Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

DawnM

Can we talk about the John Crist situation without Christian bashing?

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, katilac said:

Not to mention that the tickets can cost far more than that: 

Currently, the maximum price for John Crist tickets is $928, a price that could apply to the best John Crist tickets available.

https://www.vividseats.com/theatre/john-crist-tickets.html

I saw him for $25 a ticket over the summer. 

ETA: after reading the original report, the cost of the tickets was completely irrelevant. He basically used the fan's desire for a free ticket to shame them into coming up to his hotel room. 

Edited by sassenach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My perspective is that of a person in church leadership who has walked through a great number of situations where someone in long-term, protracted sin gets "found out." 

First, it's an absolute grace of God that this all came out. John's career has exploded in the last few years and the fact that this all came out on the eve of his Netflix special is no accident. I believe that we're seeing the Lord's good discipline at work here. 

Strongholds cannot be conquered in the dark. I can imagine how someone who is trying to protect a public image could get mired in sin that they're afraid to confess to. I've seen it time and time again with non-famous people, so John's situation and that he's been fighting this for 7 years with no victory, doesn't surprise me. Trying hard not to sin while keeping your sin a secret always ends in defeat.  I hope he is experiencing the relief of no longer protecting a false image. 

No, I don't think his career will be the same. But I hope that by the time Jesus gets done with him, he wouldn't want his old life back.

As for the "open secret" thing, without being part of that community, it's hard to know what that means or whether he has been confronted. It's possible that people knew he was having sex, but who knows if anyone understood the coercive nature of these encounters. It's possible that people did confront him. Is it possible that everyone knew everything and turned a completely blind eye? Yes, but in my experience that's not how it usually goes down.

It's sad. Sin is always sad. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

Gosh, this just made me remember.

I don't know if he is a celebrity in the US, but in Canada we have a reality tv guy called Mike Holmes who is a contractor and his schtick is coming to homes that have been screwed up by immoral or incompetent contractors and fixing the problem.  He's a middle aged guy, nice enough looking a guess, sort of big and he has a soothing voice.

Anyway, he appeared one day on our local CBC lunchtime call in.  It's usually an expert who gives callers advice on something, car maintenance, pet training, gardening, whatever.  Callers will vary depending on what the topic is, as you'd expect. Mostly the experts aren't famous, beyond possibly have written a little book, they are just local people.

Anyway, the day MH was on, all of the callers were women, and they were just gushing and so, so weird. They also totally filled the lines for the whole program. Very much damsel in distress looking for a strong white knight sort of thing. I felt almost embarrassed - I get the appeal but I can't imagine talking to someone that way in a million years, much less on a public radio show! I got the impression he was used to that sort of thing but the host was a little gobsmacked.

I just googled him to see who you were talking about. The first "people also asked" question was "Is Mike Holmes married?"

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 10:40 PM, Ottakee said:

Sad but I am glad that he is admitting to his part and appears to be taking serious steps to address this issue.  Far better than many other situations I have seen in the church/Christian circles.

What does it mean when you say "admitting to his part"?

What other part would there be?

This seems like a dangerous slip of the keyboard, because it seems to imply that someone else was at fault. God? His victims? Who?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StephanieZ said:

What does it mean when you say "admitting to his part"?

What other part would there be?

Also, he says that he didn't do everything he's accused of doing. At this point, we don't know if he's being truthful about that or still trying to hide things (confessing only to what he really can't deny).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this part to be powerful (copied from the link above)

*******************

In the end, Sarah says the key to her emotional recovery has been remembering that one Christian's behavior is not a reflection of the character of Christ. And she holds out hope that Crist can one day be rehabilitated and reconciled back into the body of believers he has hurt—but for that to happen, he must first be held accountable.

"To be using the God that I know and I serve to be able to do this to people is just mind-boggling and so dangerous, and it has to stop," Sarah says. "... But God can use a really terrible situation for good. At this point even, I stand by: If John will do the work and John will truly repent and John will truly change, even John's story could be something absolutely phenomenal that could change lives for others. But until he actually does the work and actually changes, it's only going to continue." torch1.png

******************

As the ex-wife of a sex-offender, I have to agree.  Far too often the church just brushes these things under the rug and ignores the work that needs to go into change.  Rachel Denhollander Talks about it in her book, What Is a Girl Worth?  She says it so much better than I could ever do.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, sassenach said:

https://www.charismanews.com/us/78703-john-crist-cancels-2019-tour-dates-after-reports-of-sexting-harassment-manipulation

Here's the original story that broke this all open. Very detailed and very well-reported. 

