The following is headed towards both of my pastors. It is an incident that happened this evening between choir practice and the choir performance.

What do you think?


Pastor,

I need you to be aware of an incident that happened up in the choir loft between the male choir member behind me and I this evening.

During the period between choir practiced and our performance this evening, the male behind me was telling me that I should not swing back and forth to the music while singing in the choir. Then he grabbed my shoulders and pushed me from side to side apparently demonstrating my physical movements while I sing. I backed away.

Physically grabbing someone like this is inappropriate conduct.

This is my formal complaint.

Please talk to him:

1. He needs to leave me alone.

2. He is to NEVER grab me or touch me again. If he does, I WILL file a police report.

3. If he has any complaints about me, he is to direct them to one of my pastors.

Church should be a safe haven. Right now, I don't feel safe.

I would have said something to the guy who grabbed you, too, immediately. "Excuse me, but get your hands off me right now."You also might want to check around and see what the guy's story is. He may be a pervert or he may just be an inappropriate jerk. At any rate, you need to tell him yourself to keep his hands to himself.

Thanks, Pastor!

Every month it seems you have a new "problem", you are a difficult parishoner and the nightmare of every pastor/priest/reverend/whatever.

Stop going to that church, it is not your designated mission in life to drive this poor pastor to an early grave.

It is also unfair to work your hostility out at other people's expense.
SEE A THERAPIST to help you deal with your anger.

It's not the job of a new attendee to give the pastor an easy life.

I do think that if the negatives outweigh the positives a person should leave the situation and seek elsewhere for a better fit. In this case, though, I think Sandie has every right to speak up for herself and make it clear that the man who manhandled her was out of line. Anyone who is going to turn it around and make it about Sandie in a "blame the victim" kind of way is not thinking clearly. There were several options open to this fellow choir member in this situation and none of them involved him laying hands on Sandie.

I don't see any anger/hostility in this post by Sandie, not sure where Glo is getting that from.

Also, Glo, if you think Sandie represents a "nightmare" parishioner, I would disagree with that too. I've known many church members who leaned heavily on their pastors for personal support through life's trials like divorce, illness, unemployment, mental illness, etc. If there are not enough church resources to draw upon the pastor is left with an unequal load and _that_ is a nightmare.

I do think it's tough for her current pastor as not many mainstream Christians, in my experience, have Clue One about ex-Mormons (or ex-JWs). That is up to them to deal with, not up to the ex-[whatever] to curtail their explorations.

This is the deep south, Southern Baptist church. I am not sure just where the guy in the choir would go if he is expecting choir members to freeze in place when they sing.

The pastor whom I called was swinging to the music while we were singing as did others in the choir.

There are times when people, like the pastor, raise one hand and slowly wave it back and forth when they sing. It is how some people worship. I don't do that, but I have no problem with others worshiping like that.

This situation is just odd.

Re: my constant dramas with kids. It really hurt my feelings. Luckily, several other posters emailed me with words of support and encouragement. One of them said, "Glo's an idiot. Don't pay any attention to her."

'Nuff said.

;o)

But you do have constant drama in your life, much of which is self-inflicted.

Certain personalities draw certain problems into their lives, what else is new.

When you ask for opinions, sometimes people point out what you do not like to acknowledge.

Sandie is constantly running to the Pastor like he is her daddy.
She is running to him asking him to solve her personal problems for her. Time to grow up and stand up for yourself, Sandie.
Deal with jerks directly. You don't need daddy to do it for you.

Well, there's a way to say things.

One way can make the OP feel misunderstood, undervalued, ridiculed, told off, or even attacked.

Another way can offer support while making concrete suggestions about how things can change.

As many of us know, there is a huge learning curve in leaving a tightly controlled environment and moving out into the big wide world. We do take our former ways of interacting and coping with us - we haven't learned new ones yet.

I find that especially women who have been exceptionally meek and obedient take time to learn to be assertive. The mildest of differences of opinion seem like major clashes and many are deeply programmed to avoid that. More assertive women, especially if they have never been in a fundamentalist, patriarchal, hierarchical environment, can't fathom the non-assertive responses often given by less assertive women. Barking at them to "grow up", "do it yourself", "tell the guy where to go", "who cares what your pastor thinks", "kick your husband to the curb" etc does not magically transform a less assertive woman into a she-bear.

As with many things on the road out of a controlling group, some people take longer than others to reinvent themselves, as that is often what is required.

