You're moving your horsey wrong

[pelagius]

True Blue Mormon. This is why there is no such thing as an ALUF.

Generally, it is thought of as True Believing Mormon ... the unnecessary true modifying believer is actually important here .... Why?

They are different points on the continuum. I have never thought TBM is a pejorative term though. It is just short hand for someone who holds traditional beliefs in the church more or less as they are taught. On the other end of the spectrum within the church are cultural or "new order" Mormons who practice the faith while rejected some or all of the core tenets. Obviously those are points along a line. Even TBM's are almost all cafeteria Mormons on some issue.

Because it is generally thought of as as pejorative term across the bloggernacle. The term rose to prominence among the ex-mormon.org crowd and was definitely used with a biting edge (it was not used with quite the same bite as morg-bot but it basically means the same thing). It wasn't a benign description. It was a designation for the unthinking and and unreflective in the church (which, of course, would be anyone one that was actually deluded enough to believe the foundational truth claims of the church according the the ex-mormon.org crowd). That's why "Mormon" gets over modified wit both true and believing. Try throwing around TBM at sites like timesandseasons.org or bycommonconsent. Unless it has changed recently you will get deleted or banned pretty quick for using the term.

I understand a lot of people use the "Blue" version of it but its rise to prominence on exmormon.org is definitely associated with True Believing Mormon and this rise is as a bitter pejorative whether with believing or blue.

[pellegrino]

I find my early contribution to the thread (although later in the thread I am not so bad) rather embarrassing so I was hoping the thread would be forgotten. I would have deleted the whole thing but others made some fine contributions.

Honestly, I haven't read the foyer enough lately to have any impression of the discourse at all.

I don't think you have anything to be embarrassed about in this thread. You may not feel it's your finest work, but I think even your initial post has merit on its own. If I'm not mistaken, my "less literal Mormons" thread may have been the catalyst for this thread.

I missed the memo; what does "TBM" stand for?

I could be wrong but I always thought TBM came from this Marion G. Romney talk, in reference to President Joseph F. Smith:

. . .he was returning from his mission to the Sandwich Islands, in the fall of 1857. He came home by way of Los Angeles, by what was called the Southern Route. In that year Johnston’s Army was on the move for Utah, and naturally enough there was much excitement and bitterness of feeling concerning the ‘Mormons.’ In southern California, just after the little train of wagons had traveled only a short distance and made their camp, several anti-‘Mormon’ toughs rode into the camp on horseback, cursing and swearing and threatening what they would do to the ‘Mormons.’ Joseph F. was a little distance from the camp gathering wood for the fire, but he saw that the few members of his own party had cautiously gone into the brush down the creek, out of sight. When he saw that, he told me,” says Brother Nibley, “the thought came into his mind, ‘Shall I run from these fellows? Why should I fear them?’ With that he marched up with his arm full of wood to the campfire where one of the ruffians, still with his pistol in his hand, shouting and cursing about the ‘Mormons,’ in a loud voice said to Joseph F.:

“ ‘Are you a ‘Mormon?’

“And the answer came straight, ‘Yes, siree; dyed in the wool; true blue, through and through.’

“At that the ruffian grasped him by the hand and said:

“ ‘Well, you are the ---- ---- pleasantest man I ever met! Shake, young fellow, I am glad to see a man that stands up for his convictions.’ ” (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, Deseret Book Co., 1939 ed., p. 518.)

[Surfah]

I could be wrong but I always thought TBM came from this Marion G. Romney talk, in reference to President Joseph F. Smith:

That's where I got it from too. In seminary growing up one of my teachers always challenged us to be TBMs.

[UtahDan]

Generally, it is thought of as True Believing Mormon ... the unnecessary true modifying believer is actually important here .... Why?

Because it is generally thought of as as pejorative term across the bloggernacle. The term rose to prominence among the ex-mormon.org crowd and was definitely used with a biting edge (it was not used with quite the same bite as morg-bot but it basically means the same thing). It wasn't a benign description. It was a designation for the unthinking and and unreflective in the church (which, of course, would be anyone one that was actually deluded enough to believe the foundational truth claims of the church according the the ex-mormon.org crowd). That's why "Mormon" gets over modified wit both true and believing. Try throwing around TBM at sites like timesandseasons.org or bycommonconsent. Unless it has changed recently you will get deleted or banned pretty quick for using the term.

I was not familiar with the origin of the term, that is interesting. I can't speak to those sites in particular (though I read them both) but Dehlin, for example, uses that term all the time in a very neutral way. I have seen a lot of others use it in a very neutral way. I suppose I should not have said I have "never" seen it as a pejorative, but I can't remember the last time I saw it used in that fashion. Of course, I don't read any of the "ex" or "recovery" message boards.

"Stage 3 Mormon" is another term that I like that seems pretty neutral to me. (Though I realize stages imply progress, I don't think Folwer intended it to be seen that way).

[tooblue]

Someone who is questioning might know all about the Kinderhook plates for example. A TBM might understandably not want to spend a lot of time learning that story, the critiques, the apologetics, just to answer someone on a message board on an issue that to them is ultimately trivial. Searchers/questions often have motivation to learn a lot about a topic that a TBM doesn't and consequently they know more about it. That is not universal. I only offer it as one explanation of why TBMs don't hop into the fray more frequently on some of these issues.

