If it’s true the easily offended are rising up, doesn’t that bode well the enemies of Mormonism, which has an endless supply of potentially offensive beliefs & practices?

Is it the keyboard army of the offended bringing down the beast?

I think it is the keyboard army typing out facts and evidence of the fraud that is bringing down the beast.

Assault them on both fronts!

I really hate that term SNOWFLAKE, and absolutely DESPISE the fat bigoted man who made up that term on his radio show.

What is bringing down Mormonism? Common sense and decency. People don't like being lied to.

Dilly dilly!

Snickers said they really hated the term "snowflake".

To me it "snowflake" is short and sweet rather than saying "an overly sensitive or easily offended person, or one who believes they are entitled to special treatment on account of their supposedly unique characteristics".

It's like calling someone a "Mormon" rather than " a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter days saints".

But, ugh..."snowflake generation" implies that a whole generation of people are overly sensitive. That's one generalization too far. Besides this term is also often used to unfairly delegitimize people speaking out against racism, homophobia and other awful stuff. In other words, calling on people to be decent human beings. You got a problem with that? Okay, argue the issue rather than call names.

Look, I understand that people can get hypersensitive persecution complexes. Look at Mormons, they go off the deep end about persecutions when you point out that Joseph Smith was a liar. For some of them, you might as well have called for the next Haun's Mill or extermination order to say such a thing. But I don't need to call them names, because I can explain the distinction.

Mormons are free to worship Joseph Smith's golden plates until they're blue in the face--but I just choose not participate, because he was a liar and not worth my time.


Besides...get enough snowflakes and its a snowball coming right at you!

Your definition of snowflake when used as a political insult is accurate enough. What is really irritating about it is the massive irony when the people who usually hurl the "snowflake" insult are the exact same people who are afflicted with a severe case of pearl-clutching when they hear someone say "Happy Holidays"

"Over-sensitivity" is in the eye of the beholder.

And on point of the thread - what is destroying Mormonism is that it is theologically bollocks, and socially not worth the social cost. It's a handy support system for a BIC Mormon transferred to Atlanta. For most others, it is not worth the cost.

I would go a step farther.

Those who describe others as "snowflakes" are usually the ones who are offended to see their own racial and cultural privileges melting away. Rather than address the arguments, the aggrieved denigrate their opponents.

The inanity of the term is evident in the topic of this thread. Are we really arguing that those with the wisdom and strength to walk away from an abusive cult are somehow weaker than the masochists who stay?

The only people I have heard use the term "Snowflake" in real life to describe someone or deride them are a$$holes.

Trying to set up divisions between generations, age groups, social classes is a tactic of the right wing to institute authoritarian beliefs of self superiority.

I am 69 and have been called a snowflake numerous times because of my political beliefs.I am far from being a Millenial I don't melt down, but I do not like name calling and insults.That is especially true when the name caller can't even express what he believes, isn't interested in facts and cant a construct a grammatical sentence!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2019 09:35AM by anybody.

I have a hard time with any post using the term 'snowflake'

yes I’m angry that I raised my children to believe in a false religion founded with lies.

or if you can't sit in a college classroom and have fellow students express worldviews that differ from yours.

You are a SNOWFLAKE. (And it's not a good thing to be).

Each successive generation will move further away from the myth of Smithism.

Think how far we've progressed in just the past 25 years. Then the last 50 years. 75 years, 100. You get the idea.

It's a paradigm shift made by progress. Like a form of evolution. Things don't stay the same, and values like ideas take on new meaning in time.

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Think how far we've progressed in just the past 25 years.


Hmmm...I'm thinking, I'm thinking, maybe I'll think some more...trying to find the "progress."

I'd agree there's been substantial progress in explaining and understanding Mormon history, theology, and mind control. If I then concluded that societies and nations were progressing because of my own enhanced awareness of my former religion, then that could very well make me...let me find some neutral, non-triggering words for this...a small, precarious, and admittedly unique crystalline structure composed of frozen water.

I have a real issue with snowflake as well. The term automatically dismisses a person's opinions without proper evaluation of them and solid reasons offered to the contrary. It's a bully tactic. It also assumes all "SnowFlakes" are alike and they are not.