The reason I have responded so many times on this thread is that I have lived through this transition as well so have a lot to say about it. It can take a while to learn to view the pastor as essentially a fellow churchgoer, albeit one who gives a lot more talks than anyone else in the group, rather than the go-to guy for everything from a leaky tap to a spiritual crisis. It can take a long time to come to realize that things are very different in most other non-mo (or non-JW, etc) churches. One of the biggest changes is that the minister is the spiritual leader but not "the boss", at least in mainstream groups and that the group is amorphous - congregants are free to make their own choices.

It sounds so simple, but depending on your religious background, it is often a process to come to understand what that means and then to move into it, believing you are equal to the pastor/minister - all worshippers together - and then acting like it. In the post-mo church I attended, it took me time to comprehend that the pastor was an advisor, a speaker, a voice on the governing board, a resource, etc, but not a person who had authority over me. The only difference between us, essentially, was his position as a hired person in the church with a specific and publicized job description who happened to have a degree in Theology, OT Studies, etc while I was an attendee at the church who went to church classes and participated in some of the various ministries in which the church was involved; both of us being fellow worshippers on an equal plane in that regard. Many things went on that didn't require the pastor's attendance or direct oversight and many congregants, both men and women, were in charge of programs, classes and outreaches. It was eminently reasonable for church members to suggest programs and policy and the pastor had one vote, just like everyone else (although true enough, on major items his was the deciding vote, but he had to keep the congregation happy, not the other way around, as he was essentially an employee of theirs - very different from the Mormon Church and others like it).

It is a vastly different world from what I had been used to in several "fundamentalist" groups. The reality at more mainstream churches doesn't always hit you in a blinding flash. It can take time to process the differences and alter how you think of yourself and your part in things and then implement the changes.

Makes perfect sense to me!

I don't see Sandie "constantly" posting about a continual litany of problems. Not too many of us come here and post about something that's going right. We hear from people when they have a nagging question, an urgent situation, a life-changing moment, an ongoing situation they can't figure out, etc. From that you could say that nearly _everybody_ here "constantly posts about problems". It's kind of a harsh reaction to hit an OP with that response when they're asking for support and maybe suggestions, not barbs and blasts which only make them end up feeling worse about themselves and more hesitant to post on personal issues.

That is not to say that it isn't helpful to make suggestions about how to react in certain circumstances and how to deal with realities you can't change. Certainly, to suggest that her current church might not be the best fit for Sandie could be a helpful response. To indicate that an issue like the grabby man is her _fault_ is less than helpful. To be so blunt and non-supportive as to make her feel bad about posting is not to understand the disengagement process that many of us have to go through as we transition from fundy to main to maybe different realities altogether.

Definitely, at least the grabby man part is _not_ Sandie's fault. To baldly state "you shouldn't be there", "you should assault the guy back", "you're not assertive enough", etc sounds a lot like blaming the victim to me, besides being unrealistic in terms of Sandie's personality, experience, the place where she's at in her post-mo life, and the law itself frankly (as returning assault for assault is not an acceptable reaction in law).

That's how I see it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/21/2010 04:28PM by Nightingale.

that Sandie is coming from a background of being meek and childlike. She is probably having a hard time growing out of that.
I suppose these suggestions could be worded in a more positive way.
It is just hard for me to relate, because if that guy had done the same to me, I would have shoved him away me and told him loudly "don't you EVER grab me", but I guess that's just me. I'm a hot-head.

I understand BG. Some of us are born hot-heads, others come to it on a gradual basis. :)

I'm sensitive to posters feeling slammed rather than supported by the way their posts are received. I remember how hard and scary it was to post as a newbie here and how it could hurt to be treated abruptly. You're right that it's in the phrasing most of the time. Most of us are trying to offer support while making suggestions and giving personal accounts that show how we can relate. I made that point somewhere in all my posts on this thread. It's worth an OP keeping in mind that most replies are trying to be of help and that even if things sound abrupt it's someone's honest opinion, they took the time to care enough to reply and sometimes a good sharp jab can propel us to thinking more, re-evaluating and taking action.

I know it's hard to come up with The One Standard Response Style that would suit all newbie and still-questioning posters. That's not what I'm trying to do. Just hoping that our responses don't come across as "blaming the victim" rather than trying to help those who are climbing out of the pit we already managed to leave behind.

I was especially sensitive this week due to the case I posted about on another thread where a military commander stalked, raped and murdered women and I'd go postal on anyone who even hinted that a man's outrageous and criminal behaviour toward a woman is in any way her fault. Obviously, Sandie's situation with grabby man is much lower-level than in the case I mention, but it goes to the way we think about things and how that influences our thoughts and behaviour. That is also why I mentioned (in the other thread about the murderer I think) that I have zero tolerance for men making jokes about polygamy, rape, sex with minors, etc. Just not funny. At all. And it's not that I'm too intense about it - it's that it goes to show what type of mind-set some men have (and women too) that is degrading to women - and that is one step too far along the path to harming them in significant ways.

