Replacing the New Order Mormon

[stuck]

I was active on NOM for a long, long time - under a different username for many years, and then after doxxing myself like an idiot one Halloween unmasking, in 2016 had to switch to my present username.

When I first joined NOM, the "middle way" really was the ethos. I was perhaps not as patient with that approach as I should have been, and perhaps posted some things not in keeping with that ethos. Mine was not a voice who supported that, for better or worse. But there was a time I really needed this site - I had no one else to talk to, this was pretty much it, and I will be forever grateful to a community of people I never met in person where I could process my feelings about discovering the Church wasn't what it claimed to be.

I don't know that I blame anyone at NOM for making this forum less "middle way" focused over the years - I will always maintain the Church itself makes a "middle way" an untenable option. When someone said earlier in this (very old) discussion that the forum had become more like group therapy, I think that was inevitable. Mormonism is a "my way or the highway" religion.

I don't come by much anymore - I am one of the lucky ones, a few years ago the spouse I never thought would come around listened to a YouTube personality who was saying the same thing I'd been telling her for years (I'm just glad she finally listened to somebody), and we are well and truly out. I have some survivor's guilt over that, because I know for many of you it won't work out that way.

I think there will always be a need for a place where those stuck in the Church with no hope of escape can come and find their people, a place where they can find a listening ear, a place where they can process, a place where they can find acceptance. That is what NOM was for me. I hope that is what NOM will always be for anyone who needs it like I did.

I agree with Not Buying It. It's great to have a place where we can come and vent and also listen to what others in our "shoes" are going through. Hopefully we can keep it going for a few more years if not decades.

[Cnsl1]

Whoever has been keeping the lights on in this place, thank you.

And thanks to all who have opened their hearts and doubts and difficulties and shared them so others could read and relate.

I found this place many years ago and it felt like I landed on an Island after being adrift and feeling alone. I found hundreds of other ship wrecked survivors. Thank you.

Like many of ya'll, I thought I could stand and abide in the middle way, but it's rather hard. It's not that the middle way is no longer there, imo, but that change is constant. You can't stay put if you're still pursuing knowledge and want to learn. And probably can't stay put even if you want to. The world keeps moving around you so that where you planted your butt just isn't the same anymore.

So maybe this island isn't a place to live, but I think it's still a lighthouse. And I hope the light stays on. I think there are other poor seamen lost out there. Maybe we gotta shine the light a little brighter.

[moksha]

Or do we let this place go the way of all the others before it and let it rest? Things to think about but for now we’ve committed to another year.

I want this board to continue as much as I want the Church to continue.

The Church produces some wonderfully kind people. Many of my best neighbors have been LDS. Almost all the wonderful posters on this forum have been Mormon.

This board serves a niche that no other message forum serves. It lends itself to an examination of Mormon issues that are neither strident nor covered with a gooey sugar-coating.

As far as readers, maybe we should ask some podcasters to mention this board. I volunteer to ask the Backyard Professor, and if some others can volunteer to ask RFM (Hagoth?)***, Bill Reel, Rebecca Biblioteca, John Dehlin, and Nuance Hoe, that will be a valiant attempt that will well serve us in the hereafter.



***Wouldn't it be great to see Hagoth on the Radio Free Mormon podcast?

[Just This Guy]

As far as readers, maybe we should ask some podcasters to mention this board. I volunteer to ask the Backyard Professor, and if some others can volunteer to ask RFM (Hagoth?)***, Bill Reel, Rebecca Biblioteca, John Dehlin, and Nuance Hoe, that will be a valiant attempt that will well serve us in the hereafter.



***Wouldn't it be great to see Hagoth on the Radio Free Mormon podcast?

Radio Free Mormon posted on NOM 1.0 on a semi regular basis. Bill showed up as well on occasion. I don't think either of them made it to NOM 2.0. I don't know if there is any way to get them to come back. Their Facebook/Youtube pages are not conductive for in-dept conversations.

[Mayan_Elephant]

As far as readers, maybe we should ask some podcasters to mention this board. I volunteer to ask the Backyard Professor, and if some others can volunteer to ask RFM (Hagoth?)***, Bill Reel, Rebecca Biblioteca, John Dehlin, and Nuance Hoe, that will be a valiant attempt that will well serve us in the hereafter.



***Wouldn't it be great to see Hagoth on the Radio Free Mormon podcast?

Radio Free Mormon posted on NOM 1.0 on a semi regular basis. Bill showed up as well on occasion. I don't think either of them made it to NOM 2.0. I don't know if there is any way to get them to come back. Their Facebook/Youtube pages are not conductive for in-dept conversations.