That said, a big dose of true empathy on top of the damning facts the Mormon's church is facing would help push a lot of members over the edge I hope.

The Mormon Niagra Falls of faith has become more of a trickle down a few rocks people are holding onto as facts surface. If you read the facts and then add that to how Mormons and their trusty leaders treat and marginalize good people, damage families, maybe that could trigger an avalanche.

“The Mormon Niagra Falls of faith has become more of a trickle down a few rocks people are holding onto as facts surface.”

But it’s a hell of a barrel ride.

Haha. Yes. What a ride.

I felt like I sort of did it with a snorkel, inner tube, and swim fins though with my hands in the air yelling "Wheeeee" on the way down.

Exactly. LOL. At the end, we shouted, "Let's do it again!"

IMO, the main force is the older folks, who retain the memories of what actually happened,as opposed to what the church likes to tell people about their past. Then the younger people can see the disconnect.

It's like what happened in the US in 1971 with the publication of the Pentagon Papers relating to Viet Nam.

I think there are two dynamics at work. The first is what you describe: older people see the lies and tergiversation, and some of them leave.

Younger people, by contrast, are raised in a system that has utterly nothing to do with them. They never buy into the system, so it's easy to leave.

My hunch is that the latter is the bigger problem. So many of us feel deceived and betrayed by people and institutions we trusted: we feel angry. We fight against the church and we rage. We are, in other words, still struggling.

If I were the church, I'd worry more about the younger generation. The opposite of love is not hate but indifference.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The opposite of love is not
> hate but indifference.

So true. And the opposite of smart is not stupid but ignorance. Stupid is ignoring smartness.

I had to look up 'tergiversation.'

Tergiversation | Definition of Tergiversation by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tergiversation
Tergiversation definition is - evasion of straightforward action or clear-cut statement : equivocation.

tergiversation - Wiktionary
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tergiversation
tergiversation (countable and uncountable, plural tergiversations). The act of abandoning something or someone, of changing sides; desertion; betrayal.

Oxford Encyclopedic English Dictionary:

1) apostatize; change one's party or principles,

2) equivocate, make conflicting or evasive statements,

3) turn one's back on something,

I've also seen 4) to vacillate on moral principles.



In my view tergiversation is an excellent description of LDS practice. It 1) constantly changes its principles; 2) routinely equivocates and obfuscates; 3) incessantly turns its back on its own history, doctrine, and people; and 4) frequently reverses itself on issues of morality.

The Mormon Church constantly proclaims itself God's arbiter of morality on earth but is in fact a pretentious body with no enduring principle other than self-interest. It's hard for me to imagine better examples of tergiversation.

For me, Mormonism is like spaghetti, you may try to loosen the strings but the chaos seldomly straightens just like that.

...wrong. Tergiversation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQegs2a_aw8

HA, those of you complaining about the term snowflake. Can't you see you're just enforcing the label on your self.

Except that we are not complaining on our own behalf. We are saying it is wrong to call a generation of people "snowflakes."

More generally, if Jack calls Jill a "jerk" and Jill objects, by your logic that proves Jill is indeed a jerk. Correct? Or is she just a "snowflake?"

When you say "we" do you mean everyone complaining . . . or just those who are complaining for the same reason you are?

Doesn't everyone understand that about generalizations? They aren't universal truths?

I scoffed when I heard the term snowflake generation. I thought it was ridiculous. But, like I like to do, I thought about it and started to observe (i think) the absurd demands for apologies, hyper-sensitivity, easily-offended ---- and I did start to wonder if it was more pronounced in certain generations or manifesting itself in a different way in certain generations.

Anyways, in the midst of that it did cross my mind that if this so-called increase in snowflakes existed, perhaps that would be a bad thing for the mormon church.

I am objecting to the description of an entire generation as "snowflakes." I think that level of generalization is per se ridiculous and also inaccurate with regard to many or most of the people who are the object of the calumny.

As for me, I really don't care if I am called a "snowflake"--as I have been multiple times on RfM. I think I even adopted that moniker a few times because I like irony.

I agree with you that young people who won't put up with stupidity are bad for the Mormon church, but I don't think disrespect for a cult is a sign of weakness. It strikes me as an indication of strength.

Nope. The Know Flake Mormons are. They know it isn't true and flake away from it.

Those "little flecks" of Mormon History are pretty big flakes.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Flake

I was promised happiness and all I got was guilt, worry, temple-created consternation and a big fat promise of nothing but a network of people I could codependently confirm groupthinking with.

the term "snow flake" damn sure is intended to be an insult,


would not it have been more accurate and to the point to say:
"the current upcoming generation"

as well, "snow flake" is intended to be applied to those of the upcoming generation with a definite Leftist leaning as in it is NOT intended to apply to everyone in the current upcoming generation, even IF it might be applied to a significant portion of the current upcoming generation.

Yah, I know about the generation X label, and then it was Y and then it was Z, with the millennial label deal also covering some of that same territory.

so what is after Z ? ZZ ? I pretty much lost track of the actual distinctions between those groups designations somewhere between X (which mostly means NO longer Baby Boomer -which was grossly overused to ragged and extreme extent) These labels are supposed to be defining, and yet they somehow just turn into buzz words that do not mean so much, besides being attempted insults.

more to the point, MORmONISM and MORmONS are the biggest enemy that MORmONISM has ever had.

Snowflakes are (supposedly) all uniquely individual.
Snowflakes are natural, beautiful, complex.
Snowflakes are mortal -- born in a tumultuous storm, drift for a while, put down somewhere, then disappear without a trace.

Yeah, I don't like the way the ignorant use that term, either.
But I like my version of the analogy :)

This thread has been wandering this way and that. It's "the other side" that's populated by snowflakes. Perhaps we should agree upon just what a "snowflake" is. I see a snowflake as:

1) A person who melts upon criticism of his/her/its opinions
2) A person who has difficulty dealing with hostile invective, which causes
3) a person to retreat to a defensive "safe space"

If you find my generalization workable, then it's not the the political/religious/cultural liberals who are the snowflakes, but the Mormons, who avoid "anti-Mormon" literature, websites, and discussions--even to the point of shunning--when confronted with contrary persons and positions.

--the unsensitivefiend

My definition.

A pejorative euphemistic term designed to describe individuals being perceived as self-designated entitled in some way by the person using the term.

"A pejorative term used by people with one set of entitlements seeking to denigrate those seeking their own (often identical) set of entitlements."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2019 02:56PM by Lot's Wife.

You are "entitled" to your own definition no matter how susceptible to daytime temperatures it may be.

Let is snow, let it snow, let it snow...

Seriously, the issue is vs. Mormons, who are the snowflakes? And if we can agree that involves overly sensitive people and retreat to psychological safe spaces, then I think it's the Mormons.

Although your proposed usage is not how the word is usually deployed in public conversation, I'm comfortable with your reasoning. Using insults to cover a moral or intellectual retreat is cowardly, you fascist.

:P



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2019 03:26PM by Lot's Wife.

Remember, the Bolsheviks were actually the minority faction in the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party.

Never trust an election conducted under Russian influence.

Stupid Mensheviks.

Can we thrown Duane “the Rock” Johnson’s definition into the mix?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.yahoo.com/amphtml/entertainment/rock-says-generation-snowflake-putting-society-backwards-153231192.html

“That’s democracy. So many good people fought for freedom and equality — but this generation are looking for a reason to be offended. If you are not agreeing with them, then they are offended.”

The first line in that article reads:

"Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson doesn’t have any time for the “easily offended.”

I hope the irony was intentional.

So...Dwayne is offended by the easily offended? :)

Yes, that is the logical flaw.

If snowflakes are those who are easily offended, they fit in perfectly with Mormons who seem to thrive on being offended by a lot of silly little things: coffee, shoulders, non-white shirts, etc.

One of my TBM friends is very fond of saying, "I find that really offensive." Being offended by little things is what the Mormon church is all about; it's how they judge others and feel superior.

Yes, that is caffiend's observation.

And you two are correct.

Better chance than the baby boomer generation that is for sure.

jay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ihe enemies of Mormonism are Mormons themselves...
>
> Is it the keyboard army of the offended bringing down the beast?

No, it's the beast itself.

Smart people have nothing to do with TTC (The Terrible 'Church').

People are educating themselves and following their conscience.

People are listening to the still (too) small voice.

M@t

And yet again, this thread is one of the reasons I so love RFM. Never change.