Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

This is for encouragement, ideas, and support for people going through a faith transition no matter where you hope to end up. This is also the place to laugh, cry, and love together.
Wonderment
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 3:38 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Wonderment » Sun Jul 21, 2019 9:17 pm

Right now, I think a lot is seasonal. It's summer and people are out doing stuff. Yard work, projects, vacations, etc. We are not inside as much where hopping on NOM is as good a way to spend time. Also, thinks have been pretty quiet on the LDS front lately. Nothing more than the normal level of BS. Not as much to spark a conversation.

In a few months when the weather grows cold, the computer becomes more interesting way to spend the time, when the church drops a bomb of one sort or another, we can expect to see an uptick in posting.
Agreed. While traffic on message boards is increasingly siphoned off to Facebook and social media, I think there is still very much a place for reflective, thoughtful, supportive discussion. That's what I see on NOM, and that's why I like to hang around here. We will always have a lot more lurkers than we will have posters, because some church members in faith transitions want to remain anonymous on a message board. I find NOM to be much more inspirational and thought-provoking than any Facebook page.

I remember last summer as being very quiet here ( and on several other message boards) but I do remember that conversations picked up as we moved into the autumn and into October conference.

As far as the FMH board goes, Mormon feminism had the wind taken out of its sails after Kate Kelly was ex'ed. The movers and shakers went on to other endeavors, leaving the "Stay LDS" people behind, and they're writing very little of interest. JMO -- Wndr.

User avatar
Not Buying It
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 12:29 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Not Buying It » Mon Jul 22, 2019 5:54 am

While there probably has been a slow down for message boards in general, I have to wonder if maybe fewer people need s halfway point like NOM. My eyes were opened after I was already chained to the Church - I had already married, had a believing spouse who wanted to raise our vanload of kids in the Church, getting out was going to take a lot of time if it ever happened at all. I needed a place of support while I tried to sort it all out. But a lot of young people find out about the Church’s dirty laundry before marriage and mission now, it’s much easier for them to cut ties with the Church, and they don’t really need a place like NOM while they are in Mormon limbo.

And I think the Church itself realizes this, which is why they are ramping up efforts to keep the youth (doing all the wrong things if they want to keep them, of course, but full speed ahead in the wrong direction isn’t atypical for the Church).
"The truth is elegantly simple. The lie needs complex apologia. 4 simple words: Joe made it up. It answers everything with the perfect simplicity of Occam's Razor. Every convoluted excuse withers." - Some guy on Reddit called disposazelph

User avatar
Advocate
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:14 am

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Advocate » Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:11 am

I notice more activity when the church does stuff to discuss. The church hasn't done much that merits discussion in the last couple months.

I do agree that there are several posters that overly push the idea that all republicans are bad. It doesn't have anything to do with the mission of the board, drives people away, and ought to be called out or moderated.

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 12:43 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Newme » Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:15 pm

Blashyrkh wrote:
Sat Jul 20, 2019 3:24 pm
First off I really appreciate you bringing up this question. I am a typical NEM. I basically attend for my wife. I had a heart attack this week and the ward members were more supportive than I can imagine. I live in an older ward and I had a 70-year-old couple mow my lawn. There is an 78-year-old man finishing a bathroom as we speak that I started a month ago. That being said I still find thebeliefs to be nonsense. I used to love the compasionate and caring opinions and views of my friends on here . however, the reason I dont visit NEM much anymore is because IMO it has become nothing more than left-wing opinions and people tearing into anything conservative. Old, white guys are the spawn of Satan and if you don't bow down at the LGBTQ alter then you are an ignorant piece of crap not even worthy of the wasted air you breathe. I get enough unwanted politics forced on me throughout my day. I want to come here and not have to deal with the same stuff. I have my political beliefs which have nothing to do with my former religion. Being torn down here because of them made me feel unwelcomed and once again forced to the outside of another group.
I can relate. That’s why I don’t go on this forum much.
I appreciate the understanding of faith crisis but the shutdown of opinions some don’t like and the echo chamber of the new popular identity politics reminds me too much of mormon cult shunning and shutdown. Initially the old NOM forum was more respectful but also seemed to become ruled by those intolerant to other views.

The main related forum which respects freedom of speech (besides ad hominem attacks - only 1 rule) is lds freedom forum. It seems increasingly NOM but mixed with some at both TBM and Atheistic extremes.

I hope you recover well from your heart attack. I imagine that shook you up. For a bit, I had a health scare and seriously wondered about my death, life and everything. Nice how people showed love. The most beautiful thing about the lds church is how people look out for one another.

Wonderment
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 3:38 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Wonderment » Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:56 am

Old, white guys are the spawn of Satan and if you don't bow down at the LGBTQ alter then you are an ignorant piece of crap not even worthy of the wasted air you breathe.
What does this mean, and who here has ever attacked white people? I'm not seeing what you're seeing here. Could you give an example of a time when white people were under attack here?

"If you don't bow down at the LGBTQ"......What does this mean? Can you give an example of this happening?
If a NOM speaks up for equal rights of LGBT people, is that bowing down to them?

We have some LGBT posters on this board, whom I think are very kind and very well spoken. If they are treated with kindness and respect, does that mean quote "bowing down to them" ?

How can issues with the church be separated from real life issues in today's society? The church has some strong political ideas about equal rights for women, for LGBT people, and for people around the world. How can that be separated from what is happening in America today?

Is there anyone who would like to take a stab at explaining this? Why are issue of social reform dismissed as "identity politics", 'bowing down to LGBT"
"white guys are the spawn of Satan", and so forth? What is the source of these accusations?

User avatar
Evil_Bert
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 7:40 am
Location: Northern Nevada

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Evil_Bert » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:50 am

Wonderment wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:56 am

What does this mean, and who here has ever attacked white people? I'm not seeing what you're seeing here. Could you give an example of a time when white people were under attack here?

"If you don't bow down at the LGBTQ"......What does this mean? Can you give an example of this happening?
If a NOM speaks up for equal rights of LGBT people, is that bowing down to them?

We have some LGBT posters on this board, whom I think are very kind and very well spoken. If they are treated with kindness and respect, does that mean quote "bowing down to them" ?

How can issues with the church be separated from real life issues in today's society? The church has some strong political ideas about equal rights for women, for LGBT people, and for people around the world. How can that be separated from what is happening in America today?

Is there anyone who would like to take a stab at explaining this? Why are issue of social reform dismissed as "identity politics", 'bowing down to LGBT"
"white guys are the spawn of Satan", and so forth? What is the source of these accusations?
I think that what the original post is speaking to is that there have been a number of posters that tend to get very political and push their views on others. NOM 1.0 didn't allow any political posts. There have been a couple of threads within the past 6 months that a certain point of view was espoused and everyone ganged up on somebody who disagreed. I don't remember the post, because I quickly quit reading, but it was something to do with LGBT.

I am not arguing one side or the other, but sometimes we don't see the political disagreements if our side is "winning".

Proud parent of a LGBT daughter, big 2nd amendment fan, and slightly right of Attila the Hun.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by jfro18 » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:47 am

Wonderment wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:56 am
Old, white guys are the spawn of Satan and if you don't bow down at the LGBTQ alter then you are an ignorant piece of crap not even worthy of the wasted air you breathe.
What does this mean, and who here has ever attacked white people? I'm not seeing what you're seeing here. Could you give an example of a time when white people were under attack here?

"If you don't bow down at the LGBTQ"......What does this mean? Can you give an example of this happening?
If a NOM speaks up for equal rights of LGBT people, is that bowing down to them?
I can't remember the specific threads, but I know there have been a lot of references made to how all top church leaders are old, white men when we're discussing church policy/doctrine.

And so I think that comes with it the implication that they can't see the world around them when they're completely surrounded by old, white dudes confirming their world view. It's not bashing white people, but it is bashing that the church has been a white male dominated institution since it was created by Joseph... which does play a big role in many areas such as the ban on backs, women in the church, and LGBT issues.

I also think we see a lot of pushback when anyone defends the church's LGBT policy because of studies that show it isn't a choice and what the implications are of that, but I am only speaking for myself. I certainly don't think anyone should 'bow down at the LGBTQ,' but I do believe they should have the same rights and opportunities that anyone else does... which is contrary to the church's teachings and actions.

And religion is emotionally charge enough as it is... the overarching political themes that do seem to lend themselves to discussing church issues seems to push it to another level which is really difficult to separate sometimes.

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1298
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by alas » Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:10 am

The other thing I think some our conservatives are missing is that every time someone has been “bashed” for expressing anti LGBT views, someone else has jumped in to say that they have a right to express their views. Example, the thread where anal sex was brought up as dangerous, and the poster was told to S. U. Two people jumped in to tell that attacker he had gone too far and that the anti gay sex person had the right to express their view point.

Yes, most of us here are pro LGBT, but then so is approx 52% of the US according to the last poll I saw. So, unless you like a conservative echo chamber like Fox News, then get over yourselves and learn to listen to an opposing opinion. The same goes for the flaming social liberals like me. Learn to listen to an opposing opinion. By the way, on that thread I mentioned where two people jumped in to defend the anti anal sex person, I was one of them defending her right to say her opinion.

This is why I don’t want the conservatives to leave. We NEED opposing opinions here or we become an echo chamber. That was why it was so refreshing recently when we had a believer show up wanting to discuss a theory he had about a trickster God. It was something new to discuss and opposing opinions.

Becoming an echo chamber where we have the same old discussions about underwear and how corrupt the old white men who lead the church are, is *WHY* I think NOM has gotten stale and people are dropping out.

We need to be what NOM.1 was trying to be by moderating political discussions. Sure, wonderment is right that it is hard to discuss the church without getting into the things the church is political about. The church has traditionally fought civil rights for blacks, women, and LGBT. So, those issues which are political are going to be discussed, and not everyone changes their opinion on those issues when they change their mind on the church. So, we have to be extra careful to allow different opinions.

And because of the current president of US, it is easy to blast “conservatives” as evil and I have seen people do that on NOM. But things have changed because many Republicans like my DH hate tRump. DH has never voted Democratic in his life, until tRump. But now he s swearing he will never vote Republican again, and for a registered R, that is pretty dramatic. And the whole political climate has gotten more divided and hateful under tRump. I know I have probably been guilty of some Trump bashing, and I notice I am doing it here because I have taught my spell checker to correct Trump to tRump. Naughty me and my spell checker. So, given that we might have Trump supporters here, I will try to reprogram my spell checker and be more accepting that good people can Support someone I personally see no good in. But, I am not the only one who has bashed Trump on here, so others need to watch that too. He really has nothing to do with the church and is not one of those political issues the church involves itself in, so he shouldn’t come up on NOM.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by jfro18 » Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:55 am

alas wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:10 am
The other thing I think some our conservatives are missing is that every time someone has been “bashed” for expressing anti LGBT views, someone So, given that we might have Trump supporters here, I will try to reprogram my spell checker and be more accepting that good people can Support someone I personally see no good in. But, I am not the only one who has bashed Trump on here, so others need to watch that too. He really has nothing to do with the church and is not one of those political issues the church involves itself in, so he shouldn’t come up on NOM.
i don't want to completely out myself on a public forum, but I've been heavily interested in politics the last 20 years and have been more involved with people the last 8 years on social media and through some jobs I got writing for some publications - esp among conservatives/GOP.

When i bring up trump in a conversation about church matters,it's really not to bash trump but to highlight how the diehard Trump supporters have such similar traits to believing members.

And by that I do NOT mean that they share similar beliefs -- just that they have the same emotional reactions to information that contradicts their belief.

So when I mention it, the comparison is from my personal experience in talking to and working with Trump supporters (and Republicans who do NOT like Trump) and seeing how close it is in talking to them and believing Mormons who just refuse to accept any new information.