The woman Kate in the story seems almost unbelievably naive and gullible. Who ever taught her that Christians don’t intentionally do bad things? Talk about being set up to be taken advantage of in one way or another. Has she never heard of sin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2019 at 10:38 AM, BlsdMama said:



I also don't know if his career will survive this and it's because most people differentiate between:
 

1. I did this and I am so sorry

vs.

2. I got busted for this and, oh, by the way, I am so sorry.

 

I’m honestly perplexed by this. Is it because he’s just a comedian, so doesn’t really have any real power or influence? Or because being a Christian was central to his act? Many Christians seems to regularly not only give a pass to very powerful people who regularly go against Christian teachings, sexual or otherwise, but even enthusiastically defend and support them. And most of the time these powerful people aren’t even admitting their sins. But I guess their Christian defenders and supporters are getting more than a few laughs in exchange, so maybe that explains the different treatment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frances said:

The woman Kate in the story seems almost unbelievably naive and gullible. Who ever taught her that Christians don’t intentionally do bad things? Talk about being set up to be taken advantage of in one way or another. Has she never heard of sin?

I think the idea that Christians don't intentionally do bad things is more common than you imagine. It's why businesses will list themselves in a Christian business directory or otherwise advertise that they are Christian. It's why so many parents worry less when their kids are at a youth group activity rather than elsewhere. It's why one of my local homeschool groups puts on a dance that is open to those outside the group, 'as long as they are of good Christian character.' 

ime, the more someone lives in a Christian 'bubble,' the more likely they are to believe this. 

1 hour ago, Frances said:

I’m honestly perplexed by this. Is it because he’s just a comedian, so doesn’t really have any real power or influence? Or because being a Christian was central to his act?  

Being a Christian was central to his act. I couldn't quite figure him out at first - my dd sent me his 'every parent at Disney World' clip and I thought it was funny so looked at some other clips. It was easy to see a lot of it had a Christian theme, but who was the audience? He's not Ricky Gervais level, but a lot of his bits seem mean-spirited enough that I didn't expect Christians to be fans. I was wrong, lol. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Meriwether said:

I just googled him to see who you were talking about. The first "people also asked" question was "Is Mike Holmes married?"

 

I guess he would have a lot of scope to be involved in some sort of home reno sex scandal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, sassenach said:

https://www.charismanews.com/us/78703-john-crist-cancels-2019-tour-dates-after-reports-of-sexting-harassment-manipulation

Here's the original story that broke this all open. Very detailed and very well-reported. 

 

Gosh, he really comes across as quite an unlikeable person, doesn't he ? 

I must admit I don't understand the woman who thought because he was Christian, he was trustworthy, even as he was singling her out from her boyfriend, providing her with alcohol and telling her he was 'enjoying the view'.

Is this really a thing people are taught to believe? It seems very harmful, given there are trustworthy and non-trustworthy people of all faiths and none.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can be sorry you got caught AND really and truly sorry for your actions at the same time. We can't see inside his head or his heart. I'm hoping for his own good and others' good that he is truly repentant. 

I'd never heard of the guy before this thread. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Frances said:

The woman Kate in the story seems almost unbelievably naive and gullible. Who ever taught her that Christians don’t intentionally do bad things? Talk about being set up to be taken advantage of in one way or another. Has she never heard of sin?

She was pretty young, wasn’t she?  I used to be that naive and not about Christians in particular.  Growing up, the adults in my life were all nice to me and I figured that the vast majority of people were good and decent once they were grown. I knew that teenagers could be rotten, but I figured they were being a “rebellious teen” and would out grow it. 

I remember a friend of mine at age 17 being interested in a boy and telling her family, “He’s a good kid. He’s an eagle scout,” as if that would seal the deal that he simply *must* be an upstanding and decent person because he was an eagle scout.  I was 18 and figured that made sense.  Of course, her dad and my mom both snorted about the “good eagle scout” line and tried to explain to her that just because someone is an eagle scout, it doesn’t always mean they’re a good guy to date.  

There are a lot of young people who are sheltered and while they know there are bad people somewhere out there, they’re surprised when they meet one of them in person for the first time.  My own sons have never run into anyone who is manipulative and would intentionally take advantage of them.  They know people like that are out there, but knowing that there are people like that out there is different from confronting one.  It can take some time for it to finally sink in, “Hey...they guy is one of those bad people I heard mom warn me about!”  

