Posted by:
imaworkinonit
(
)
Date: April 23, 2011 05:21PM
vs. the problems that come up in an ABUSIVE relationship or controlling church (or a cult).
The difference is in the way problems are worked out.
sukiyhtaky Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Deb, if that is your honest belief, then you have
> to by reason hate every church, every
> organization, every person, every everything on
> the face of the earth. There is not a single
> person who doesn't get offended or hurt by someone
> or something else at sometime in their life. I'm
> sure many have been offended and/or hurt by you.
> Is that reason for vilification? Really?
Normal people make mistakes. They sometimes do things that hurt other people, accidentally, or even on purpose. But good people or organizations learn from their mistakes, apologize, and try to make things right. Those are the types of people/organizations that you can work through past mistakes with and build a trusting or loving relationship with.
But abusive relationships don't work that way. In an abusive relationship or church, the abuser usually denies any wrongdoing, and often tries to shift the blame to the victim, often warping that persons sense of reality or self-worth.
Sukiyhtaky, your post was actually a mild example of manipulation/abuse. You implied that if Deb has surely hurt people in her life, and since she has, she has no right to complain. This is inappropriate because 1) You don't know Deb 2) You don't know how she interacts with people or how she has mended past mistakes 3) even if she HAD hurt people and hadn't mended it, that wouldn't mean she can't ever complain about mistreatment for the rest of her life.
One of the main things an abuser does is minimize the worth, abilities, feelings or thoughts of the abused person (like telling them they have no right to be upset because they aren't perfect, either ;-). The LDS church has this down to an art. Anyone who leaves supposedly did so because of sin (they are labeled as "bad", therefore minimizing the respect anyone in the church has for them); they read anti-mormon literature (they are supposedly "deceived" because they don't agree . . . and not only are they wrong, but they have supposedly sinned by even READING unapproved sources. This in itself is the topic of a discussion on a person or group who presumes to tell another what information they may access); or they were "offended" (overly sensitive and emotionally volitale).
By defending people's right to criticize the LDS church, I'm not recommending that people need to be angry at the LDS church their whole life because that would be a waste of energy. But there is nothing wrong with feeling appropriate anger over mistreatment. In fact, it's HEALTHY to be upset when you are mistreated. That's how you notice that you don't LIKE that kind of treatment and you deserve better.
The reverse IS a problem; when someone comes to ACCEPT mistreatment humbly and submissively, then they are broken.
This is a place for healing. Discussing the problems (as we do here on the board), affirming that the treatment was wrong (an essential step in healing from control and abuse), and learning to think about ourselves and interact with other people in a more healthy way is a POSITIVE thing.
And here's another parallel between people who leave the LDS church and those who leave abusive relationships: A lot of people who have not been on the receiving end of the abuse (or who accept that kind of behavior as normal) are perfectly willing to defend the abuser or turn a blind eye to the abuse, or even join the abuser in attacking the victim. We saw just a little bit of that today.