Episode 294: Winning and Losing

12 comments on “Episode 294: Winning and Losing”

  1. Guest Reply

    You didn’t address the fact that your podcasts take at least 40 minutes to get to the point. We lose interest by then.

  2. Gabriel von Himmel Reply

    I have to sound like a ditto-head but your “Guest” is right.

    Seems there is too much foreplay and precious little hind-frolic.

    Let’s bring up the pace and let the gratuities drop out.

    I have enjoyed this podcast in the past.

    Hoping for a brighter day.



  3. Randy Quentin Meyers Reply

    I did appreciate, was moved by the previous episode, “Lila”. although I can see how why others may not. While listening to it, in the beginning of it, I thought, ” Great, but why call this ‘Mormon’-anything. I’m sure Adam Archer could make a good podcast on any topics, but these recent episodes have not been speaking on much Mormon stuff at all.”

    Today I enjoyed this episode 294 -“winning and losing “, great original concept, well-verbalized by you.
    Good points on what people expect or plan as goals of the movement.

    I have share John Larsen’s views currently that it cannot reform, is a bad thing that needs to go away, BUT also the moving on, and lacking interest in attacking a group that seems to be losing any good ground with ‘the world’ any way, now that people can know and the church admits what I, while a doubting missionary in 2007, thought the church would never admit (the essays recently on LDS.org…)
    , the issues that made disappointed in apparent deception by the Church in the first place. — this relates to the questions you posed in this episode, about what is winning, what does it look like, etc, and the fact that the church obviously , in many ways, is losing.

    Empathy is great, and I appreciate the new views you shared, some very original thinking, that I think can enlighten us all. (I vote to keep it up this way…. I liked it, and this ep.s qualities make me come back from almost unsubscribing from Mormon Expression due moving beyond interest in Mormonism, whether For or Against, but both the ep. “Lila”, and ” winning/losing”, change my mind.
    (What do I know,…but) you’ve found your voice for Mormon Expression , I think it shines in the episode 294.
    Thank you for all you do.

  4. TISOG Reply

    I think the main issue is that Mormon Expression is a brand with a particular demographic, and Adam Archer is altering that brand.

    If the Mormon podcasting world was like the 5 Stages of Grief, doubting mormons generally begin with Mormon Stories as a safe place to explore their shock and denial in becoming aware of Mormonism’s problems. After this stage comes Anger, and in the past freshly disaffected Mormons ready to leave the church would move on to Mormon Expression, a place where they could vent their anger and indulge in more irreverent/sarcastic/snide commentary, and pick apart Mormonism. But with Adam Archer coming in, he is decidedly less angry and more ready to move on to the final stage of Acceptance. (Ironically, that is why John Larsen left.) Adam wants the focus to be broader and more engaged in how to rebuild your life after Mormonism, but that does not fully jive with the average ME listener.

    Adam is right, Anger is not a virtuous quality nor should it be nourished too often (it is petty and regressive), but it is also a real and necessary emotion that needs to be “expressed” in the grieving process. It’s not that Adam Archer does not have anything awesome to say or that he doesn’t make great podcasts (he does!), it’s just that he is pushing the average ME listener forward before they are ready.

    • Jessica A Reply

      This is well put. Adam’s great. Adam’s a smart guy with things to say, and I think he’s finding his voice. But I when I download an episode of Mormon Expression, what I’m looking for is an episode of Mormon Expression. Not necessarily John Larsen or a John Larsen clone, but something recognizably Mormon Expression–a little anger, a little sarcasm, a little mocking, and a LOT of Mormonism. Every time I play a new episode, I’m hoping to find that.

  5. David B Reply

    I appreciate the time and effort that you put into making these podcasts. It must take a ton of time and effort. But I have some issues with how things are going.

    I quit listening to the Lila episode. Dying and dead babies are not my thing. I got my own sadness. I don’t want the sadness of strangers.

    That episode was far too Mormon for my taste. The guests seemed very Mormon rather than ex-Mormon. I may have misheard, but it sounded like you pretended to believe in heaven and to believe in God to console the grieving parents. Not cool. The episode did not even seem to be about the ex-Mormon experience. It was more about faithfulness and believing.

    The current episode brought up the interesting subject of what we really want to see happen to the church. But then the episode suddenly ended with no real conclusion. You made strange statements I did not understand that I wished you would have had time to elaborate on. You want both the church and ex-Mormons to win and you think both parties can? What on earth? To want such a thing you are sounding rather Mormon yourself rather than ex-Mormon.

    But more to the point, how does that work? How can the church change to be honest and be a force for good? It would have to do this to “win” and also allow ex-Mormons to win. The church would have to throw out the Book of Mormon, throw out the Book of Abraham, throw out Joseph Smith, throw out Brigham Young, throw out practically every prophet before Spencer W. Kimball and some after. Throw out Masonry and temple worship. There would be practically nothing left. The Mormon church would look like a mainline Protestant church by that point.

    But then if you throw out more falseness like Christianity, God, and Jesus what does the Mormon church look like then? The Unitarian Universalists? An atheist convention?

    I want to hear more about why you want the Mormon church to win and what you think it would look like after its shared victory with the ex-Mormons.

  6. Uncle Ralph Reply

    I think you said, at some point, that the “Church had lost so much” in recent years. Like what? You can tell when old rich white men are losing or are threatened with loss because they start changing their behavior or trying to change the game. The Church did this with polygamy and blacks in the priesthood. The recent essays and such might indicate some mild discomfort on the Church’s part, but you’ll know when they start to lose significantly by the significant changes they will make when their bank accounts are threatened. Like everyone else on the planet, the GA’s first loyalty is to the Almighty Dollar.

  7. Dnlluke Reply

    This show is starting to feel like a bishop running out the clock in Sacrament meeting.

    I hope the weird old guy in the back row gets up there again soon…

  8. Anonymous Reply

    I wonder if John Larsen is as ethical as I thought he was. I begin to suspect he planted Adam in this role so as to showcase how much better he himself was at the job. Maybe John got so fed up with the complaints he was getting that he thought “Oh you want something different? I’ll give you something different, and you will be bored to tears. You’ll beg to have me back!”

  9. WritinLeft Reply

    Adam, couple of things: First, I sense a
    hint of resignation in the tone. If you don’t think the job is for you, then
    run, don’t walk away from the microphone. No one will think the less of you for
    it. Mind you, I’m not saying at all that you should quit, but that ME has built
    an identity and audience on hard-hitting, deeply-researched topics. There’s
    still much work to do. Yes, we should always be deconstructing Mormonism (all
    isms actually), uh huh…endlessly. The mantra should be, when you (Mormon church)
    stop sending out missionaries, diminishing women, ripping apart families,
    spending god-awful amounts of money to prop up your collective egos, own up to
    your past, blah blah blah,…we’ll stop beating you up every chance we can. Ok,
    well, never mind…we’ll never stop beating you up, but you get the point.
    Secondly, don’t fucking apologize. No one wants to hear it. Bringing focus to the
    distinction that you are not John Larsen is weak and a waste of time. We know
    it already. This is your show now so, own it. The built-in audience you have is
    looking (craving) for something they’ve grown accustomed to be able to find
    here. If you take the show in a different direction, that is fine, but you’ll
    lose (and replace to some extent) listener-ship. Remember, John in the
    beginning had many shows that were steaming piles. You will too! He
    did however have the luxury of anonymity. You have a big task ahead of you in
    filling those shoes and in that, I sincerely wish you the best of luck.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *