Record of Happy Promise Keeper Posts After Banning

This is a record of the further posts of Happy Promise Keeper which I deleted after he returned to my site after my directly-stated wishes for him to desist. Since he is attacking other women in cyberspace in the same manner, I am making this part of the public record.

Happy Promise Keeper, on Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Hi, Danni. I am led of the Lord to come back here for a time. I would like to comment on this that you said …..

“Domestic abuse is exactly the same spirit as sexual adultery, but even more egregious because it includes the element of a murderous spirit. ”

Please share with me how you arrive at this conclusion, of course aside from simple opinion. I simply cannot see this point born out in Scripture. The Scripture is VERY clear that one CAN divorce for adultery and even remarry. But, with the vague definitions of “domestic abuse” we see these days, I am concerned that we are allowing too much liberty to divorce unless and until EACH case of alleged domestic abuse is proven. If we broaden Scripturally-allowed divorces to include the mere allegations of this “domestic abuse” then we are doing a disservice to marriage.

Agree or disagree?

Danni Note:

My reply to this post is recorded in Characteristics of an Abuser.

Christine, on January 16th, 2009 at 2:59 am
…Furthermore, when in a marriage, if one party treats the other with disrespect and abuse instead of cherishing them with love and friendship, how is the relationship supposed to sustain itself? It is not being fed. A hungry heart is not likely to be satisfied with starvation and is opened up to find love elsewhere. To quote a song, “We are made to love and be loved.”

Happy Promise Keeper, on Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Danni, I also have certain concerns with this statement of yours ……

“Furthermore, when in a marriage, if one party treats the other with disrespect and abuse instead of cherishing them with love and friendship, how is the relationship supposed to sustain itself? It is not being fed. A hungry heart is not likely to be satisfied with starvation and is opened up to find love elsewhere. To quote a song, “We are made to love and be loved.”

Are you purporting to use this statement as some sort of approval to permit an abused/neglected spouse to seek “love” elsewhere? Adultery? Infactuation with someone of the opposite sex aside from the physical act? Can you see where this statement could be used by the aggrieved spouse to validate inapproriate behaviors of their own? Which would in turn be abusive actions of their own?

Thank you.

Danni Note:

Obviously, he is attempting to attribute someone else’s comments to me and assign them meaning which I have also repeatedly made statements against elsewhere on my site. Since he targeted many of my threads, he surely saw what I believe about his statements elsewhere – and I have no further need to answer him on this charge. His charges are patently intended to be contentious.

In an interesting side note, he posted a rather extensive piece on a “contentious woman” on one of his Family Life Forum threads – entirely missing the fact that everything he described about a contentious woman describes his own public behavior.

Happy Promise Keeper, on Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:12 PM
Danni, so in effect what you are saying is that if one does not toe YOUR party line and agenda, that they are to be cast aside and labeled as an “abuser?” Can you not see that is in itself abusive behaviors? Shouldn’t the goal of all Christians be to preserve marriage instead of showing others easy outs to break the covenant? By your behaviors here, you are showing the cyber community that abuse can be met with abuse ….. such as in emotional and physical adultery on the part of the aggrieved spouse ….. sin begats sin. By your own admission you have been counseled by church leaders about your behaviors and agenda and the way you are carrying out your personal crusade. You leave no room for respectful disagreement or even legitimate questions. I notice you have dodged the ones I posed to you earlier. You purport to be able to look into some type of “cyber crystal ball” to diagnos my intentions here. Trust me, your infantile approach at analysis here is wrong. That is in itself abuse, as you have leveled false charges and accusations. I know my inquiries here have set you on edge. They cause you discomfort. So be it, because you are not offering a fair and balanced forum here. You are not open to EVEN looking at the other side of the “abuse” equation. This is sad, indeed. It limits your ability to offer true Biblical counsel. You are indeed a bitter and angry woman, Danni.

Danni Note:

Interestingly, on the Family Life Forums thread “Women with Tempers” in Sept. 2008, USS Wahoo used the mechanism of refusing to answer questions he did not want to answer, using the excuse that he was putting up “boundaries,” etc. So it appears that it is only USS Wahoo who is allowed to “put up boundaries.” The distinct difference between him and me is that I did first attempt to dialog with this individual, patiently answering his questions. My patience stopped and the boundaries came up when he started sending them faster than I could reply and then being nasty when I hadn’t answered them fast enough for him. I also carefully and politely pointed out his abusive behaviors – which are very visible and recorded in his comments for public view – and he refused to desist.

At this point, what HPK is demanding is carte blanche to badger and abuse with impunity. He is saying I cannot call his behaviors abusive because to do so I am invoking a “cyber crystal ball” – though we are told in the Word to separate from a “railer” and to judge those in our midst who demonstrate these behaviors. He is saying I have no right to stand up for myself or for righteousness – because then I am being abusive. That is a very revealing statement. He can do this, but if a woman does it is abusive.

Also, when he isn’t getting his way he resorts to accusations and name calling –

“your infantile approach at analysis…is abuse in itself” — talk about accusations!

“you have leveled false charges and accusations” – except that everything I have said has been supported by his own quotes and the Word.

