83352 - The Board Apostasy Board (I'm joking, not hating)

[TheBlackSheep]

http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/83352/

This question legitimately surprised me.

I remember, during my writing tenure (2008-2010), being afraid to post anything which was even slightly unaligned with Church doctrines or culture, either here or on The Board proper. I'd say that some of our "meanest" contributors have been very pro-LDS doctrines and even pro-LDS culture, but perhaps I only feel this way because I've been out of the Church for so long?

I think the culture here has shifted as a reflection of the shifts in Board culture as a whole. (Not current Board culture; the Board is now more stringently pro-Church in all ways than it was when I was a writer.) When I started writing as Friendly Neighborhood Agnostic in late 2009 I was not aware of any Board writers who were not very active in the LDS Church, though I'm sure there were some. I especially wasn't aware of anything like that on the Board previously. The latest Board reunion would show that that is no longer the case. I don't think the Board Board is a den of iniquity. I just think it reflects the way that old-timey Board readers and writers have shifted.

And it would make sense. I have always thought that Board readers and writers were some of the most open-minded and even liberal (perish the thought!) people affiliated with BYU (but maybe that's just because that's what I want them to be). It would seem that those types of people would be the people who are more willing to discuss the grey areas of Church doctrine and culture, whether they end of disaffecting or not. It's easy to feel persecuted when you are discussing issues with other smart, passionate people who are just as sure they are right as you are when they don't agree with you. I know I have felt that way in other, super-LDS circumstances.

Or maybe I'm way off base and we're all meany heads. Any thoughts of whether this is true?

[Marduk]

I just think it odd that "LDS perspective" is always deemed to be something without diversity of opinion. I mean, it sounds like the questioner isn't upset that more correlation-approved opinions don't exist on here, simply that there exists opinions that aren't correlation-approved. The answer of "can't you control them?" is so squicky...

[TheBlackSheep]

1. Agreed with everything you just said. (It did squick me out.)

2. If we, or I guess I, could be kinder, I'd like to know, as I care about this community and The Board community more than I probably should.

3. I wondered what I had actually written as FNA, and I found this: http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/56290/. Hoo boy I never want to go through that part of my life again, and if anybody is having trouble with their LDS beliefs or identity you let me know and I will do whatever you need to do.

[Portia]

"Friendly" is not ipso facto "agrees with me." I think it's a useful distinction.

[Marduk]

I've always found this board to be a friendly place.

[mic0]

I wonder if the reason a lot of us find this board "friendly" even though we have heated discussions/arguments/fist-fights is because we've been around here for a while and gotten to know one another? It may seem kind of clique-ish to newer members (of which there are few (is it because we are so close that new people don't join at high rates, or are we so close because new people don't join at high rates?)).

I'm also surprised that the board people today aren't trying to get the Facebook group going more or a Tumblr (whatever the cool kids are into these days). There are absolutely ways to get "official" forums out there so people can discuss questions and answers to their hearts' content. I know it is work more work for an already volunteer force, but I there you go. The FB group has definitely gone in waves of popularity and doesn't allow for anonymous commenting.

Also also, even though there are more users here who are post-LDS in their lives compared to probably most people who read the Board, there are also a lot of active LDS folks who post stuff all the time? (just like marduk was saying)

[Zedability]

I think it depends on the tone of the thread. There have definitely been threads where I felt like people would get mad at me if I posted a more orthodox opinion but there were also threads where I had no trouble disagreeing with something. I'm not sure exactly what the difference is.

[Emiliana]

The only times I specifically remember things getting really heated/attack-y were between Marduk and Vorpal. I can see how someone who didn't understand that long-standing frenemy-ship (frenmity?) could misinterpret that as our general attitude towards conservative or orthodox Mormonism.

We (particularly Portia, me, Imogen, and a few others) also tend to be a LOT more open about sexuality than I think most BYU students would be comfortable with, and I can see how that could be off-putting. But I don't apologize for that in the slightest, because regardless of a person's opinions about the proper role of sex, I think society needs to be a whole lot less afraid of talking openly about it.

But yeah, the idea that the Board should somehow "shut down" the BoardBoard because we tend to have unorthodox opinions...yeah, no. Free speech might not exist on the 100 Hour Board (which is fine; it has its own standards in accordance with its own purpose), but it does need to exist in other places.

[Emiliana]

is it because we are so close that new people don't join at high rates, or are we so close because new people don't join at high rates?

I think this is a really good question. If it's the former, how could we be more open to newcomers?

[Cognoscente]

Ha! The writer linked to my old reddit post. That's weird.

[Imogen]

And I wonder if the strong presence of us non-Mormons is off-putting to some? Not in like a "We hate other religions" way but just in some way?

I know I haven't been posting as much as I used to (thanks grad school and teaching), but I try to read everyday, and while I know we are a pretty liberal group I haven't seen anything I'd consider egregious. But I'm a pro-choice, birth control using, same-sex marriage supporting Catholic, so I'm probably not the best judge.

But if you're reading this and are afraid to comment we're really nice!! And we want to hear what you have to say!

[Cognoscente]

I also always figured that the Board attracted multiple subsets of the greater LDS population that are:

1) Younger, with a greater propensity to skew liberal, and at an age range given to intense personal growth and education,
2) Within (1), particularly well-read, intellectually curious, willing to re-examine preconceptions and with a talent for research,
3) At a time (the last 5 years particularly) where there is enough credibly-sourced material online not traditionally available in the Church Education Curriculum to cause dissonance/disaffection that the Church is moving to make steps to engage in the discussion, i.e. the Essays.

I don't know that my method is sound, but it makes sense to me that within a faith community, a group self-selected for inquisitiveness would see a greater-than-average disaffection rate. From any faith community, really.

[TheBlackSheep]

Precisely, Cognoscente. Thanks for saying part of what I meant in my opening post in a clearer way.

[TheBlackSheep]

The use of the word "infiltrated" in the question did bother me. If my memories are correct, and they very well may not be (Mormon culture does produce a lot of people who value feeling persecuted), the Board Board used to be a lot more negative toward people on the "fringes." That this has changed doesn't mean people "infiltrated" the Board.

mic0, do you think it's always been "clique-ish?" I'd agree that it could seem clique-ish now because the core group of contributors is pretty small, but I don't remember it always being that way. Maybe I was just more intimidated years ago, but I seem to remember more different personalities. Then again, hasn't the Board's number of daily unique hits trended downward for some years now? It's an interesting question you pose, and I wonder about it too.

[yayfulness]

When I first joined the BoardBoard three years ago (right before applying to the Board), I remember there being quite a few active posters. I can't remember exactly who all of them were, but I do remember that there were more than there are now.

There also hasn't been a single new profile registered here since last December.

I want to say that Board writers used to be more active on the BoardBoard, whereas now there's hardly any interaction.

[NovemberEast]

I think it depends on the tone of the thread. There have definitely been threads where I felt like people would get mad at me if I posted a more orthodox opinion but there were also threads where I had no trouble disagreeing with something. I'm not sure exactly what the difference is.

I'll second that.

Also, I'm relatively new (but I hung out in stealth mode for a while before and have followed the regular board for about 4 years) and it is a little cliquey...how very mormon of the board.

The cliquey nature hasn't stopped it from being on my "bored at work" rotation though.

[Portia]

Yes I think that compared to 2007, there is a large gap between the liberalism of former writers and the conservatism of current writers. I get the sense from people like my brother that more doubting/disaffected/outside the norm teens aren't going to BYU in the first place compared to a decade ago. Thoughts?

Zed and yay are probably two of the most liberal current Board writers, and they're reasonably active here. Something I found strange about the original question was the idea that active, married, TBMs such as them should shun the "infiltrators." I've never felt anything but actually welcomed and befriended by them, and the idea that some other behavior is better baffles me. Their willingness to engage someone who disagrees with them, has a different "lifestyle," or simply someone who feels uncomfortable in the homogeneous Provo environment, to me, speaks to very high character, not the opposite.

[Indefinite Integral]

I hope this doesn't get people jumping down my throat or demanding lots of explanations (because I don't do well with either of those things) but I have been reading the Board Board since 2010, and from my perspective the general culture of questioning and in many cases opposing church culture (and sometimes church doctrine as well (yes, I know they are separate)) has definitely increased. I often find myself disagreeing with the opinions on here, but since I am really really bad at defending my positions, I pretty much never comment on things I disagree with, of which there are more now than when I first came here.

Also, sorry for all the long run-on sentences, it is how my brain thinks and I didn't feel like editing more.

[TheBlackSheep]

Indefinite Integral, I'm not trying to jump down your throat at all. I'd agree that the culture here has shifted since I started writing in 2008, as I said above. My question for you is: does that make us unfriendly? Are you nervous disagreeing because it's hard to be in the minority (and it is) or because we're mean/unfriendly?

I just don't see at least most of us as unfriendly in the least, but I want to know if I'm wrong, especially about me.

The thing is that it took a lot of bravery to get the culture of the Board Board here. I remember feeling so scared and nervous and alone when I posted things that were even a little out of line with very mainstream Mormonism, even when I was an active, enthusiastic member. I guess I could have just been intimidated, but I don't want to make people feel the way I felt in 2008.

[TheBlackSheep]

yay, I'd agree that it seems like writers used to be more active here. Maybe as the Board itself has become more conservative and the Board Board has become more liberal the writers are disinclined to participate?

NovemberEast and Zed, what is it about the tone of some threads? Zed, I know you didn't exactly know what the difference is but I would be interested in thoughts.

NovemberEast, I think the clique-y nature of things comes from the fact that most of the active participants I can think of here have been here a long time so we're friendly with each other. Does it feel to you like we're discriminating or mean to outsiders? That's something else entirely.