I'm surprised you saw it as a put down of some kind.

I don't see it as a put down but rather as a demonstration of a lack of understanding. You're a lawyer and I suppose as such you can't help but want to codify and compartmentalize people and ideas. To be faithful is to be a searcher and questioner. There is nothing trivial about faithfulness. On the contrary it is a solum choice that is demonstrative of as much or more knowledge than the supposed questioner. Most don't hop into the fray more frequently because of the condescending tone that suggests faith based searching and questioning is demonstrative of an inferior mind.

[UtahDan]

I don't see it as a put down but rather as a demonstration of a lack of understanding. You're a lawyer and I suppose as such you can't help but want to codify and compartmentalize people and ideas. To be faithful is to be a searcher and questioner. There is nothing trivial about faithfulness. On the contrary it is a solum choice that is demonstrative of as much or more knowledge than the supposed questioner. Most don't hop into the fray more frequently because of the condescending tone that suggests faith based searching and questioning is demonstrative of an inferior mind.

You lost me here. LA Ute applauded me, that is all I care about.

[pelagius]

I was not familiar with the origin of the term, that is interesting. I can't speak to those sites in particular (though I read them both) but Dehlin, for example, uses that term all the time in a very neutral way. I have seen a lot of others use it in a very neutral way. I suppose I should not have said I have "never" seen it as a pejorative, but I can't remember the last time I saw it used in that fashion. Of course, I don't read any of the "ex" or "recovery" message boards.

"Stage 3 Mormon" is another term that I like that seems pretty neutral to me. (Though I realize stages imply progress, I don't think Folwer intended it to be seen that way).

For the life of me I cannot figure out why an appeal to Dehlin adds weight to the argument that TBM is neutral (he is calling others TBM, not himself TBM). Steve Evans over at bycommonconsent saying it was neutral would add weight.

I find the use of "stage 3 mormon" as about equivalent to "morg-bot." I know you guys love your Fowler (and I am glad you find the model personally useful) but really I hope you can see why many might find the term offensive.

[tooblue]

You lost me here. LA Ute applauded me, that is all I care about.

I'll borrow from pelagius then:

Generally, it is thought of as True Believing Mormon ... the unnecessary true modifying believer is actually important here .... Why?

Because it is generally thought of as as pejorative term ... It was a designation for the unthinking and and unreflective in the church (which, of course, would be anyone one that was actually deluded enough to believe the foundational truth claims of the church.

As an aside you're starting to remind me of the elderly woman in France who would pretend not to understand my French due to my accent. They understood me just fine, they just didn't want to talk to me.

[UtahDan]

For the life of me I cannot figure out why an appeal to Dehlin adds weight to the argument that TBM is neutral (he is calling others TBM, not himself TBM). Steve Evans over out bycommonconsent saying it was neutral would add weight.

I find the use "stage 3 mormon" as about equivalent to "morg-bot."

Anyone who uses it in a respectful and neutral way adds weight to the argument, particularly someone who reaches a lot of people. It isn't an appeal to authority, just highlighting how I have seen it used. I used Dehlin because he seems to be someone who goes out of his way to be respectful of traditional belief, though perhaps you don't see him that way.

The meanings of things do change, but I am glad to hear someone tell me that they find it offensive because I truly didn't know that. At least to you it implies "unthinking" and apparently others receive it that way as well. Maybe you don't like the idea of a label, but they can be helpful shorthand in a conversation even if not perfectly descriptive. If there a shorthand you think is more appropriate?

[Jeff Lebowski]

For the life of me I cannot figure out why an appeal to Dehlin adds weight to the argument that TBM is neutral (he is calling others TBM, not himself TBM). Steve Evans over at bycommonconsent saying it was neutral would add weight.

I find the use of "stage 3 mormon" as about equivalent to "morg-bot." I know you guys love your Fowler (and I am glad you find the model personally useful) but really I hope you can see why many might find the term offensive.

So help us out here. What are the proper terms we should be using?

(FTR, I hated the Fowler book. Interesting ideas, but I thought the writing was awful.)

[UtahDan]

As an aside you're starting to remind me of the elderly woman in France who would pretend not to understand my French due to my accent. They understood me just fine, they just didn't want to talk to me.

I'd really like this thread to not end up being about you.

[tooblue]

If there a shorthand you think is more appropriate?

How about:

tooblue
pelagius
Surfah
Indy Coug
creekster

...

[UtahDan]

So help us out here. What are the proper terms we should be using?

(FTR, I hated the Fowler book. Interesting ideas, but I thought the writing was awful.)

Yeah it was pretty dry. I have gotten far more mileage out of listening to others discuss his ideas.

[UtahDan]

How about:

tooblue
pelagius
Surfah
Indy Coug
creekster

...

We could have a lot of fun with this. But just for starters, what group of people or thought process would "tooblue" be short hand for?

[tooblue]

I'd really like this thread to not end up being about you.

Then don't pretend not to understand me. It's a simple solution.