But alas is right that we need to be civil and be *careful* when we mix politics into the church discussions and I'll try to make cleaner distinctions in what I'm trying to say as well, because I'm not trying to put everyone in the same giant box when they disagree with me. It's just that I can not help but see the similarities in the approaches I get from both Trump supporters and believing members - esp the outspoken ones online. That's not really so much an issue of beliefs, but in the emotional approach to beliefs that do not line up with the evidence that we can show them.

User avatar
achilles
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:17 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by achilles » Tue Jul 23, 2019 1:35 pm

I think that online social groups like NOM need to fulfill people's needs to be relevant. And that is certainly a worthy goal for us to work toward. For me, I've finally made the break from the Church and my emotional needs for support aren't as urgent as maybe they once were. I've been very busy with school (the toughest year in my program) and typing isn't very comfortable for me. Otherwise, I'd be posting a lot. I love all of you.

At the risk of maybe jacking this thread:
Blashyrkh wrote:
Sat Jul 20, 2019 3:24 pm
and if you don't bow down at the LGBTQ alter then you are an ignorant piece of crap not even worthy of the wasted air you breathe. I get enough unwanted politics forced on me throughout my day.
Blashyrkh, I agree that you should be able to express your opinions without being attacked. I also agree that there are left-wing folks out there that make issues surrounding race, gender, and sexuality into ad hominem bullscheise. That being said, just as most conservatives are decent folk trying their best to make the world a better place, most liberals are the same. Since the last presidential election, I've had the opportunity to listen to my father express his frustration with feeling that he can't voice his real opinions about things without somehow being punished by left-wing die hards. I am trying to understand this feeling, and be more sensitive to it.

On the other hand, I am gay, and I'm not going back into the closet just to make someone else feel less uncomfortable. I'm not going to stop fighting for full civil rights for myself and others like me, and maybe you can excuse me for thinking that those who want to prevent this are ignorant of the realities of my life, but are certainly still worthy of "air" and dignity just like all other human beings.
“For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.”

― Carl Sagan

User avatar
Advocate
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:14 am

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Advocate » Tue Jul 23, 2019 1:54 pm

jfro18 wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:55 am
alas wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:10 am
The other thing I think some our conservatives are missing is that every time someone has been “bashed” for expressing anti LGBT views, someone So, given that we might have Trump supporters here, I will try to reprogram my spell checker and be more accepting that good people can Support someone I personally see no good in. But, I am not the only one who has bashed Trump on here, so others need to watch that too. He really has nothing to do with the church and is not one of those political issues the church involves itself in, so he shouldn’t come up on NOM.
i don't want to completely out myself on a public forum, but I've been heavily interested in politics the last 20 years and have been more involved with people the last 8 years on social media and through some jobs I got writing for some publications - esp among conservatives/GOP.

When i bring up trump in a conversation about church matters,it's really not to bash trump but to highlight how the diehard Trump supporters have such similar traits to believing members.

And by that I do NOT mean that they share similar beliefs -- just that they have the same emotional reactions to information that contradicts their belief.

So when I mention it, the comparison is from my personal experience in talking to and working with Trump supporters (and Republicans who do NOT like Trump) and seeing how close it is in talking to them and believing Mormons who just refuse to accept any new information.

But alas is right that we need to be civil and be *careful* when we mix politics into the church discussions and I'll try to make cleaner distinctions in what I'm trying to say as well, because I'm not trying to put everyone in the same giant box when they disagree with me. It's just that I can not help but see the similarities in the approaches I get from both Trump supporters and believing members - esp the outspoken ones online. That's not really so much an issue of beliefs, but in the emotional approach to beliefs that do not line up with the evidence that we can show them.
So let me summarize the point you seem to be making:

TBMs are not logical thinkers and follow their emotions just like Trump supporters are not logical thinkers and follow their emotions.

and that doesn't strike you as politicizing the discussion?

Just my opinion, but unless you also make it a point to show how democrats (or Hillary supporters or Bernie supporters, etc.) have the same emotional reaction to information that contradicts their beliefs (see e.g. https://www.foxnews.com/media/college-s ... cist-trump), then you're making it political.

A lot of people (myself included) don't care for politicized discussions and certainly don't come here for politicized discussions. I'd support moderation of such politicized discussions and would encourage all to use non-politicized analogies here at NOM.

User avatar
A New Name
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:36 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by A New Name » Tue Jul 23, 2019 3:21 pm

I think reddit (both /mormon/ and /exmormon/ has filled in where NOM once stood. Also the privite facebook groups are big now. I'm on several of them, and they also scratch the itch that NOM once did

User avatar
Evil_Bert
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 7:40 am
Location: Northern Nevada

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Evil_Bert » Tue Jul 23, 2019 3:58 pm

I started with NOM 1.0, and while I am on Facebook, I haven't ever looked for the private groups, so have never joined any.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by jfro18 » Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:47 pm

Advocate wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 1:54 pm
So let me summarize the point you seem to be making:

TBMs are not logical thinkers and follow their emotions just like Trump supporters are not logical thinkers and follow their emotions.

and that doesn't strike you as politicizing the discussion?

Just my opinion, but unless you also make it a point to show how democrats (or Hillary supporters or Bernie supporters, etc.) have the same emotional reaction to information that contradicts their beliefs (see e.g. https://www.foxnews.com/media/college-s ... cist-trump), then you're making it political.

A lot of people (myself included) don't care for politicized discussions and certainly don't come here for politicized discussions. I'd support moderation of such politicized discussions and would encourage all to use non-politicized analogies here at NOM.
It's not political in the sense that it's not tied to any specific beliefs - just in the manner in which politics have turned into a purely emotional outlet.

And to your point, you can make the same case for any politician who has developed a cult of personality like AOC on the left, Trump on the right, etc.

The reason Trump is used now is because Obama is gone and Hillary is gone... so Trump is the most relevant example. If I was posting I would mention AOC as well because I've encountered a lot of that for her as well -- more so than any of the 2020 candidates for sure.

But yes, if you talk to diehard political types (especially online but even in person), facts and data are irrelevant to changing someone's views no matter how much the evidence contradicts the belief they have - and that goes for many on both sides lately.

User avatar
Not Buying It
Posts: 1011
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 12:29 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Not Buying It » Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:46 am

I don’t think you can avoid talking about politics when discussing the Church. For one, the Church is so enmeshed in Utah politics, it’s ridiculous to think that will never come up. Sometimes the Church meddles in state politics outside of Utah (Prop 8), and even meddles at the national level. I don’t think it is realistic to think discussions here are going to be free of politics.

Moreover, politics frequently involve morality, and there is going to be an intersection of Church, morality, and politics in discussions. My objections to Trump are predominantly moral rather than political - in the same way that many conservatives refuse to vote Democrat under any circumstances due to their moral objection to abortion. Gay marriage is seen as both a moral and political issue, as another example. I’m not sure it is realistic to think that politics is never going to come up in discussions here.

So would it be forbidden to, say, point out the contradictions in believing members who support Trump in spite of the well-documented adulteries and self-admitted sexual harassment, when those same members were calling for Clinton’s impeachment over Monicagate? Would it be considered too political to discuss the many ways Trump is the polar opposite of what Christ taught on the Sermon on the Mount, and yet some Church members who consider themselves the most Christlike of all people support him anyway? I’d be interested to hear a compelling reason why those things shouldn’t be discussed on a forum devoted to discussing LDS history, culture, practice, and doctrine.

