William Schryver wrote:
William, can you address this one, what is the historical context that makes it acceptable?
"No, it’s just because Emma was a champion **** and no one else would have her except Joseph. (Needless to say, I don’t think I’ll be checking out the new “Emma Smith as the Exemplar for All Women” movie.)"
Yes, it is a forgery--one that I was even deceived into believing authentic for a period of time.
I originally wrote "wench" and it was subsequently altered (by someone with moderator capabilities) in the original post and also in any post that quoted it. For months they tried to get me to admit to saying that, and I consistently denied it, knowing I had not written such a thing. Then, almost magically one day, they produced a quote. And I was therefore, I felt at the time, compelled to issue an apology for it. Only later did I discover the evidence that it was a forgery. I will soon describe in some detail this and the other methods of propaganda legerdemain employed in the campaign by Mormon apostates to silence my apologetic articles and presentations.
Suffice it to say at present that there are no fewer than three attempts at forgery in MsJack's collection of what are mostly manipulated, out-of-context quotes, or greatly exaggerated claims based on posts typical of online banter. I should note that I have no reason to believe, at this time, that MsJack was complicit in the forgery element of all of this, only that she was entirely indiscriminate and otherwise without compunction when it came to accepting and manipulating information in such a way as to advance her little endeavor.
This is probably William's most obvious lie yet.
"Champion bitch" is a common phrase for a dog in a show. Do a Google search for "champion bitch" and you'll get 20,600,000 results---most of the top results referring to actual dog shows.
Do a Google search for "champion wench" and Google will say, "Did you mean champion winch"? (With far, far fewer results even then.)
The sentence, "Because Emma was a champion wench and no one would have her but Joseph" also makes little sense. Because Emma was a champion [young woman] and no one would have her but Joseph? If she was a champion woman, why would no one else have her?
There is the archaic meaning of "wench"---i. e. prostitute---but that's just as bad as calling her a bitch.
On top of this, the context of the comments following the "champion bitch" remark in that thread don't sound like people reacting to having heard Emma called a "wench." For example:
LOL! Will, please post these thoughts of yours over on MAD for our general entertainment purposes. I beg of you. Please! Make sure you include your thoughts about God obviously having sex with Mary. And don't forget the part where you call Nancy frigid and Emma a bitch. Also don't forget the part about God's alpha males being rewarded with females. PLEASE!viewtopic.php?p=144967#p144967
thought the people at MADB would be up in arms over William calling Emma a "wench"? Yeah right.
Loquacious Lurker wrote:
Emma's a bitch? What if your wife had sex with over thirty men and didn't tell you about it? When you found out and, understandably, freaked, would she and others be within their rights to say you acted like a bit of a "bastard?" Why or why not?viewtopic.php?p=144954#p144954
So LL thinks "bastard" is the male counterpart in force to "wench"? I don't think so.
Also, if the moderators here were going to pull something like that, don't you think they could have saved the Grand Conspiracy Against William Schryver a lot of trouble and edited the famous c-word post to show William actually calling Harmony the c-word, and every subsequent post quoting it?
I imagine he's lying about this because this quote has been by far the most damaging of his offenses among faithful members.
P.S. --- No one has ever
produced evidence that the moderators here alter people's posts here to make it look like they have said things that they did not say. You'd think they would have been caught in the act by now if that were the case.EDIT:
I probably should not say for a fact that William is lying. I guess it's possible that he has deluded himself into believing that he never said it and the entire thing is part of a grand, moderator-abetted conspiracy against him.
But it's still wrong either way.