"Witlesses", "JDumbs", other labels.. How do you feel about them?

by AlmostAtheist 54 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  blindersoff

  I will confine my comment to the use of these terms on this board.

  I can see how a JW could wind up here accidently. My own mother did a search & wound up at an 'apostate' site.

  If I had done that and saw terms like the above, I would never have given it a second look. It does nothing to attract truthseekers. It only serves to give vent to our own feelings. I attended a Sunday talk recently where the speaker spent the whole time deriding other churches. If I were one of the public , I would have walked out. Almost did anyway. (A side note) I think the same thing applies to the choice of what is generally considered (if there is such a thing) foul launguage.

  Having said that, I realize that the purpose of this board is not solely to help JW's escape but I do see a lot of comments geared that way.

  So I think it depends on the motive of the user. Is it to vent, or to convince someone with appealing reasoning, etc.

  No need to flame me. I am not trying to tell anyone here what they should or should not say.

  B
• 

  Finally-Free

  I would be happy to refrain from using derogatory terms when referring to Jehovah's Witnesses if they would be willing to stop referring to me as a "pest", "apostate", or "dog that has returned to his vomit".

  But as long as they continue to speak abusively of me I feel free to respond in kind.

  W
• 

  Lilycurly

  "dog that has returned to his vomit"

  That is probably the most disgusting thing I have ever heard. Just the mental picture...ugh. It was NOT fun getting up on a Sunday morning to go to a place where stuff like that would be forced into your mind.
• 

  mrsjones5

  Someone on the board recently said that they knew of jws who referred to "worldly" people as "ITs".
• 

  kid-A

  I believe the WTS referred to all non-JWs as "cockroaches" in need of extermination in a recent magazine. This is in addition to the litany of offensive terms the JWs have applied

  to non-JWs over the years. I have no compunction at all about using derogatory terms to describe JWs. THe use of other derogatory terms to categorize people based on colour, nationality, sexual

  orientation, etc, is morally wrong because these are characteristics we have no control over. However, religion is a choice, it is a way of thinking, not some unalterable physical feature, in this

  case, I have no hesitation to use these terms for the dubs, witlesses, shitnesses, J-dumbs, borg, etc etc. Furthermore, jehovah is not, and never was gods name, just another JW fiction. Jehovah is simply

  an anglicized mispronunciation of an original hebrew term, yahweh. Hence, I dont understand why any offense should be taken at "jehoobah" "jehoobie" etc etc....
• 

  GetBusyLiving

  This really is a good topic AA. I find it really difficult sometimes to remember the sensitivity I felt to expressions that degraded the mythological tribal diety "Jehovah" when I first started checking out ex-Witness sites. The most telling part of my apprehension was that I was already an atheist when I first looked at ex- witness web sites. The brainwashing is deep and a Witnesses dissonance can be so deep as to be completely illogical. It's something to remember if any of us personally care about the active lurking Witnesses on this website.

  Don't get me wrong. I think Jehovah slurring is hilarous now. I'm pretty sure I came up with the expression "Shitnesses". I really should have patented that.

  GBL
• 

  ColdRedRain

  I'm Afro-Caribben. It's an ethnic group that's so esoteric, nobody really has anything to say about us, other than that we work 40 jobs and we smoke pot, neither of which is a bad thing ;)

  CRR of the "Welcome to the Gap...err, I mean American Eagle, Mon. Sorry mon, I wark at boat' places" class.
• 

  AlmostAtheist

  I have to admit, this topic came to mind for purely selfish reasons -- I don't want to inadvertantly poison my mind by allowing myself to develop a prejudice about a group of people.

  Some sort of presumption might be deserved. JW's as a group probably do have some traits that make them less than desirable as associates. Almost all of them walk around with the notion that most people are going to die horribly at God's hand sometime soon, and they see it as a good thing. That alone has got to carry some attitude with it. They nearly all believe they are the elite "keepers of the truth", so there's surely some arrogance hanging over them. (Though most seem to have compartmentalized that into just theological arrogance.) But as one poster mentioned, they are surely not all "witless". I'd bet you know -- and I surely know -- of JW's that are actually quite intelligent. Deceived, but intelligent.

  I hadn't thought about the effect on lurkers when they see topics that have potentially offensive material in them. I was only looking to protect myself. (You guys, always looking out for lurkers. It's all about me, people! ME!)

  Granted, the JW's all have their prejudices against us. I'm not sure that's a good reason to carry one around about them, though. They have an excuse for it -- they're brain washed. What's my excuse?

  Dave
• 

  james_woods

  Maybe these terms are OK (if just being posted in jest) but only if we are sure they do not carry prejudice or hate.

  I do remember being a young JW when one of the circuit overseers came to town. He had previously served in a Utah circuit and actually used the term "Morons" for the mormons around there - several times during the saturday night talk he gave. I was offended even though I have always had a deep sense of repulsion for what Brigham Young and bunch stood for.

  In another idiotic example, my sister got her holy roller style baptist preacher do my fathers funeral. He actually stood up there and said "see - we christians do not cry at funerals because we have the lord". Didn't notice that everybody was crying. Then he goes on to spout forth that only non-christians cry at a funeral because they don't have the lord. My wife (who is Vietnamese Buddhist) was sitting there. Thank god she didn't pick up on exactly what he was saying.

  Whoops! did I just post "holy roller"?
• 

  Finally-Free

  Granted, the JW's all have their prejudices against us. I'm not sure that's a good reason to carry one around about them, though. They have an excuse for it -- they're brain washed. What's my excuse?

  We are conducting an educational work. We are helping JWs to learn that there is a real world out there!!! And in the real world actions often have consequences. For example, if JWs would walk into a bar and start calling people names and telling them they - and their children - deserve to die they would likely get beaten up. We don't beat them up, but when we respond to them in the same manner in which we are addressed we are teaching them that their bad behavior has negative consequences. They learn that their bad behavior is unacceptable.

  Believe it or not, that is the first thing that made me take a second look at my beliefs. Someone made me realize that my religion was not making me a better person. (no, I didn't get a beating). It prompted an honest self examination, and I discovered that my association with Jehovah's Witnesses had made me very hateful and judgmental, quite the opposite of what I was before I was a JW.

  But when we poke fun at JWs we are, in a sense, poking a bit of fun at ourselves and our own past. When I call JWs "stupid", I am admitting that for 20 years I was "stupid" too.

  W