As I said to Sandie somewhere on this thread, I think that everyone who posted has her best interests at heart. We all just vary in how we express it. I note her posts often get a lot of reaction, so there is definite interest there on her behalf. Lucky Sandie!

What I mean about church not being a safe place is that we can't any longer just assume that everybody we meet at church, or the church itself even, is automatically "safe".

I'm sorry for yet another bad experience you've had at church.

I note the pastor tells YOU to "stay away from him". Sheesh.

You win the prize for stick-to-it-iveness at this church.

As you know, there are plenty more out there!

I used to think that you shouldn't "church-shop" but now I realize there is absolutely nothing wrong with looking around and finding what's out there and putting oneself first in terms of what's a good fit.

I hope you either start racking up some positive experiences with this Baptist church or else come across another one or even a different denomination and have a better time.

Good luck either way.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/19/2010 10:32PM by Nightingale.

single adult days when a group of us sang together.

Of course it all depends on how much you can withstand and what you are getting out of it. People tend to post about problems, which is why things can seem one-sided.

There are lots of choirs and lots of churches Sandie. I think everyone just wants to see you find a place that's good for you.

No organization including churches are perfect. If this church is a good fit, I'd stay and just avoid this guy. If you want to stay in the choir, tell the director you want to be away from him and make it clear to him that you do not want him touching you. If you don't like the church, keep looking. This isn't the only church in the world.Just understand that wherever you go, you are not going to like everyone.

Is this the same church where there was inappropriate behavior going on with the youth pastor or something? Or was that a different church (or issue)?

It sounds like the pastor does not think this was a problem issue for him to solve. Basically, he told you to stay away from him until he-- the pastor-- can work it out. You are in his little world, so that was your answer.

If you do not like the conduct of the pastor, don't go there again. You are not paid to go to any church. You pay in time and talent. If your talent and time are not appreciated to your standards, don't go again. You have a choice. This is not mandatory participation.

I found how quickly I was replaced in my volunteer positions at church groups. I found the membership moved along swimmingly without me. I found church leaders want compliant people who do not stir the pot.

This incident is a he said, she said situation. Pastor did not see it? Did anyone? I am certain the pastor does not want to be the playground monitor. I would have told the guy to take his problem up with the chior director and to keep his mitts to himself, but I would not be in any church group anyway these days...so take that for what it is worth.

Since you asked opinions, and since I have watched and replied to your posts since your excommunication from Mormonism.... I am not certain what you want from a church family. It seems you deal with problems in all of these religious circles.

If this works for you...stay. If not...leave. No one but you can choose where you hang your hat.

You should have suggested that his bass voice didn't cut it and that he should be in the Soprano section...then punched him in the figs.

Just sayin'...

Ron

This suggestion made me laugh out loud!

can find out what your pastor is really made of. The answer of "stay away from him until I can work this out" might mean that he wants you to be safe until he can confront this guy and tell him to keep his meaty paws off the ladies, or it could mean that he wants to keep the man safe from the "feminist woman who doesn't know her place". Time will tell. Good luck, dearie. In the end, I really hope you can find someplace that satisfies your spiritual needs.

I think this is very mormon behavior. Someone crosses a personal boundary and, instead of dealing with it directly and immediately with the person who crossed the boundary, this poster has chosen to run to some perceived authority and try to manipulate him into handling the situation for her.

That's just weak. IMO.

If a man I don't know puts his hands on me, one of two things will happen. A) He may draw back a couple of bloody stumps. B) At the very least, I would politely clarify my boundaries -- do not touch me uninvited -- and would probably also make it abundantly clear that no random chorister gets to tell me how to act. If I feel like swaying to the music, I'm gonna sway. If Mr. Handsy doesn't like it, he can stand somewhere else in the choir.

All you really did is act like a kid on the playground by running to the teacher to tattle. When I was a manager, I didn't play this crap with my employees. If they had a personal problem with each other (excluding assault or harassment), I expected them to handle it like adults. Have a nice, intelligent, adult conversation about why each of you thinks you have the right to control the other's behavior.

dogzilla: "If they had a personal problem with each other (excluding assault or harassment), I expected them to handle it like adults. Have a nice, intelligent, adult conversation about why each of you thinks you have the right to control the other's behavior."

I understand the spirit of what you're saying in your post above. As for the incident at church for Sandie, I don't see that a man grabbing onto you is "a personal problem with each other". I also don't think that Sandie objecting to this unwanted touching is a case of her wanting to "control [his] behaviour". She has the right to expect that men won't touch her without her consent. DNA's post mentions that even a mere tap on the shoulder from one man to another could constitute assault. It's worth realizing the legal position on this. I agree with DNA that one's reaction should be rational though.

In our post-mo journeys we have much to learn. This is what I see in many of the posts here, people learning new information, different ways of reacting, testing their learned boundaries and breaking free into a new place. It takes time and experiences to teach us new ways. I think that if Sandie, or anyone, attends numerous churches to get an overview, and even takes some no-church time, things tend to fall into perspective and then we're in a position to make more informed decisions about our new direction in life. Time in this instance can be a great revealer as well as healer.

Nightingale Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dogzilla: "If they had a personal problem with
> each other (excluding assault or harassment), I
> expected them to handle it like adults. Have a
> nice, intelligent, adult conversation about why
> each of you thinks you have the right to control
> the other's behavior."
>
> I understand the spirit of what you're saying in
> your post above. As for the incident at church for
> Sandie, I don't see that a man grabbing onto you
> is "a personal problem with each other". I also
> don't think that Sandie objecting to this unwanted
> touching is a case of her wanting to "control
> behaviour". She has the right to expect that men
> won't touch her without her consent. DNA's post
> mentions that even a mere tap on the shoulder from
> one man to another could constitute assault. It's
> worth realizing the legal position on this. I
> agree with DNA that one's reaction should be
> rational though.
>

She does have a right to expect that nobody will touch her without consent. She also has a voice. There is absolutely nothing wrong at all, with setting appropriate boundaries when someone behaves inappropriately toward you. I supposed I should have spelled it out a little more succinctly.

Part of getting past mormonism is learning how to set boundaries and ask for what you want. In this case, it would be perfectly appropriate for the OP to say, "Do not put your hands on me. I will sway while I sing if I want. You cannot control me." What I was suggesting, was, rather than run to the pastor and expect a man to handle the problem, that Sandie take her power back, cut out the middle man and handle the problem directly. There was no reason to make it the pastor's problem. Presumably, Sandie is a grown up and can set someone straight. I was suggesting that she try that rather than get her panties in a twist because a third party won't handle the situation the way she wants them to.

I'm also unclear on what she really wants. Does she want permission to sway? Does she want Mr. Handsy to know that she's allowed to sway while she's singing? Does she want Mr. Handsy thrown out of the choir? What, exactly, does she want the pastor to do? (That she can't do herself?)

I didn't read the other posts, so perhaps this has been covered.

He was controlling, and that's annoying. But I think the real problem was being touched in a manner you didn't like. That's more than annoying, it pisses you off, and rightfully so.

My wife has never been sexually harassed, even though co-workers have been. I think it is because she comes across as someone not to mess with. If a guy did try to do something inappropriate, she'd probably say something in a loud firm voice that would embarrass the guy, and they sense it. (I'm not saying women who are harassed are asking for it, I'm saying that sometimes guys go for the less risky target).

The same could work for you, and you'd feel like less of a victim. When he put his hands on both shoulders, if you turned to face him and in a no nonsense voice said, "You need to take your hands off of me right now!" He'd get the hint better than a talk with the pastor at a later time.

Any unwanted touch is an assault and can be prosecuted. Side note: How did I find out? I was watching the protesters at GC while I was still TBMish. A guy came out and called the protester a "retard" as he walked by with his kids. I came up behind him and very gently tapped him on the shoulder and told him that I found that offensive, especially in front of his kids. It was dumb of me and embarrassed the guy so he got hostile and told me that he was going to have me arrested for assault. I was shocked, thinking, "Hey I'm one of you, not a protester".

I went over to a cop who saw the whole thing and asked if that could ever be called an assault. He said yes, that any unwanted touching that isn't incidental can be.

So back on topic, it felt like an assault because technically it was. I think anyone that filed charges in a case like mine and yours would be silly, and it shouldn't happen, but it is an assault.

Better than charging someone with a crime, is to very firmly tell them that they are not to do that again. Say it in a loud voice, and it shouldn't be a problem again; and you took care of it yourself. If that turned him into a totally dominant ass thinking, "I'll show her" type of an exchange, then file charges.

Nine times out of ten, I'll bet the loud instructions takes care of it.

Maybe you were brushing up against something unknowingly and he was trying to handle the situation in the best manner he know how.

Sandie, you can do the following things yourself, to him directly. Tell the grabber directly:

1. You need to leave me alone.

2. You are to NEVER grab me or touch me again. If you do, I WILL file a police report.

3. If you has any complaints about me, keep them to yourself. (Bite me)

If it were me, I'd elbow him hard in the groin if he swayed me by my shoulders again, then feign ignorance as to what I just did. He sounds irritating and annoying! I've run into people like that here and there in life. I think most of us have.