret News is eating crow over this article from last year (but the "update" by the original author is an honest attempt to deal with what must be an awkward situation):

Meet the Mormon helping run Donald Trump's White House

By all accounts, Porter really presented himself well and was able to impress many people in high places.  But he obviously had a dark side and temper that has been his undoing.  I just feel bad for the women he has beaten who didn't get the support they needed and watched his star rise.  It's possible Porter was excommunicated and we don't know about it, but if his Church leaders knew about the abuse and he wasn't disciplined, that would be a travesty for the Church.

What surprises me about this type of statement is the desire to make humans - male or female - one, or at most, two dimensional characters.  If a man is an abuser it is impossible for him to be anything else.  If a woman is an abuser she cannot possibly have any other achievements or accomplishments. An abuser is only permitted to be an abuser and nothing else.  If they do excel in anything else then they must be pounded down until they become a single dimensional individual - an abuser without job, business, home, family, or friend.  

These people that create this standard and enforce this type of "compensation" - I wonder, are they prepared to live by that same standard?  I hope so because this kind of thing more often than not turns on the enforcers rather quickly and they die in the flames they created to burn others. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Here is a lengthy interview by Anderson Cooper with one of Rob's ex-wives.  She is amazing and very articulate.

Why is there no audio?  Or is she perhaps less articulate than you thought?

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Why is there no audio?  Or is she perhaps less articulate than you thought?

There was audio when I watched it.

M.

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Maureen said:

There was audio when I watched it.

M.

That is so weird. I thought my computer was having a problem.  But it's definitely the link (and my computer). Anderson Cooper's interview on CNN with her is totally silent. Other videos of her (on the Today show, for example) has sound.

Maybe my computer has a preference...  

Share this post


Link to post

Leave it to CNN to make this about Mormon bishops

How flippin ridiculous can you get?  This HAS to be the Lord's church.   I mean that is really reaching for it.

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Leave it to CNN to make this about Mormon bishops

How flippin ridiculous can you get?  This HAS to be the Lord's church.   I mean that is really reaching for it.

But she actually gave the bishop a pass. She did not blame him at all and credited him along with the policeman for waking her up to the situation.

Share this post


Link to post

I   thought it was great she talked about redemption in relation  to her ex-husband.  Men can change, other men need to talk with them, show them a better way. I read once that anger was because of either fear, frustration or hurt.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, juliann said:

But she actually gave the bishop a pass. She did not blame him at all and credited him along with the policeman for waking her up to the situation.

I was impressed by the way she addressed that as well.  It could have gone to blaming so easily by expecting him to have enough training, inspiration, experience, whatever to figure out the warning signs...to speak for her when she couldn't. 

Instead it was more 'I couldn't explain it to him, so why should anyone expect him to read my mind?'...a very reasonable and generous position.

Since we are not part of the conversation, many of us might have thought asking for the restraining order would be a red flag; iirc, the bishop was the one who helped her with it, maybe even suggested it (though that might have just been the separation), but also he was realistic in mentioning it could hurt Porter's career, which is to me not as shocking or male centered as it sounded at first now that I have listened to her explain their interaction and how much he didn't actually know about the ongoing abuse because she hadn't told him and obviously Porter wouldn't have.  We need to remember if she chose to stay with him the restraining order on his record could rob her of chances as well and have a very significant impact on the quality of their family life through limiting higher paying and more influential jobs and connections, potentially affecting her own ambitions (or if you prefer goals) which she likely had marrying someone in his line of work (though apparently the bishop viewed it much more significantly than the Trump administration...shocking I know).  Sounds like the bishop considered reconciliation a real possibility at the time apparently from what she had told him or rather what she hadn't told her and Porter was likely saying it was a bump they would get past, given how he has been downplaying everything now and asking her to do so as well.  The bishop may have just been ensuring she understood the seriousness for both of them and not the least bit trying to suggest she shouldn't do it, but just prepare her so there would be no shock or too much dissapointment if it happened.  She presents him as concerned with her as an individual, listening to her.  It is certainly possible he was worrying a man's career is his life and focused on how it would affect Porter alone, but if so, it comes across as an anomaly in the interaction from what she said in the interview.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, aussieguy55 said:

I   thought it was great she talked about redemption in relation  to her ex-husband.  Men can change, other men need to talk with them, show them a better way. I read once that anger was because of either fear, frustration or hurt.  

It wasn't a soapy, sentimental, or preachy redemption.  It came across as a deep, devout, intelligent belief of a caring responsible woman out to help others.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, aussieguy55 said:

I   thought it was great she talked about redemption in relation  to her ex-husband.  Men can change, other men need to talk with them, show them a better way. I read once that anger was because of either fear, frustration or hurt.  

What is Anthony Weiner's religion?

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Leave it to CNN to make this about Mormon bishops

How flippin ridiculous can you get?  This HAS to be the Lord's church.   I mean that is really reaching for it.

I'm sure they'd say Catholic bishop, if that were the case.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Am I prepared to have my successes in business, with family, and with friends count for nothing if I viciously and repeatedly abuse those I am supposed to love the most? Yes, yes, I am. If that fire consumes me then I deserve it.

Also, are you seriously suggesting that calling out abusers and villifying them is 'digging a pit for your neighbor'? That is.....disturbing.

For your first point - I like it when we use really gruesome words to make it even worse than it is. I am talking about sins in general; abuse takes many forms and all of them can be done without be vicious or repeated.  Great, live by the standard you judge others and lets see how this turns out for you.  I already have my popcorn and enjoy a good, gruesome, horrible finish. :)

Gads, the exaggeration that goes on.  What I am suggesting is that humans are multidimensional individuals; that not a single human has lived perfectly; that an individual - male or female - can do very bad things while also doing good things; that some of the humans we call monsters are just human while there are real monsters - Pol Pot comes to mind, Stalin, Hitler, Idi Amin Dada, etc., these are monsters.  Are all individuals that have emotionally or even physically abused their spouse monsters the same type of individuals as these others?  Talk to me about what is disturbing again....I am having a major problem with your definitions and the sanctimonious manner in which our society is now judging other humans willy-nilly.  

What terrifies me is the counsel not to judge or that we will be judged in the same manner.  I am concerned that so many blindly jump on the any social band wagon without thinking it through and understanding what is really being said and done.  Lastly, I really detest the new class of Puritans that want a perfect society as long as they themselves will never be judged or measured by the same standard they burn everyone else. 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×