It sounds like Kate figured it out within a day of meeting him, so I think she did pretty good in wising up to what was going on relatively quickly.  

Edited by Garga
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StellaM said:

Is this really a thing people are taught to believe? It seems very harmful, given there are trustworthy and non-trustworthy people of all faiths and none.

 

I was never expressly taught this view, but I did hold this view until in my early twenties, at least in reference to adults.  The adults in my life were kind to me and protective of me, so that’s what I figured most adults were like.  It was surprising to meet adults that were total jerks or manipulative, etc.  In that regard, my childhood was good—that the adults in my life were good to me.  I wasn’t abused.  

My mother did warn me about bad intentioned people and did try to teach me to be wise about people, but it was hard to fully understand what she meant until I met non-trustworthy people on my own.  I believed her that they were out there, but at the same time, I didn’t believe it.  If that makes sense—it’s one thing to know something is a fact because Mom tells you, but it’s another thing to know something is a fact from direct experience.

Edited by Garga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Garga said:

I was never expressly taught this view, but I did hold this view until in my early twenties, at least in reference to adults.  The adults in my life were kind to me and protective of me, so that’s what I figured most adults were like.  It was surprising to meet adults that were total jerks or manipulative, etc.  In that regard, my childhood was good—that the adults in my life were good to me.  I wasn’t abused.  

My mother did warn me about bad intentioned people and did try to teach me to be wise about people, but it was hard to fully understand what she meant until I met non-trustworthy people on my own.  I believed her that they were out there, but at the same time, I didn’t believe it.  If that makes sense—it’s one thing to know something is a fact because Mom tells you, but it’s another thing to know something is a fact from direct experience.

 

I am always happy when I hear someone had a great childhood 🙂 That's how it should be!

My surprise was more that people might be explicitly taught 'Oh, if they are a Christian, you can trust them!' (Christian in the context of this thread, I'd be just as surprised to hear a secular parent say 'Oh, if they are secular, they can be trusted!')

To me that's just - wow - that's not a helpful thing to teach young people. Many people are trustworthy, but not on the basis of a declared faith (or lack thereof), more on the basis of observable, repeated trustworthy behaviours, kwim? There are very trustworthy Christians out there for sure, but oh my goodness, if the trials here into child sex abuse and the Church has taught me anything, it's that professing a faith isn't any kind of guarantee.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, StellaM said:

 

I am always happy when I hear someone had a great childhood 🙂 That's how it should be!

My surprise was more that people might be explicitly taught 'Oh, if they are a Christian, you can trust them!' (Christian in the context of this thread, I'd be just as surprised to hear a secular parent say 'Oh, if they are secular, they can be trusted!')

To me that's just - wow - that's not a helpful thing to teach young people. Many people are trustworthy, but not on the basis of a declared faith (or lack thereof), more on the basis of observable, repeated trustworthy behaviours, kwim? There are very trustworthy Christians out there for sure, but oh my goodness, if the trials here into child sex abuse and the Church has taught me anything, it's that professing a faith isn't any kind of guarantee.

I wonder, too, if people are taught that “if they’re a Christian, you can trust them”?  It’s so dangerous if people are teaching their kids this. I have tried to expressly teach my own sons that that’s not always the case. I sure hope that now that so many scandals have come to light that this isn’t being taught.  There are even scriptures to beware wolves in sheep clothing and about judging a tree by its fruit—look at the person’s actions (fruit) to see if they’re trustworthy, etc, rather than blind trust.

I know my one son really liked John Crist’s humor. It’s with a heavy heart that I’m going to share the articles in this thread with him for the exact reason that I don’t want him to think he can trust someone is “good” just because they’re Christian. 

Edited by Garga
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Garga said:

She was pretty young, wasn’t she?  I used to be that naive and not about Christians in particular.  Growing up, the adults in my life were all nice to me and I figured that the vast majority of people were good and decent once they were grown. I knew that teenagers could be rotten, but I figured they were being a “rebellious teen” and would out grow it. 

I remember a friend of mine at age 17 being interested in a boy and telling her family, “He’s a good kid. He’s an eagle scout,” as if that would seal the deal that he simply *must* be an upstanding and decent person because he was an eagle scout.  I was 18 and figured that made sense.  Of course, her dad and my mom both snorted about the “good eagle scout” line and tried to explain to her that just because someone is an eagle scout, it doesn’t always mean they’re a good guy to date.  

There are a lot of young people who are sheltered and while they know there are bad people somewhere out there, they’re surprised when they meet one of them in person for the first time.  My own sons have never run into anyone who is manipulative and would intentionally take advantage of them.  They know people like that are out there, but knowing that there are people like that out there is different from confronting one.  It can take some time for it to finally sink in, “Hey...they guy is one of those bad people I heard mom warn me about!”  

It sounds like Kate figured it out within a day of meeting him, so I think she did pretty good in wising up to what was going on relatively quickly.  

I don’t think the article gave her age. I guess I assumed she was at least 21 since she was drinking with him and didn’t seem bothered by it. She also mentioned working on her career. I also grew up pretty sheltered just by virtue of living in a very small town and spending most of my time there or with extended family in other small towns or the countryside. Virtually everyone was Christian. IRL, I was never really exposed to anything inappropriate or bad. Still, I don’t recall ever thinking or being taught someone didn’t intentionally do bad things simply because they were Christian. I was taught that everyone sinned. And you certainly didn’t trust a man you just met enough to be alone with him, especially if alcohol was involved.

Edited to add that even as a young teen, I would have been snorting right along with the parents of the young girl who wanted to date an Eagle Scout and assumed therefore he must be a good person.

Edited by Frances
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing new here. Didn't know of him but Christian or no Christian, what does it matter? Can't speak to how serious / remorseful he truly is since I don't know him personally. Just like many before him, he is doing his Mea Culpa now - perhaps in hopes it will save his career, perhaps not. I agree with those who have expressed surprise that there still seems to be a notion that Christians don't do these kind of things. We have had so many examples of Christian leaders doing "this kind of thing." It can hardly come as a surprise.

Edited by Liz CA
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, StellaM said:

 

I am always happy when I hear someone had a great childhood 🙂 That's how it should be!

My surprise was more that people might be explicitly taught 'Oh, if they are a Christian, you can trust them!' (Christian in the context of this thread, I'd be just as surprised to hear a secular parent say 'Oh, if they are secular, they can be trusted!')

To me that's just - wow - that's not a helpful thing to teach young people. Many people are trustworthy, but not on the basis of a declared faith (or lack thereof), more on the basis of observable, repeated trustworthy behaviours, kwim? There are very trustworthy Christians out there for sure, but oh my goodness, if the trials here into child sex abuse and the Church has taught me anything, it's that professing a faith isn't any kind of guarantee.

I don't think it has to be taught. It is a natural in-group bias--these people can be trusted because they are my people.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, sassenach said:

https://www.charismanews.com/us/78703-john-crist-cancels-2019-tour-dates-after-reports-of-sexting-harassment-manipulation

Here's the original story that broke this all open. Very detailed and very well-reported. 

 

That all makes me sad.

For the record, from what John has said in his comedy, he was a homeschool kid, from the Atlanta area and I think his family has 8 kids.  His father was a pastor.

I think we, as parents, don't ever want to believe that our child could struggle with something like this and I want to believe that I have raised my boys to respect women, but something about reading this article makes my heart break for his family in their dealing with all of this.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, DawnM said:

 

That all makes me sad.

For the record, from what John has said in his comedy, he was a homeschool kid, from the Atlanta area and I think his family has 8 kids.  His father was a pastor.

I think we, as parents, don't ever want to believe that our child could struggle with something like this and I want to believe that I have raised my boys to respect women, but something about reading this article makes my heart break for his family in their dealing with all of this.

Maybe. Or maybe his family is where he learned this attitude about women. I mean, remember the swimmer that raped a woman and his father was all indignant his son was going to have his life ruined over a few minutes of action?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, did anyone else get the vibe that he was actually using the "I'm a sex addict" line as a way to manipulate women into sleeping with him or at least not reporting his behavior? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Maybe. Or maybe his family is where he learned this attitude about women. I mean, remember the swimmer that raped a woman and his father was all indignant his son was going to have his life ruined over a few minutes of action?

 

 

Maybe, although that wasn't the feeling I got when he talked about his youth or parents.  But I have no proof.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read the beginning of the article...And what Katie describes that happened is peppered with red flag after red flag after red flag. 

She also said she kept thinking, "This is kind of weird." 

It is those red flags that I taught my kids to notice, and that voice ( their own voice) that says...this is weird, this isn't right, what is going on here?

I never taught them...Trust someone bc they belong to XYZ group of bc it is Cousin So-n-So. 

I taught my kids to be on the lookout for actions. 

I know that this doesn't always work. That some predators hide their nature too well. And that in some situations, there is no warning. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

I have to say, did anyone else get the vibe that he was actually using the "I'm a sex addict" line as a way to manipulate women into sleeping with him or at least not reporting his behavior? 

I guess I didn’t get that vibe, but I did find it very interesting that Nora, who he flirted with and called to share sexual exploits with, said that as far as she knew, he remained a virgin and didn’t actually go as far as intercourse. As if that even matters when he’s being such a disgusting, manipulative creep and bragging about it to another woman. It seems like he must have picked up some twisted beliefs about women and sex somewhere along the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, maize said:

I don't think it has to be taught. It is a natural in-group bias--these people can be trusted because they are my people.

 

Maybe I'm just not very trusting - I wouldn't trust an atheist bloke as far as my little finger!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

I have to say, did anyone else get the vibe that he was actually using the "I'm a sex addict" line as a way to manipulate women into sleeping with him or at least not reporting his behavior? 

 

I did, but hmmm...not trusting, not forgiving, quite cynical type person here.

To me, calling it an addiction is a way of saying 'oh poor me, I haz no control'.

Also, his sister has to be his chaperone on tour ? I mean, what's that all about ? That was also weird.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What's he struggling with though ? The whole phrasing of this as a struggle...idk...I get that no parent wants to think of their baby boy growing up to be a sleaze, but it's less of a struggle and more of a choice to act like a sleaze. I can see they would be disappointed with his behaviour - but why is 'not trading sex for tickets/not pushing women already in relationships/not having multiple secret relationships' a struggle ? Makes it sound way more heroic than it actually is.

John should just take a year off, go to therapy with an old lady therapist, own his sh*t, and not talk about it to people who aren't involved ie most of the world.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, maize said:

I don't think it has to be taught. It is a natural in-group bias--these people can be trusted because they are my people.

I think in order for this to apply, though, there has to be an out-group. So I can see it more where a person’s particular religion or denomination is in the minority or is one of several very distinct religious groups or is somehow discriminated against. Perhaps that’s why I never thought this way about Christians growing up, virtually everyone I knew was some type of Christian. Being raised Catholic, I certainly didn’t trust Catholics more than anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think some people are just naturally more suspicious of people's motives, or maybe they are better at reading cues or something like that. Although age does make a big difference, you can learn a lot over time.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2019 at 7:56 AM, ByeByeMartha said:

I think that there are more men struggling with sexual sin today than we are aware of. 

 

I think there are many women struggling with this very same thing. I'm in no way victim blaming because I'll admit to not knowing the whole story, but women participating in sex acts in order to gain something isn't real classy on their part either. I'm disturbed by the number of women who willingly do these types of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, StellaM said:

Maybe I'm just not very trusting - I wouldn't trust an atheist bloke as far as my little finger!

Why not? 

18 hours ago, StellaM said:

Also, his sister has to be his chaperone on tour ? I mean, what's that all about ? That was also weird.

'Accountability partners' are a big thing in American Christian fundamentalism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, StaceyinLA said:

 

I think there are many women struggling with this very same thing. I'm in no way victim blaming because I'll admit to not knowing the whole story, but women participating in sex acts in order to gain something isn't real classy on their part either. I'm disturbed by the number of women who willingly do these types of things.

That was phrased poorly in the one article. The other clarified that first he would give them the free ticket, then later try to use that to guilt them into coming to "hang out" at his hotel room. Same as the old, "but I bought you dinner!" routine from a generation ago. They were not transacting sex for tickets - they accepted the gift of a ticket and then he used that to try to say they owed him. Blech. Not a new thing. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2019 at 3:56 PM, Frances said:

I’m honestly perplexed by this. Is it because he’s just a comedian, so doesn’t really have any real power or influence? Or because being a Christian was central to his act? Many Christians seems to regularly not only give a pass to very powerful people who regularly go against Christian teachings, sexual or otherwise, but even enthusiastically defend and support them. And most of the time these powerful people aren’t even admitting their sins. But I guess their Christian defenders and supporters are getting more than a few laughs in exchange, so maybe that explains the different treatment?

Legit questions - I’m not sure I’m the girl to answer the question. I don’t “fangirl” much tbh. I didn’t even do New Kid in the Block posters as a middle schooler. Essentially, the scenario where I allow manipulation for a $25 ticket OR where I give a fella pass on cr@ppy behavior because he’s amusing or the preaching is awesome or he has a catalog and promotes homeschooling, yada, yada, yada, is beyond my ability to fathom. 