“I know my inquiries here have set you on edge. They cause you discomfort.” – Hardly, more like a pesky fly buzzing around. In saying his comments “cause me discomfort” he is implying it must be because he is shining the light of truth and making my conscience uncomfortable.

“you are not open to even looking at the other side of the ‘abuse’ equation” – this statement is made despite the fact I dialogued with him previously about the fact that abuse is gender neutral and everything written on my site from a woman’s perspective is equally applicable to men. This is something I have also addressed several other places on my site, if he had merely done his research on the truth instead of accusing. He seems to hope that others will be persuaded by his words without reading for themselves.

“you are indeed a bitter and angry woman.” — That is difficult for him to justify, particularly since I have responded with extreme patience over an extended period to his own abusive behaviors. If I were indeed an angry and bitter woman I think the tone of my entire site would be different. I did not respond to his attacks, including the name-calling, in kind or with anger. If I were an angry and bitter person, my responses to him would have revealed these attitudes, and they clearly did not.

At the same time, this is something I observed in my marriage to an abuser, and which others who have been in abusive relationships have also noted. When a “victim” stops being cowed by the abuser and simply states the truth without emotion, the abuser becomes angry and accuses the other party of being angry and shutting down, abandoning the relationship emotionally, not caring about the relationship, not communicating, etc. The attack increases because the “victim” has stepped out of the manipulations of the abuser and refuses to play the game by being “put in his/her place” by the abuser’s accusations. This behavior by HPK is another example of stereotypical abuser mentality.

However, by calling me an angry and bitter woman he can “successfully” discount everything I have said and dismiss it as merely the vanity of an “angry and bitter” woman. He doesn’t have to take seriously anything I have said, and hopefully, no one else will either. It seems that he hopes others will be confused by his smokescreen and likewise dismiss the material on this site, and my identification of him as an abuser.

Happy Promise Keeper, on Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:55 PM
Hannah, you are reading into my comments some stuff that simply isn’t there. I have never said here or anywhere else that ALL types of domestic abuse is not adequate cause for divorce. What I HAVE said, and I stand by it, that not ALL allegations of domestic abuse are actual abuse and certainly not ALL such accusations are allowed for divorce. Society has watered down the definitions of abuse so much that one (usually the husband) must be Christ Himself in order to not be labeled the “abuser”. What some here and on the other such extremist sites resent is when someone posts some cautions or balances. I can tell you positively that not ALL allegations of “abuse” are actually proven to BE abuse. I can also tell you positively that the “abuse card” has been used quite too frequently to get out of a marriage that one may not be “happy” in ….. and from the clergy standpoint I will always stand against that type of frivolousness.

Danni Note:

This comment is practically a duplicate of HPK’s theme throughout this site – and mirrored in every other venue where I have seen him write. He constantly discounts women’s claims of abuse, he constantly demands that the church must validate and prove every allegation (which has the problems stated elsewhere), and he constantly insists that women who are speaking out about abuse are being prejudiced against me – which turns the subject aside from the point. He perpetually insists that if we expose the truth about the realities of abuse we are allowing an open door for everyone to bail on their marriages for any reason.

He does this in spite of the fact that myself and other writers have painstakingly stated the perameters and process for dealing with abuse, which does not allow for an open rush on the divorce courts. But he not only refuses to acknowledge these statements and writings, he will not acknowledge their existence or reality even if they are pointed out to him directly – in case he missed them accidentally. He just bulldozes ahead with his accusations. Then makes his “stand on holiness” with statements like, “from the clergy standpoint I will always stand against that type of frivolousness.” – implying he is the personal vanguard of righteousness – and we are the unrighteousness assaulting the gate.

Happy Promise Keeper, on Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Danni, removing the evidence is a desperate way to cover your tracks. You have my sympathies, sister.

Danni Note:

More minimizing and dismissing from HPK. Cover my tracks? What tracks are those since I deleted his comments?

“You have my sympathies” – is a patently disrespectful statement. He is giving me his pity-full (deliberate spelling) pat on the head, as if to convince me and anyone who might read his words that he is being the bigger man.

I spent several days and many hours patiently attempting to dialog with this reader. He persistently returned comments full of disrespect and name-calling. I warned him before taking action to ban him. In spite of being banned, he returned saying “the Lord” told him to return – another directly abusive action since I had told him not to return. When I followed through on my promise to ban him, he degenerated into further name-calling and disrespect.

One thing I see consistently in HPK’s comments is that if I don’t agree with him and lie down and surrender to him then I am being abusive, angry, bitter, etc. There can be no possibility that he is ever wrong – not even genuinely mistaken. Even when his errors have been politely addressed, in hopes that he has merely misunderstood – he has taken the opportunity to directly ignore these explanations and continue to push forward with more, faster, and more demanding accusations.

There has never been any question in his mind (as reflected in his comments) whether he is mistaken, misunderstanding or overstepping where he has no authority. His entire commentary has been on the attack – subtly at first, then with greater audacity – with a uniform assumption of guilt on my part and righteousness on his. There has been no real dialog, only accusations, met with further accusations when answered.

Yet, at the end of the day, he says I am being abusive when I stand up to him and refuse to be bullied. Apparently, from what HPK is demonstrating, only men have that option because women who stand against abuse are all evil-hearted man-haters, and are, therefore, only being guiltily defensive and shifty.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: