Why I Post Anonymously (Part 2 – the John Hugh Morgan Fiasco)
The Year Long Soap Opera of Being Pressured and Harassed Into Giving My Real Name
I wold advise you to read this whole post to get the full picture, but there is a kind of TL;DR thing at the bottom.
Here is part 1:
(Link): Why I Post Anonymously (Part 1)
——————————————-
Aug 2014 update:
(Link): Blogger Guy, John H. Morgan, Who Accused Me Of Being Untrustworthy Apparently Finds My Blog Trustworthy Enough to Use As A Resource
(Link): John Hugh Morgan Still Lurking At My Blog as of summer 2015 – What Nerve
There is also an October 2014 Update much farther below.
———————————————–
I originally had much of the following content in ‘Part 1,’ but it was getting out of hand, making that post too long, and going off on a tangent, so here is that material in its own post.
What I will do is give some history and background first.
About a year or two ago, I got a new blog visitor, a guy who posts under the name John Hugh Morgan (aka johnhughmorgan3 ~ Twitter handle = @JohnMor13413450. He has a blog on Word Press, (Link): Christian Virtue in the 21st Century).
—January 4, 2014 update:—
Morgan has now set his “Christian Virtue in the 21st Century Blog” to private.
One must have his permission to view his blog.
However, you can still view and read the blog via Google Cache. For example:
A copy of this “Maidens” post that I make a reference to in this post can be viewed
(Link): here – cached version of “Maiden” post
I don’t know if Morgan did this today or yesterday, but one thing is certain: he continues to visit this blog and reads it. 😆
The dude scolds me about not posting under my real name, in that he apparently feels people should post under their real names to be considered “credible” (and transparent and the like), but then goes and sets his whole blog to private.
What is it this guy is trying to hide? I thought the whole purpose of blogging under one’s real name (according to him) was to be open and viewed as trustworthy?
I may be blogging under a “pen name” here, but my blog is open and visible to anyone who drops by.
It’s quite the double standard to lecture someone for not blogging under their real name, implying they are untrustworthy, deceptive or shady, but then pretty much acts shady and dishonest, or suspicious and odd, while blogging under their real name. 😆
—-Update Jan. 21, 2014.—-
Morgan has since set his blog back to public:
(Link): Christian Virtue in the 21st Century
Morgan seems to mirror the stuff I discuss on my blog, after I blog about it first.
I do believe I was blogging about feminist “slut shaming” rhetoric and its effect on views of virginity and celibacy, and how such views have seeped into Christian culture, before he was, but he feels fine borrowing that topic to use at his own blog, with no hat tip to this blog.
How someone can criticize me for not blogging under my real name but feel just spiffy fine about using ideas I blog on first is beyond me.
I have no idea how long his blog will remain publicly visible. Probably until he sees I can see it again, in which case it might go back to hidden mode for a few days again. 😆
–end of Jan 21 update—
In his “Maidens” post (view post), Morgan states:
In order to affirm something, you must be willing to defend it.
- At one time in history, knights defended maidens at all costs. It was known as chivalry.
- So every chance we get, let’s show the world what it is missing.
- Show men with dignity and self control that they are worth more than a distrustful glance, an anonymous email, or adolescent games.
- There really is no gray area here. You either build a guy up to what he can be or you tear him down to what he used to be. It’s your choice.
Several points:
1. Vis a vis the “chivalry” type comments, of knights defending women.
Women should defend themselves. Women expecting or hoping for other people to defend them, especially men, is a form of codependency.
When I was cyber stalked previously, I had no man to defend me. I had to defend myself.
Brow-beating or shaming a woman for caring about her personal safety as expressed by her using a pen name when writing sensitive, personal information, as I do on this blog, is bullying.
It is not ‘chivalry.’ It is quite the opposite of “chivalry.”
2. Regarding the “anonymous e mail” comment.
I’m not sure if that is a veiled reference to me or not; if it is:
Morgan contacted me here. He sent me e-mails. I did not contact him first. I did not e-mail him. He initiated contact with me.
3. Re: ‘adolescent games’ phrase.
That would be him, there again, who is being adolescent.
A mature man stops at a woman’s first or second “no” when asking her for something and does not try to shame her or harass her out of her “no.”
But it goes beyond “adolescent games” to keep harassing a woman online who has made it more than clear on one occasion she does not want you bothering her for her real name.
Again, this guy does not understand or appreciate how scary it is for women on line, or how dangerous it can be, when we get death threats or rape threats from men we do not know, and it’s made ten times more frightening if the man in question knows where we live and what our real name is.
4. Re: ‘Building a guy up’.
Sorry, no. A man’s behavior or emotional state is not a woman’s responsibility.
By the same token, a man’s sexual actions and sexual thought life is not a woman’s responsibility, either, so it is in error (as many Christian men do) to tell women to “dress modestly.”
That view is identical to what some branches of Islam teach, by the way, and which is why some practitioners of Islam force women to dress in head to toe outfits called burkas.
Muslims hold females responsible for male behavior and for male sexual sin.
If you find yourself parroting Islamic views, or agreeing with them, and yet claim to be a Christian, you need to re-examine your “Christian” beliefs.
5. Regarding Morgan’s comment:
- “In order to affirm something, you must be willing to defend it.”
Er, yeah, which is what I was doing on this blog for two or more years, but got beaten up for it merely for not providing all the world with my real name.
A person can defend a belief under a “pen name.” Using one’s real name is not necessary.
And as if I want a bunch of horny, mal-adjusted sexual sickos e-mailing me about sex. No thank you.
And trust me, if you are a woman and you post under your real name (and with a photo) you WILL get sleaze-oids responding to you with sick, perverted comments and requests, especially if you mention anything about your personal sex life or history, as I do on this blog.
Morgan does not have to live with a fear of, or possibility of rape, because he is a man and not a woman (assuming he is in fact telling the truth about himself and posting his true name).
Morgan keeps wanting to portray the situation of posting about sexually related stuff under one’s real name as only slightly risky and no big deal… but again, he is not a female. He doesn’t understand and doesn’t want to.
(PURPOSE OF THIS BLOG)
I shifted views on pre-marital sex since I first began this blog a few years ago.
I no longer defend the concept of staying a virgin until marriage per se, only that I see a lot of Christians who profess to believe in it do not really practice it or believe it, and some of them, like hypocrites, even attack the very teaching.
I’m now more speaking out against the Christian hypocrisy and idiocy of sexual teachings I see, more so than defending celibacy or virginity.
— end Jan 4, 2014 update —
Morgan would occasionally leave comments under some of my posts. Not a problem. He was polite, did not make any trouble at that point.
But at some point early on, Morgan began pressuring me A LOT to give him my real name, to friend him on Facebook, etc.
I politely explained that, no, I did not wish to give him my real name or friend him on social media.
Morgan backed off after a little while, so I thought the matter was dropped.
Boy, was I wrong! Morgan began pressuring me again after some time (days or weeks, I can’t recall) once more for my real name and other personal identification. I again declined.
It seems to me we danced this dance several times within the space of weeks or months, and I had to keep telling him NO.
At one point back then, he apologized. Things calmed down for a while, I considered the matter over and done.
Morgan claimed early on that his pressuring me over me giving him my real name was due to some sort of mental health issue he suffers from, if I remember rightly.
I think at one point Morgan did not drop by my blog for a few weeks, so I figured he was gone for good, but no, he started leaving the occasional post again.
I was on edge thinking, “Oh no, it’s that guy who hounds me over wanting my real name. Geeze, I hope he does not bring THAT up again.”
But, he did not hound me at that time for my name or anything. So I thought it was a done deal.
Wrong again. He began hassling me again to reveal my real name.
It’s quite common on the internet for people to use screen names. I don’t think he understands that or appreciates it.
Anyway, I called Morgan out on it once more, and I think he told me back then he was sorry, that he ‘forgot’ that he had previously asked me for my real name.
A few months went by without incident. He was just a visitor who would drop in, leave a few posts, and go.
Sometime around August, September, or October 2013, I decided to make a Twitter account for this blog.
A few weeks after I was using that Twitter account to tweet links to some of my blog posts about singleness, Morgan started sending me tweets.
Morgan was again hounding me to give him my real name, but this time, he was doing so on Twitter.
Lord almighty, what is the obsession with getting my real name?
I am no less ‘credible’ for using a pseudonym.
My posts are no less true because I am not posting under my real name of “Mary Smith, located at 123 Elm Street, Any City, USA.”
(Here is where I pick up with the comments that were originally in Part 1 of “Why I Post Anonymously” with a little bit of editing so that it flows better.)
A (now former) regular reader of this blog ( johnhughmorgan3 ~ Twitter handle = @JohnMor13413450 ) suggested recently on Twitter that my not posting under my real name damages my credibility. I don’t see how.
——- Edit. January 2, 2014 update:
This individual, ( johnhughmorgan3 ), has since, as of late Jan. 1, 2014, or early Jan. 2, 2014, deleted all tweets he made to me on my Twitter account from his Twitter account (the ones where he was again bugging me to give him my real name, etc). 😆
Those Tweets are no longer appearing in my Twitter “contact” area, which notifies you of replies or comments you receive.
However, my replies to him remain on Twitter. I was not talking to myself.
I sent him about 4 or 5 tweets, in reply to his tweets to me, where I made it clear AGAIN that I would not be giving him my real name, after he once more bugged me about about stating my real name.
Then I logged out after posting a few links to news stories about singles.
When I logged back in to Twitter a day or so later, I checked my “contact” area on Twitter.
Even after I had logged off, in the time since then, he had sent me several tweets, again harping on me about me remaining anonymous.
In one tweet, Morgan claimed he knew of people who would want to post at my blog here, if only I would state my real name. I ignored that tweet and the others. I did not reply to those.
As far as the first batch of tweets are concerned, the ones I did reply to-
Here is one Tweet I sent him, after he began badgering me to reveal my real name AGAIN:
(Link): My Tweet Reply
That Tweet to him reads:
@JohnMor13413450
Why would my being anon damage my “credibility?” I useMyBlog2 rant so I guess it doesn’tBug me if ppl dn’t find me credible
————————————-
But some time last night or today (January 2, 2014), the dude has deleted any tweets he sent me.
Why? He claims to be a Christian guy.
What is he trying to hide? I thought Christians were supposed to be honest, upfront, and transparent, etc.
It looks like a person posting under his real name (or what he claims to be his real name) does not necessarily make him any more upstanding, “credible,” and honest than a person who uses a screen name to blog.
I had a hunch last night that he would delete all his Tweets to me. I had him pegged for that kind of person. I find it odd, though.
So there you have it.
– Dude harasses me for my real name for over a year (though he took a break from this behavior mid year for a few months),
– then sends me an e-mail or two late Nov. 2013 saying he’s fine with me staying anonymous, then
-stalks me over on Twitter in December 2013, once again hassling me and pressuring me for my real name, getting upset when I once more decline to reveal my true identity;
– then has a melt down / tantrum (Jan 1 or 2, 2014) and deletes all his tracks (ie, previous Tweets to me) and demanding I make more changes to my blog.
And this is why I blog anonymously, folks.
Goodness only knows what this sort of person would do if he had my real name.
(The last stalker I had DID have my real name, and the weirdo would harass me at my job, in addition to my private life.)
— Edit 2, January 2, 2014 —
DAMAGE CONTROL
I just visited the dude’s blog page recently (hosted on johnhughmorgan3.wordpress.com), and the blog has the post stamped as Dec 31, 2013:
(Link): Maidens Waiting For Marriage
(* A copy of this “Maidens” post can be viewed (Link): here)
You know WHY he made that post and why he chose that day to post it?
Look at the timing: it is stamped December 31, 2013.
Morgan made that post when he did because of his recent negative interactions with me from November and December 2013, where he was once more hounding me to give him my personal information and was doing so on my blog and on Twitter. He also sent me some e-mails in Nov. 2013.
This guy, Morgan, who pestered me for about over a year (via my blog, e- mail, and Twitter) for me to give my real name goes on and on in that post ((Link): Maidens Waiting For Marriage) about how much he admires women for posting under their real names “publicly.”
I have no idea why women writing about their experiences under “pen names” rather than their real names “publicly” magically do not count for anything.
Morgan also goes on and on (in his “Maidens” post) about how he totally understands about female concerns for online safety – NO, NO, HE REALLY DOES NOT; read this entire post for an explanation of why (as well as (Link): Part 1).
Also observe my comments above how this Morgan guy deleted previous tweets he sent me, tweets where-in he was once more shaming me and hounding me for not giving my real name to him.
Why would he do that unless he feels he has something to hide?
Morgan was, I can only assume, deleting those tweets, probably so he can claim I’m making the whole thing up, or how he really is Mr. Trustworthy, or can appear to be so to other ladies online.
Men simply do NOT face the same kind of, and amount of, danger online, or in real life, that women do (see links farther below for more on that).
Continue reading “Why I Post Anonymously ( Part 2 – the John Hugh Morgan Fiasco )”
Christian Pundit 