 

I will admit to asking asking for a selfie with Andrew Pudewa once but that is the ultimate stretch of my fandom, lol.  

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, katilac said:

Why not? 

'Accountability partners' are a big thing in American Christian fundamentalism. 

 

Because you don't just trust someone b/c they share an ideological outlook with you! 

It sounded a lot like he was outsourcing his own self-control and self-awareness to his sister - not cool.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

That was phrased poorly in the one article. The other clarified that first he would give them the free ticket, then later try to use that to guilt them into coming to "hang out" at his hotel room. Same as the old, "but I bought you dinner!" routine from a generation ago. They were not transacting sex for tickets - they accepted the gift of a ticket and then he used that to try to say they owed him. Blech. Not a new thing. 

 

Yeah - definitely a different scenario there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

Legit questions - I’m not sure I’m the girl to answer the question. I don’t “fangirl” much tbh. I didn’t even do New Kid in the Block posters as a middle schooler. Essentially, the scenario where I allow manipulation for a $25 ticket OR where I give a fella pass on cr@ppy behavior because he’s amusing or the preaching is awesome or he has a catalog and promotes homeschooling, yada, yada, yada, is beyond my ability to fathom. 

 

I will admit to asking asking for a selfie with Andrew Pudewa once but that is the ultimate stretch of my fandom, lol.  

 

I don’t really get this either, and even though his manipulating them because of a ticket is a different scenario than them sleeping with him for a ticket, I guess I just still don’t get it. You gave me a ticket. I don’t owe you **** is more along the lines of my way of thinking. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, StellaM said:

 

Because you don't just trust someone b/c they share an ideological outlook with you! 

It sounded a lot like he was outsourcing his own self-control and self-awareness to his sister - not cool.

 

I have a huge problem with this in Christian circles (and I AM a Christian, and I even like watching the Duggars). If you have a conviction to stay pure, but are unable to control it unless you’re being chaperoned, are you really that convicted? I have a serious problem with people not having personal responsibility.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StaceyinLA said:

 You gave me a ticket. I don’t owe you **** is more along the lines of my way of thinking. 

And that's the ideal response, but just because someone has a weakness doesn't mean it's okay for him to exploit it.

I think we also have to keep in mind that their responses are coming from a place likely influenced by fundamentalism and patriarchy. Girls are expected to 'stay sweet' and talking back to men is not expected. Drinking alcohol, even if forbidden, would often be seen as a more acceptable way to rebel than telling a man "I don't owe you ****." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I HATE the "I admit I'm a flawed person" apologies that own up to nothing and leave lots of wiggle room for legal deniability.  They want the credit for taking responsibility without actually taking responsibility.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KungFuPanda said:

I HATE the "I admit I'm a flawed person" apologies that own up to nothing and leave lots of wiggle room for legal deniability.  They want the credit for taking responsibility without actually taking responsibility.

Right up there with "I'm not perfect." 

Everyone has flaws. No one is perfect. You are not gaining points by admitting that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, katilac said:

Right up there with "I'm not perfect." 

Everyone has flaws. No one is perfect. You are not gaining points by admitting that.

 

Also it doesn’t take perfection to not be a sexual predator. Many non-perfect people are not sexual predators. Pretending that people are asking you to be perfect lets you off the hook for failing, since perfection is an unreasonable expectation. Which defects attention from the fact that what you actually failed at was the much more reasonable expectation that you not use your fame, status, and power to sexually prey on other people. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Danae said:

 

Also it doesn’t take perfection to not be a sexual predator. Many non-perfect people are not sexual predators. Pretending that people are asking you to be perfect lets you off the hook for failing, since perfection is an unreasonable expectation. Which defects attention from the fact that what you actually failed at was the much more reasonable expectation that you not use your fame, status, and power to sexually prey on other people. 

Exactly. Goes back to the idea that being an alcoholic is one thing, robbing people to get their booze is another. If you are going around mugging people for booze/drugs even though you are more than able to pay for your own  you don't get to then just admit to having an alcohol problem. You have more to say sorry for than just the drinking. 

This guy could have just had consensual sex with people he found on whatever hook up app/wetsite, whatever. He didn't have lie, manipulate, etc. 

Edited by Ktgrok
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, BlsdMama said:

I will admit to asking asking for a selfie with Andrew Pudewa once but that is the ultimate stretch of my fandom, lol.  

I will admit to fawning just a little bit over Dr Jay Wile when he judged our speech and debate tournament one year. 

No s@xual favors though!!! 😂

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

×
×
  • Create New...