You don’t like hearing ideas that are different than yours? Then the internet really isn’t for you, unless you restrict yourself to “safe” places were no one is ever going to challenge your ideas - and you do yourself a grave disservice if you do that. As long as people maintain respect and civility, I think it is unrealistic and useless to think that politics will never come up on internet discussion boards like this one. Intellectually mature individuals can handle it when people present views that contradict the ones they have expressed.
"The truth is elegantly simple. The lie needs complex apologia. 4 simple words: Joe made it up. It answers everything with the perfect simplicity of Occam's Razor. Every convoluted excuse withers." - Some guy on Reddit called disposazelph

Blashyrkh
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2018 11:39 am

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Blashyrkh » Wed Jul 24, 2019 4:27 pm

I am not implying that politics can't be discussed here. However there is a civilized way of approaching it. When someone says "old-white men," yeah I find that offensive being an old-white man. What? Because I am old and white and a man my opinions and views are somehow negated? What if I were to refer to the mayor of SLC who has turned the city into a dump IMO as the ugly, old, rancid dyke? I wouldn't do that in normal conversation. Thats highly uncivilized and offensive. Rather, I would just refer to her as "the mayor of SLC who has turned SLC into a dump." Get it? Just because I find error with the church, which is the main focus of this sight, at least I thought so, does not mean that I have changed my political views. I am still as hard-right as I have ever been. Probably even more so as I gave up my compassionate side when I left the church. Bunch of effeminate, old, white men. 😜

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1298
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by alas » Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:07 pm

Blashyrkh wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 4:27 pm
I am not implying that politics can't be discussed here. However there is a civilized way of approaching it. When someone says "old-white men," yeah I find that offensive being an old-white man. What? Because I am old and white and a man my opinions and views are somehow negated? What if I were to refer to the mayor of SLC who has turned the city into a dump IMO as the ugly, old, rancid dyke? I wouldn't do that in normal conversation. Thats highly uncivilized and offensive. Rather, I would just refer to her as "the mayor of SLC who has turned SLC into a dump." Get it? Just because I find error with the church, which is the main focus of this sight, at least I thought so, does not mean that I have changed my political views. I am still as hard-right as I have ever been. Probably even more so as I gave up my compassionate side when I left the church. Bunch of effeminate, old, white men. 😜
Oh, so we can’t call the church leaders “old white men” but it is OK to call the “effeminate old white men.” :lol: Hey, I know I am one who probably used the “old white men” to describe church leaders. But see, the person in the whole world I love the most is an old white man, what’s worse is he is a Republican old white man. So, I am not using it at all to say that there is anything wrong with old white men as individuals. There are several old white men in my family, in my neighborhood, and on NOM that I really like. The problem with the particular old white men who run the church is that they do not comprehend their own privilege of growing up white, male, and many of them wealthy. And if they didn’t grow up well off, well they are now with all the perks the church gives them that they don’t pay tithing or taxes on lots of it. But the worst thing about them is they live in a bubble that contains a bunch of old white yes-men, and even some yes-women. They have no concept of the poor people they ask to pay tithing before buying groceries for their kids. So, “old white men is the politest thing I could call them, and I am truly sorry if I offended you by implying there is something wrong with old white men. There is nothing wrong with old white men. There is something wrong with living in the world and not respecting or really listening to the needs of people who are not in your demographic, any demographic. I also dislike some people of other demographics who disrespect anyone not in their demographic. I have run into a few blacks like this, and some Mormons, a few Catholics, and some medical doctors who disrespected anyone who wasn’t a doctor.

Wonderment
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 3:38 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Wonderment » Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:55 pm

Blashyrkh wrote:
Wed Jul 24, 2019 4:27 pm
I am not implying that politics can't be discussed here. However there is a civilized way of approaching it. When someone says "old-white men," yeah I find that offensive being an old-white man. What? Because I am old and white and a man my opinions and views are somehow negated? What if I were to refer to the mayor of SLC who has turned the city into a dump IMO as the ugly, old, rancid [expletive deleted]. I wouldn't do that in normal conversation. Thats highly uncivilized and offensive. Rather, I would just refer to her as "the mayor of SLC who has turned SLC into a dump." Get it? Just because I find error with the church, which is the main focus of this sight, at least I thought so, does not mean that I have changed my political views. I am still as hard-right as I have ever been. Probably even more so as I gave up my compassionate side when I left the church. Bunch of effeminate, old, white men. 😜I
The difference is that the SLC mayor does not enforce policies that discriminate against women, people of color, or straight people on the basis of her culture or on the basis of being a member of the gay community.
The church leaders, as a result of being members of the dominant power culture in this society, DO promote doctrine that considers women, gay people, non-Mormons as lesser than they are and therefore beneath them in hierarchy of dominance. As a result of their color and their gender, they consider themselves at the top of the hierarchy. But, that does not happen with the SLC mayor.