Dehlin was on NOM regularly before the MOSTO got momentum.

[Dirty Bird]

Getting in touch with RFM, Bill, or John Dehlin will only make things worse on the site. They do everything they can to bring down the church, and they do it in a bad way. If you want to appeal to the DEI, men can become women, and let's worship wokeness crowd, then you should definitely cater to those three men. But it will make the site even less appealing to ex-Mormons like me who didn't join the woke cult after leaving Mormonism.

Talk to Jonathan Streeter, Midnight Mormons, and Mormons and ex-Mormons who don't worship the God of Wokeness. Talk to Fair, Don Bradley, or Rod Meldrume. As a business owner, I believe it's important not to limit myself to serving only one type of customer. And getting in touch with the most irritating anti-Mormons people in the world will kill this site even faster.

[Mayan_Elephant]

Getting in touch with RFM, Bill, or John Dehlin will only make things worse on the site. They do everything they can to bring down the church, and they do it in a bad way. If you want to appeal to the DEI, men can become women, and let's worship wokeness crowd, then you should definitely cater to those three men. But it will make the site even less appealing to ex-Mormons like me who didn't join the woke cult after leaving Mormonism.

Talk to Jonathan Streeter, Midnight Mormons, and Mormons and ex-Mormons who don't worship the God of Wokeness. Talk to Fair, Don Bradley, or Rod Meldrume. As a business owner, I believe it's important not to limit myself to serving only one type of customer. And getting in touch with the most irritating anti-Mormons people in the world will kill this site even faster.

This is true about the site. If it is a site for a single ideology, the targets of the inevitable name-calling will either not participate (as proven so far) or react to the name-calling then get shushed then get banned. For what it is worth - that is not unique to NOM. That is true for every conversation that is meant to provoke a reaction.

The irony is that the church that most of us old bastards knew was exactly that - a single ideology silo where nonconformity was met with judgment, shame and ridicule. If you didn't like it, you were free and welcome to change RTFN or GTFO.

[Hagoth]

Getting in touch with RFM, Bill, or John Dehlin will only make things worse on the site. They do everything they can to bring down the church, and they do it in a bad way. If you want to appeal to the DEI, men can become women, and let's worship wokeness crowd, then you should definitely cater to those three men. But it will make the site even less appealing to ex-Mormons like me who didn't join the woke cult after leaving Mormonism.

Talk to Jonathan Streeter, Midnight Mormons, and Mormons and ex-Mormons who don't worship the God of Wokeness. Talk to Fair, Don Bradley, or Rod Meldrume. As a business owner, I believe it's important not to limit myself to serving only one type of customer. And getting in touch with the most irritating anti-Mormons people in the world will kill this site even faster.

Well, arguing wokeness and anti-wokeness is the kind of dichotomy that probably should not enter into NOM discussion anyway. It's supposed to be a support forum for people who are trying to navigate difficult relationships with the church and loved ones who keep them connected to the church. Many of the people here lean somewhat liberal and it has always been that way. Attacking people because they are sensitive and supportive of their LGBTQ loved ones really shouldn't have a place here.

As far as I can tell there is no woke cult except in the minds of people like Ron DeSantis and the ultra-conservative media. There is no black/white woke/not-woke. Sure, there are very bad examples you can point to and give them all the negative attention as the face of "wokeness" but they only represent themselves, not any broad swath of humanity. A lot of people you might consider "woke" are the worst examples of what I would consider "not-woke." They want to call everyone a Nazis and bigots. From my point of view, those people are just as "non-woke" in their own way as the people they are accusing.

From my real-life experience there is a wide spectrum of degrees to which people sympathize with and support people they care about regardless of how marginalized they are by the common "non-woke" culture. Personally I hate the term "woke" because it is used as a meaningless all-encompassing term to demonize people who are, like the rest of us, just doing the best they can. Like it or not, you are "woke" in your own ways, DB. Anyone who is not "woke" to the feelings of others who are unlike themselves is a narcissistic sociopath, and you certainly are not that. As far as I'm concerned, it's much better to err on the side be too accepting and empathetic, if that's possible.

Maybe you can think of it this way. If someone insists that they are "not-woke" maybe that's exactly what they are. Still asleep. If that's the case, their criticism of people they consider "woke" is entirely meaningless because they simply can't put themselves into the mind of someone who has moved on to a place they have not yet been. I'm not talking about the cartoonish media-hogging "woke" people. Many people who were once very conservative and bigoted, myself included, have had the experience of "waking up" from a smaller internal world to a larger one, where they discover the great joy and freedom letting go of some of hatred and fear and the need to pack people into artificial containers. I still have a LONG way to go, but it turns out some of the people I would never have associated with 10 years ago have turned out to be the most amazing and wonderful people in my life.

If that is woke I don't ever want to fall back asleep.

[Hagoth]

This is true about the site. If it is a site for a single ideology, the targets of the inevitable name-calling will either not participate (as proven so far) or react to the name-calling then get shushed then get banned. For what it is worth - that is not unique to NOM. That is true for every conversation that is meant to provoke a reaction.

You might also take into account that most people here don't want this site to be about debate and argument. Like it or not, NOM is by design somewhat of an echo chamber for people who are mentally out of the church but with one foot still stuck in it, who want a safe place for support and sharing, Time and time again we have seen people who have a problem with that, and who feel like it is their job to shake things up, being frustrated by the poor reception they receive. If anyone thinks they are going to enlighten the wise members of this forum and steer them in a new direction they will probably be sadly disappointed at the difficulty of herding cats, and the fact that they will just ignored for the most part. NOM is a small forum with a pretty narrow purpose. Too much preaching and lectures just makes it get smaller.

[Mayan_Elephant]

This is true about the site. If it is a site for a single ideology, the targets of the inevitable name-calling will either not participate (as proven so far) or react to the name-calling then get shushed then get banned. For what it is worth - that is not unique to NOM. That is true for every conversation that is meant to provoke a reaction.

You might also take into account that most people here don't want this site to be about debate and argument. Like it or not, NOM is by design somewhat of an echo chamber for people who are mentally out of the church but with one foot still stuck in it, who want a safe place for support and sharing, Time and time again we have seen people who have a problem with that, and who feel like it is their job to shake things up, being frustrated by the poor reception they receive. If anyone thinks they are going to enlighten the wise members of this forum and steer them in a new direction they will probably be sadly disappointed at the difficulty of herding cats, and the fact that they will just ignored for the most part. NOM is a small forum with a pretty narrow purpose. Too much preaching and lectures just makes it get smaller.

We agree on all points. Yes, it is an echo chamber. Yes, it is for people who want a safe space. Yes, people will push back against it. Yes, preached enlightenment ain't gonna work. Yes, the forum is small and narrow. And yes, preaching shrinks the joint. All points are acknowledged and true to me.

For some reason, the other truths about the forum, about exmormon forums, about this forum, and about conversations in general seem to be true but not acknowledged. Let me just throw a few things out there. When ridiculously bigoted comments are made, albeit in jest, the forum is no longer a safe space for some members of the forum. MEXICANS STEAL HUBCAPS. GAYS GROOM KIDS. IF YOU VOTE FOR TRUMP YOU ARE A RACIST. MORMONS ARE NAZI FASCIST HATEFUL POS's. Notice, I did not say ALL Nazis. Obviously, Mexicans, The Gays, Made Great Americans, and Mormons are no longer welcome here. Right? There's the door >>>>, assholes.

I am not preaching or asking for changes. Simply put, the truths acknowledged by both of us in this conversation are not the whole truth. What we agree on are the conditions for participation. I have been on this forum for almost 20 years - in fits and starts. I may have been on here before anyone that has posted in the last year. I think raging against the machine is awesome and healthy. I have seen the waves in the group and in individuals and I like it. I think though, that hating people makes the joint only safe for like-hateful hive minds - and that ain't good.

[Cnsl1]

Great points, Hagoth.

[Cnsl1]

Great points, Hagoth.

[Hagoth]

This is true about the site. If it is a site for a single ideology, the targets of the inevitable name-calling will either not participate (as proven so far) or react to the name-calling then get shushed then get banned. For what it is worth - that is not unique to NOM. That is true for every conversation that is meant to provoke a reaction.

You might also take into account that most people here don't want this site to be about debate and argument. Like it or not, NOM is by design somewhat of an echo chamber for people who are mentally out of the church but with one foot still stuck in it, who want a safe place for support and sharing, Time and time again we have seen people who have a problem with that, and who feel like it is their job to shake things up, being frustrated by the poor reception they receive. If anyone thinks they are going to enlighten the wise members of this forum and steer them in a new direction they will probably be sadly disappointed at the difficulty of herding cats, and the fact that they will just ignored for the most part. NOM is a small forum with a pretty narrow purpose. Too much preaching and lectures just makes it get smaller.

We agree on all points. Yes, it is an echo chamber. Yes, it is for people who want a safe space. Yes, people will push back against it. Yes, preached enlightenment ain't gonna work. Yes, the forum is small and narrow. And yes, preaching shrinks the joint. All points are acknowledged and true to me.

For some reason, the other truths about the forum, about exmormon forums, about this forum, and about conversations in general seem to be true but not acknowledged. Let me just throw a few things out there. When ridiculously bigoted comments are made, albeit in jest, the forum is no longer a safe space for some members of the forum. MEXICANS STEAL HUBCAPS. GAYS GROOM KIDS. IF YOU VOTE FOR TRUMP YOU ARE A RACIST. MORMONS ARE NAZI FASCIST HATEFUL POS's. Notice, I did not say ALL Nazis. Obviously, Mexicans, The Gays, Made Great Americans, and Mormons are no longer welcome here. Right? There's the door >>>>, assholes.

I am not preaching or asking for changes. Simply put, the truths acknowledged by both of us in this conversation are not the whole truth. What we agree on are the conditions for participation. I have been on this forum for almost 20 years - in fits and starts. I may have been on here before anyone that has posted in the last year. I think raging against the machine is awesome and healthy. I have seen the waves in the group and in individuals and I like it. I think though, that hating people makes the joint only safe for like-hateful hive minds - and that ain't good.

Good points, all. That's why my first response is generally some sort of reminder that we are talking about people, and although some people fit extreme catagories very well, the vast majority do not. And everything that one putative "side" accuses the other side of doing, you can be pretty certain that they are doing the same thing in their own way.

Some examples of "woke"-level sensitivities from far-right voices who get all butt-hurt and claim their religion is under attack:
- Someone wishing you Happy Holidays
-Starbucks putting a cartoon of people holding hands on their cup, and then equal outrage when they leave it blank
-Putting all of the Potato Head parts in the same box
-The green M&M wearing sensible shoes
-Whole Foods
-Water-efficient dishwashers
-Someone putting pronouns under their name to help clarify who their correspondent is talking to
-Etc, etc, etc.

p.s. I got a kick out of your overemphasis of the smiley face.

[Hagoth]

I apologize for getting tangentially political here. Somehow I thought I was in the Coffee Shop. I will gladly delete anything I said here if asked to.

[Mayan_Elephant]

You might also take into account that most people here don't want this site to be about debate and argument. Like it or not, NOM is by design somewhat of an echo chamber for people who are mentally out of the church but with one foot still stuck in it, who want a safe place for support and sharing, Time and time again we have seen people who have a problem with that, and who feel like it is their job to shake things up, being frustrated by the poor reception they receive. If anyone thinks they are going to enlighten the wise members of this forum and steer them in a new direction they will probably be sadly disappointed at the difficulty of herding cats, and the fact that they will just ignored for the most part. NOM is a small forum with a pretty narrow purpose. Too much preaching and lectures just makes it get smaller.

We agree on all points. Yes, it is an echo chamber. Yes, it is for people who want a safe space. Yes, people will push back against it. Yes, preached enlightenment ain't gonna work. Yes, the forum is small and narrow. And yes, preaching shrinks the joint. All points are acknowledged and true to me.

For some reason, the other truths about the forum, about exmormon forums, about this forum, and about conversations in general seem to be true but not acknowledged. Let me just throw a few things out there. When ridiculously bigoted comments are made, albeit in jest, the forum is no longer a safe space for some members of the forum. MEXICANS STEAL HUBCAPS. GAYS GROOM KIDS. IF YOU VOTE FOR TRUMP YOU ARE A RACIST. MORMONS ARE NAZI FASCIST HATEFUL POS's. Notice, I did not say ALL Nazis. Obviously, Mexicans, The Gays, Made Great Americans, and Mormons are no longer welcome here. Right? There's the door >>>>, assholes.

I am not preaching or asking for changes. Simply put, the truths acknowledged by both of us in this conversation are not the whole truth. What we agree on are the conditions for participation. I have been on this forum for almost 20 years - in fits and starts. I may have been on here before anyone that has posted in the last year. I think raging against the machine is awesome and healthy. I have seen the waves in the group and in individuals and I like it. I think though, that hating people makes the joint only safe for like-hateful hive minds - and that ain't good.

Good points, all. That's why my first response is generally some sort of reminder that we are talking about people, and although some people fit extreme catagories very well, the vast majority do not. And everything that one putative "side" accuses the other side of doing, you can be pretty certain that they are doing the same thing in their own way.

Some examples of "woke"-level sensitivities from far-right voices who get all butt-hurt and claim their religion is under attack:
- Someone wishing you Happy Holidays
-Starbucks putting a cartoon of people holding hands on their cup, and then equal outrage when they leave it blank
-Putting all of the Potato Head parts in the same box
-The green M&M wearing sensible shoes
-Whole Foods
-Water-efficient dishwashers
-Someone putting pronouns under their name to help clarify who their correspondent is talking to
-Etc, etc, etc.

p.s. I got a kick out of your overemphasis of the smiley face.

The woke party party does not have a monopoly on victimization. The anti-woke anti-party party does not have a monopoly on victimization. Neither does either party have own all the triggers, aggression or aggrievances.

I think talking about the the actual issues without putting millions of not-known people under a metaphorical bus is helpful. You mentioned pronouns. I think that is a great conversation to have. I know people that would not interview a person that had pronouns in their linked in bio or on a resume. You may think that is rude, mean, bigoted, racist or awful. Just know that people I know who have said that are not just rabid evangelist MAGA Q Nazis. (I have never met one of those people). Rather, they are people that just don't want to work with someone that doesn't get drawn into that drama.

[Mayan_Elephant]

I apologize for getting tangentially political here. Somehow I thought I was in the Coffee Shop. I will gladly delete anything I said here if asked to.

Please do not remove the conversation. But, if you prefer to move it, I would understand.

There is no tangential with politics and the exmormon community. That ship has left the station barn. Inciting or inciteful, Dirty Bird made a great point and one that is worth considering. The exmormon communities and personalities have lined up and taken political sides. Just as exmormons see a homogenous block of political fascists in the mormon congregations - the exmormon community seems to have an ideological litmus test of their own.

Look what this patient genius said:

And everything that one putative "side" accuses the other side of doing, you can be pretty certain that they are doing the same thing in their own way.

To me, it is important that this conversation repeats, and repeats and repeats, again. Something has to give and I am hopeful that it will. I do not think that we need to carry the political litmus test over from a challenging affiliation with a damn jackassed church.

[Mayan_Elephant]

We agree on all points. Yes, it is an echo chamber. Yes, it is for people who want a safe space. Yes, people will push back against it. Yes, preached enlightenment ain't gonna work. Yes, the forum is small and narrow. And yes, preaching shrinks the joint. All points are acknowledged and true to me.

For some reason, the other truths about the forum, about exmormon forums, about this forum, and about conversations in general seem to be true but not acknowledged. Let me just throw a few things out there. When ridiculously bigoted comments are made, albeit in jest, the forum is no longer a safe space for some members of the forum. MEXICANS STEAL HUBCAPS. GAYS GROOM KIDS. IF YOU VOTE FOR TRUMP YOU ARE A RACIST. MORMONS ARE NAZI FASCIST HATEFUL POS's. Notice, I did not say ALL Nazis. Obviously, Mexicans, The Gays, Made Great Americans, and Mormons are no longer welcome here. Right? There's the door >>>>, assholes.

I am not preaching or asking for changes. Simply put, the truths acknowledged by both of us in this conversation are not the whole truth. What we agree on are the conditions for participation. I have been on this forum for almost 20 years - in fits and starts. I may have been on here before anyone that has posted in the last year. I think raging against the machine is awesome and healthy. I have seen the waves in the group and in individuals and I like it. I think though, that hating people makes the joint only safe for like-hateful hive minds - and that ain't good.

Good points, all. That's why my first response is generally some sort of reminder that we are talking about people, and although some people fit extreme catagories very well, the vast majority do not. And everything that one putative "side" accuses the other side of doing, you can be pretty certain that they are doing the same thing in their own way.

Some examples of "woke"-level sensitivities from far-right voices who get all butt-hurt and claim their religion is under attack:
- Someone wishing you Happy Holidays
-Starbucks putting a cartoon of people holding hands on their cup, and then equal outrage when they leave it blank
-Putting all of the Potato Head parts in the same box
-The green M&M wearing sensible shoes
-Whole Foods
-Water-efficient dishwashers
-Someone putting pronouns under their name to help clarify who their correspondent is talking to
-Etc, etc, etc.

p.s. I got a kick out of your overemphasis of the smiley face.

The woke party party does not have a monopoly on victimization. The anti-woke anti-party party does not have a monopoly on victimization. Neither does either party own all the triggers, aggression or aggrievances.

I think talking about the the actual issues without putting millions of not-known people under a metaphorical bus is helpful. You mentioned pronouns. I think that is a great conversation to have. I know people that would not interview a person that had pronouns in their linked in bio or on a resume. You may think that is rude, mean, bigoted, racist or awful. Just know that people I know who have said that are not just rabid evangelist MAGA Q Nazis. (I have never met one of those people). Rather, they are people that just don't want to work with someone that gets drawn into that drama.

[Ghost]

I'm personally in favor of keeping popular political controversies somewhat quarantined at NOM. While it's true that they are important and can't always be separated from other topics, it's always been kind of nice to have at least one place to go where the discussion isn't dominated by such things. It's not so much about feeling "safe" from particular ideas as about hearing them endlessly rehashed everywhere.

At the same time, some topics are entirely relevant and interesting, such as the phenomenon that those who question or leave Mormonism often suddenly take strong positions along political lines that are quite different from their prior strong positions.

I wouldn't necessarily want to discourage any of the conversation in this thread (and I don't think it would matter if I did) but I also would be disappointed if half the threads here became infected with the same arguments about the same controversies that you hear everywhere else these days.

Maybe there's a good balance that involves collective preference rather than rules. Kind of like how NOM has always tended to avoid vulgar language. As far as I know, there have never been rules against that. (Is there even moderation at NOM? I have no idea.) But everyone has always seemed to maintain that practice so not to drive off questioning Mormons who might otherwise see this as just another angry, histrionic place.

[deacon blues]

I'm late to this discussion, but I like it.
I like the idea of trying to empathize with those who disagree with me, even though sometimes I let emotion take over and get pissed off.
Ideas that seem weird or crazy to me but still make sense to others like: flat earth, young earth, Trump as the solution, etc.
For some reason they make sense to others. Why? I try and set a time goal like ten minutes, or even an hour, and focus on what makes the other person believe that.
For example: Young Earthers have lots of reasons why they believe the earth was created 6,000 or 10,000 years ago. What are those reasons? Make a list of them. Are some more universally believed or understood than others?
I still go back and read the Book of Mormon and apply chiasmus and other examples. They can seem compelling in the LDS context.
Just as I have reasons for not believing the BOM is historical, others have reasons to believe. And I used to believe.
Humility is understanding that we would could be wrong. But maybe I'm wrrong.

[alas]

I'm late to this discussion, but I like it.
I like the idea of trying to empathize with those who disagree with me, even though sometimes I let emotion take over and get pissed off.
Ideas that seem weird or crazy to me but still make sense to others like: flat earth, young earth, Trump as the solution, etc.
For some reason they make sense to others. Why? I try and set a time goal like ten minutes, or even an hour, and focus on what makes the other person believe that.
For example: Young Earthers have lots of reasons why they believe the earth was created 6,000 or 10,000 years ago. What are those reasons? Make a list of them. Are some more universally believed or understood than others?
I still go back and read the Book of Mormon and apply chiasmus and other examples. They can seem compelling in the LDS context.
Just as I have reasons for not believing the BOM is historical, others have reasons to believe. And I used to believe.
Humility is understanding that we would could be wrong. But maybe I'm wrrong.

I make an effort to understand both sides. For example, I have family that is lesbian, trans, and asexual. But I try to understand the reasons people object to marriage equality or trans women playing against biological (don’t know a better word when “cis” doesn’t feel right) women. Sometimes I can actually understand their point. But it always helps me not to hate them.

So, I actually talk to real live people who support Trump, and I don’t fly a gay flag because then they wouldn’t talk to me. But I do talk about my daughter and her wife. Or my trans in-law who hasn’t come out to her parents.

I try through my conversation to help them understand me.

I read more right wing news than left. I guess I know how the left feel about stuff, but I try to understand people who think different. Of course, I half joke that I do it so that I know what the enemy is up to. And it is hard not to let the algorithms that decide what news you get to see take me down a right wing rabbit hole. I have to keep telling my news feed to stop following that rabbit hole. I wish there was some way to instruct the algorithms to take a flying leap. But everything now is ruled by algorithms. So, I try to follow things like the newspaper out of Boise, because I am a resident of Idaho, (and there are few Idaho newspapers) and a couple of papers out of SLC, because as snowbirds, what goes on in Utah is important , and one newspaper in StGeorge because that is closest to home #2. Then I read a couple of independent newspapers who don’t have any supper rich guy telling them what to print, and Faux News for the enemy point of view.