I don't believe that white people are being persecuted by people of color, or women, or gays, or anyone else. In fact, on NOM, I never see the topic of "old white men" brought up unless it is in reference to church leaders and their doctrine of creating a religious hierarchy that places them as superior and places everyone else beneath them. - Wndr.

Thoughtful
Posts: 947
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:54 pm

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Thoughtful » Wed Jul 24, 2019 10:24 pm

So my work filters NOM so no breaktime posts and I'm trying to be present with family. I love the BB format on a computer because I type 100wpm. Phone typing is annoying. But that's what I'm doing rn.

That said, I haven't been around to even read lately.

Facebook overview right now:


FMH- nearly everyone is disillusioned with the church and its turning into a postmo ladies chat room. Occasionally church or mfm topics.

ExII is being heavily moderated to enforce prioritizing POC, trans, and orher minority voices to the point its impossible to have a convo without the PC police attacking you for using the wrong word and following you to DMs.

A Thoughtful Faith imploded. Waters of Mormon is the resurrect?

TT and Wardless fizzled a bit recently with the arrival of ME on the scene which is hosted by half a dozen postmo celebs who are also life coaches and/or selling MLM diets. Its growing too fast to be sustainable and filling up with very young, folk who are like, oh so amazed by the issues and don't want to research them but don't know how to tell the truth from a hole in their ass. And many were never engaged as adults, hated the church growing up and are piling on to jointly hate mormon culture. Its quickly shifting negative and superficial.

Kiwimormon isn't blogging as much because she's podcasting like mad.

So honestly this group seems pretty stable by contrast. And people here have explored the rabbit hole pretty thoroughly.

User avatar
Just This Guy
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 3:30 pm
Location: Almost Heaven

Re: Is NOM going the direction of some other online groups?

Post by Just This Guy » Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:45 am

I haven't posted as much as I would like lately because typing is still difficult for me. Can't wait to get this damn cast off...

As far as politics goes, Due to how enmeshed the church is with Uath, I think it's impossible to avoid it while talking about Mormonism. However, I do have an issue with some politics that don't relate to Mormonism.

There are some poster who do come here to post jokes or digs at the current president. I consider that disrespectful to the tens of millions of people who voted for him and do support him. At the same time I would find similar jokes and digs at Mrs. Clinton just as disrespectful. ~20% of the US population voted for Trump. ~20% of the US population Hillary. It doesn't matter their reasons, they did it. Lets be honest, Trump is about as well liked as any president in the last 30 years. Nothing has really changed.

There was an article I read a couple weeks ago talking about a study on people's understanding of the beliefs of the opposite political party. They found that the more extreme your political beliefs, more less likely people are to actually really understand what the other party really believes in and the more likely they are to think of the opposite party in a characture / straw man.

I find DC politics to be tiring. I can see how someone could come to this board and see a left leaning group and see them as being unwelcoming to someone who leans right. One thing we all need to keep in mind is that most of us were more right leaning before we left the church. Over time our politics evolved as we left Mormonism. We need to allow the same space for people to find their own political footing and be willing to accept their viewed if they don't match ours. As long as they are respectful, all sides should be considered.

My recommendation to the NOM staff would be to keep politics to the relationship with Mormonism and leave out politics if it does not. There is plenty of places elsewhere for politics. (News, Facebook, Redit,etc.) I like being able to get away from it here on NOM.
"The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -- Douglas Adams

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests