I am taking the rest of today off from the affairs of the world.

I was going through some stuff on the search engines and found something interesting – an attack on Guy from Fractal Planet that always appeared right at the top of the Google search before anything from Guy himself has slipped right down on Duck Duck Go and did not even seem to feature on Google.

Interesting.

I did, however, find this, which I will reproduce in full.

I am going through all this history and reassessing.

Reading through it I am rather ashamed of my role in defending Guy but then I did not know what I know now – that Pauline Schneider is a barefaced liar. I discovered that in 2019.

The entire thread can be read HERE

AuthorTopic: Guy McPherson Accused of Abuse of Women in his Position as Grief Counselor  (Read 16932 times)

Nicole told me about this shit a couple of years ago, but she wasn’t prepared at the time to go public with it.  Now she has.  It was published on The Wrong Kind of Green website.  Thanks to RandyC for making me aware of it.

Edit: I incorrectly attributed this Statement to Nicole Foss due to its parallel to a narrative Nicole told me 2-3 years ago.  It is correctly attributed to Cory Morningstar.

RE:STATEMENT

Wrong Kind of Green Aug 26, 2017 Neo-Liberalism and the Defanging of Feminism

August 26, 2017

To all-

It has come to our attention that a respected leader of our small online enclave has betrayed the trust many people have instilled in him over the past years.  We are stunned at these revelations like everyone else.  It was with much internal debate and emotional pain that we decided as a group that we had to release the information to the community.  Although this form of information is not our usual forte as we are collectively concerned about overriding issues, such as leaving some form of a natural world above all else, it was something so stunningly vile that we had no other choice but to present it to the community as our conscience would not allow us to conceal this from the public.

Since this decision, which is something we thoroughly debated due to its seriousness, there is much online discussion regarding to what degree his transgressions can be described as terrible and even if they should be in the public due to the personal nature of the correspondence.  From this perspective, this person and his supporters have pointed to the fact that the behavior between himself and the woman in question was of a consensual, private nature, and should be of no concern to the wider community.  We believe this argument falls short for three critical reasons which should be considered both separately and collectively.

The first reason is one of ethics, which is separate from legality.  The word ethics is defined as “a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct.”  Most professional organizations have codes of ethics, which participants must adhere to in order to remain in good standing.  In regards to its specific ethical standards, the American Psychological Association states “your psychologist shouldn’t also be your friend, client, or sex partner.  That’s because psychologists are supposed to avoid relationships that could impair their professional performance or harm their clients. One type of relationship that’s never acceptable is a sexual relationship with a current client.“

This person has taken on several roles, which in combination provide the framework for producing potentially serious ethical concerns.  As a recognized authority in the field of climate science, this person’s words contain the weight of authority for many.  His carefully worded prognostications of a coming end of human existence on the planet, though backed by his scientific understanding,  nonetheless have the ability to produce a state of anxiety, uncertainty, and despair in those who accept his perspective.  This person acknowledges this on his website, stating that “Because the topics of his presentations sometimes induce despair, Guy became a certified grief-recovery specialist in January 2014.”

The combination of his pursuits, as a climate scientist predicting the end of life as we know it, and grief counselor, puts him in the unique role of both producing or exacerbating the effect of anxiety or despair in an individual, as well as creating the context through which that despair is then addressed.  His audience, of which we have been a part, consists of individuals often marginalized by our larger society that ignores the very real warnings of catastrophic  climate change.  The views shared by many in our Near Term Human Extinction (NTHE) group have produced not simply a sense of despair about the future, but also a sense of isolation from our immediate communities and families.  Solace is then sought out within the NTHE community, under the banner of this person’s scientific findings.

While in many ways natural responses warranted by our current situation, this combination of despair, confusion, and isolation, none the less set up the potential for the exploitation of those who acutely feel the desperation and disorientation of abrupt climate change, and have nowhere else to turn for answers.

And this is the reason for the need for ethics and ethical boundaries.  This person is in a position of authority with direct influence over the mental, emotional, and in some cases physical and monetary lives, of those who exist in a state of vulnerability.  This is a state which he has helped to facilitate and of which he profits from in his personal life.  To then use that position, as this person has done, to engage in sexualized relations with women by way of administering a self-serving “healing” to individuals who are going such traumatic personal experiences, is a violation of ethical boundaries.  From a purely ethical perspective within a narrowly focused context of a professor/student and grief therapist/client context, the exact content of these relations, which will justifiably elicit revulsion in many by themselves, is not the primary concern.  The mere existence of these relations under such power dynamics, whether consensual or not, is at best ethically compromised, simply because of the potential  for abuse that exists, even if no actual abuse can be conclusively identified.  As the revelations of women who have come forward and expressed their pain with regard to these relationships continues to grow, this strongly indicates that emotional abuse and the abuse of power were at play and their claims should be taken with utmost seriousness. At the most basic level, it is because these abuses could take place that professional boundaries and codes of ethics are established and why we should reject this person‘s behavior.

In that vein, the truth of the matter is that whatever grey area there may potentially be is no longer up for debate due to his repeated and lengthy record of attempting and succeeding in taking advantage of women in a vulnerable position emotionally due to the disheartening mental and social effects of personally accepting the ongoing Sixth Great Extinction (of which humanity will be one of its victims, as well as its singular cause).  As one of the admittedly unfiltered and honest voices concerning this present set of circumstances with few people having the sphere of influence that he has in our small community,  the unethical manner in which he used this trust for nefarious sexual ends repeatedly has left us no other recourse but to do everything in our power to stop him from continuing the same behavior.

This then leads to the second critical point.  While the argument has been made that in regard to his relations with one particular woman, the content is irrelevant because of its consensual nature, this defense rings hollow.  To use an analogy: while living in a free society one may be legally permitted to hold racist beliefs and freely associate with other racists, a member of the NAACP would  nonetheless rightfully oppose its leader if they were later discovered to be a member of the KKK.  Such an association would clearly violate the spirit and mission of an organization promoting racial justice, and in the duplicity of core beliefs in the leadership, it would  also indicate a threat to the structural integrity of the organization and potentially its members.  It would not matter whether the current leader had joined the KKK after being first approached by a klansman, or if the leader started a chapter on his own.  The compromise would be clear.

Similarly, the content of his interactions with one woman in question, no matter how they came about, indicated the willingness of this person to engage in, perhaps initiate, rape fantasies  and other degrading and sexually objectifying dialogues that are not congruous with the core values of a significant number of members of the Near Term Human Extinction Support Group and its associated community.  This incongruity is borne out in the fact that he has spoken out specifically against patriarchy on his regular online radio program and in innumerous public forums and presentations, but has engaged in fantasies of rape and sexual enslavement, which represent the most extreme form of patriarchy, regardless of how that interaction began.   Therefore, the problems surrounding the content of his interactions are twofold.  They are contained in both the degrading, misogynist verbiage itself and the fact that such interactions represent a betrayal of trust relating to the public image of a respect for life and an opposition to patriarchy that he has cultivated in the public eye to his personal benefit.

The destruction of the Earth, the underlying concern of the NTHE support group, is the direct result of human and environmental exploitation, a core element of which is the domination of women where females are treated as property to be used  like much of the natural world, mere objects for male gratification.  Thus the move from more egalitarian, hunter gatherer societies into stratified agricultural and industrial societies, which culminated in today’s planet devouring global civilization which this person critiques, entailed the objectification and commodification of women.  To participate in such objectification and fantasies of female subjugation with a potential member of the NTHE group no less, goes beyond hypocrisy.  It signifies that in regard to what this person believes and values, he cannot be trusted.  And given the context, as suggested in the above analogy, this duplicity threatens both group integrity and potentially the safety of its members.

Perhaps some would say that the way in which the information was obtained makes us no better and even worse than the perpetrator, as there are many online accusations of this being the case.  However, we didn’t go out seeking this information, even if we are greatly appreciative of it since it allows us the opportunity to stop any future manipulations by someone in a leadership position.  It was brought to us and we made the difficult decision to use it for the greater good of stopping any further occurrences – our decision superseding any disparaging things said about us individually or collectively.

Ultimately, the fact of the matter is that none of the individuals who became privy to this information have an axe to grind with this person. Actually, this is quite the contrary.  We are all people who had a great amount of respect and admiration of him as a scholar and a person.  It wasn’t until recently that those who possessed such a tremendous amount of respect for this man started questioning his motives outside of the irrefutable science and his singular desire to provide it to the public.  Sadly, this recent incident dispelled any doubts in our minds regarding much of his endeavors.

We are a small community of activists.  Most of what we know to be true in this world in regards to the state of affairs of the planet are things that are not accepted by the mainstream world, even though they are playing out in real time and disaffecting humanity at this very instant and with growing intensity.  As it is difficult to find any sources of solidarity, be it local or globally, once this disparate group of human beings find comrades or leaders (of which there are even less), we tend to cling on to them in great desperation as they are truly few and far between.

As this is the case, the people who come to us and try to find a community of some sort to explain to them what is going on or just commiserate about the ongoing travails of this global society are the picture of vulnerability during their greatest hour of need.  Hence, it is unethical, even predatory, for anyone to take advantage of these people while they are most defenseless.  As some people are trying to construe this as just a single, solitary case,  the fact of the matter is that this has been an ongoing pattern for awhile now and has reached a point where someone must step in and stem the tide of abuse this man is committing on this tiny yet venerable group.

As such, it begs the question how long can people righteously withhold  what they know to be the truth when it comes to this man’s interaction with the members of such a small group, an already victimized sect who find very little acceptance in general society?  Can we, as supposedly moral people, just sit back idly and allow this type of behavior to continue unabated since it is the path of least resistance to stay silent?  As the response from this tight knit community has ranged from outrage to acceptance, the outcome of this revelation is of no real importance as biases abound as to the acceptance of this information.  Since that is the case, the only thing of barometric significance is apprising the people of the truth to keep them from harm, which was our singular reason for the release of this information.

Although we are cognizant that all of us have personal transgressions and no one is perfect, the predatory nature of this individual makes him a threat to both those who may be accepting of his advances and, most importantly, those who are not.  If the interaction is one of consent amongst equals, it is not the business of us as individuals or as a group to intercede at all.  But, when there is a blatant disregard for the welfare of the people  in an attempt to serve the lascivious desires of one man, then that is something that must be addressed by those who are in power to do so by any means necessary.

This brings us to the third and final critical point.  Not only was there a sordid psycho-sexual aspect of what took place that was against everything this man professed to be of a personal nature as a leader of a social movement, he also betrayed the confidence and trust of another intellectual leader and comrade in the movement, where, based on his documented language, it is a legitimate concern as to whether or not he would have been an actual physical threat to her if he had the opportunity.  With this third and final critical piece, his actions go beyond purely professional ethical violations and public misrepresentations of core values which demonstrate a willingness to degrade and objectify women.  His discussion moves into the realm of creating a physical environment that justifiably feels unsafe to core members.  As previously mentioned, there are other cases of women who have begun to voice their own troubling experiences, which at this time we cannot provide further details.

Therefore, even though we have all had an immense amount of respect for this man over the years, the recent events show he isn’t worthy of being in a position of influence and power over others, as he has abused it in the past, is abusing it presently and will assuredly continue this behavior in the future if no one attempts to at least stop him.

Although we are understanding that people will still hold their opinions about the veracity of the evidence against this man and come away absolving him of all guilt in this series of events, the primary thing we hope to accomplish is to warn those who are in the community about the ulterior motives of this man.  Once people are provided all the evidence, it is up to them to make a personal decision if they wish to continue their relationship with this person, be it personal and/or professional.  We aren’t here to tell anyone what to do in any aspect, as freedom of thought and choice is something we believe in and respect.  However, we would be remiss if we didn’t provide people the total knowledge they need to make informed decisions.

As we know that many people will consider our revelation as being divisive and a planned attack for some fantastical reason that has no basis in reality, we can only say we received this information through no attempt on our part and will receive no reward for releasing it.  Once we became aware of it though, there was no other recourse but to bring it to the public sphere, as the ongoing pattern of behavior was spiraling out of control. There will be those who will cast aspersions against our character and accuse us of somehow profiting in some way from this event, even though this is anything but the case.  Still, there will be many people who will consider us turncoats, paid informants, subversives and every other form of accusation as to our motives.  Yet, we will almost assuredly lose more favor and receive heightened scorn through providing this information than any other outcome.  No matter what blowback we receive though, it is worth it to us to receive a mountain of negative response rather than live with the unconscionable act of staying silent in the face of knowing malfeasance.

We welcome all queries about the veracity of the information since the specific evidence is part of the public domain and not under our supervision.  We have nothing to hide and will vociferously defend our decisions in this matter since to be silent in this regard is criminal, if not legally, then definitely morally.

We are greatly appreciative of the support from our online community in bringing this to the fore.

Thank you.

Michael  Sliwa, Host of the radio show Nature Bats Last from August 2014 to May 2017

Derrick Jensen, Deep Green Resistance

Lierre Keith, Deep Green Resistance

Cory Morningstar, Wrong Kind of Green

Forrest Palmer, Wrong Kind of Green

Luke Orsborne, Wrong Kind of Green

+++

Psychiatrist, researcher, teacher, and author Judith Herman:

“Authoritarian, secretive, sometimes grandiose, and even paranoid, the perpetrator is nevertheless exquisitely sensitive to the realities of power and to social  norms. Only rarely does he get into difficulties with the law; rather, he seeks out situations where his tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired. His demeanor provides an excellent camouflage, for few people believe that extraordinary crimes can be committed by men of such conventional appearance.  The perpetrator’s first goal appears to be the enslavement of his victim, and he accomplishes this goal by exercising despotic control over every aspect of the victim’s life. But simple compliance rarely satisfies him; he appears to have a psychological need to justify his crimes, and for this he needs the victim’s affirmation. Thus he relentlessly demands from his victim professions of respect, gratitude, or even love. His ultimate goal appears to be the creation of a willing victim. Hostages, political prisoners, battered women, and slaves have all remarked upon the captor’s curious psychological dependence upon his victim. George Orwell gives voice to the totalitarian mind in the novel 1984: “We are not content with negative obedience, nor even with the most abject submission. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will. We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us; so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil and all illusion out of him; we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul.”

The desire for total control over another person is the common denominator of all forms of tyranny. Totalitarian governments demand confession and political conversion of their victims. Slaveholders demand gratitude of their slaves. Religious cults demand ritualized sacrifices as a sign of submission to the divine will of the leader. Perpetrators of domestic battery demand that their victims prove complete obedience and loyalty by sacrificing all other relationships. Sex offenders demand that their victims find sexual fulfillment in submission. Total control over another person is the power dynamic at the heart of pornography. The erotic appeal of this fantasy to millions of terrifyingly normal men fosters an immense industry in which women and children are abused, not in fantasy but in reality.”

Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
« Reply #1 on: August 27, 2017, 06:18:51 AM »

Nicole told me about this shit a couple of years ago, but she wasn’t prepared at the time to go public with it.  Now she has.  It was published on The Wrong Kind of Green website.  Thanks to RandyC for making me aware of it.

RE

I saw some discussion of this on The Panic room, Gail Zawacki’s FB page. Was wondering WTF was going on. If this is accurate, a lot of things make more sense as they fall into place.

Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2017, 07:20:27 AM »

There is more information on Facebook.  I was not aware of the nature of the problem until a week ago.  It first surfaced when Robin Westenra of Seemorerocks blog made comments that a woman had accused Guy of taking advantage of her.  Guy claims it was among consenting adults, but the problem is one of ethics, taking advantage of vulnerable people as a grief councilor.

Also, take a look at the people who added their names to the bottom of the statement, Mike Sliwa lived near Guy in New Mexico and co-hosted his radio show.  The two were friends!  I doubt very much that this is just a personal attack because Cory Morningstar and Derrick Jensen co-signed it as well as three other people.  I hardly think they would do that and risk their reputation and position in the collapse community without good reason.

Take a look at Guy’s more recent posts on NBL.  He is taking a break from his public presence due to “professional trolls” and the “deep-state.”

https://guymcpherson.com/2017/08/im-mostly-done/#more-14549

Something is clearly wrong here.

Finally, Nicole and Guy had a falling out several years ago because Guy was rather rude to her, as well as others analysts in the collapse community because he didn’t think they were taking a strong enough stand on the coming collapse.  He has been banned from The Automatic Earth for some time now, it is not even acceptable to speak his name on that web site.

If you want access to the Facebook feed, send Robin Westerna a friends request so you can read what people are saying.  Friend Nicole Foss as well as she posted it shortly after Wrong Kind of Green posted it

Re: Nicole Foss Goes Public with her Criticisms of Guy McPherson
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2017, 07:29:49 AM »

From Facebook, Robin Westenra’s reaction to the letter from Mike Sliwa.

Robin Westenra
9 hrs ·

Todays reflections.

Yesterday I went to the funeral of a beloved cousin who was, amongst other things was bit of a character especially when it came to his relations with the ladies. What impressed me was the acceptance of his occasional waywardness amongst those who knew him.

Then I woke up this morning to a very public statement about my friend, Guy McPherson,more- or-less comparing him with a man taking advantage of a helpless young woman.

There are several things desperately wrong (and that is putting things mildly) with this.

The first is acting as judge, jury and executioner without knowing all the facts.

I am someone with somewhat old-fashioned values and do not take kindly to this publc shaming over something that is very private?

Who can honestly, hand-over-heart tell me they are perfect?

Imagine how people would have reacted in the not-so-distant past if, in the midst of a dsiagreement I took my love letters and without consultation went and photocopied them and mailed them out to all my friends.

You’d all be quite correctly outraged.

Yet, this is exactly what happened here from what I can see. I have seen enough of the correspondance to be able to say that the young lady in question was far from innocent. In fact the correspondance shows that this person was strongly into BDSM and rape fantasies and actually initiated the correspondence.

What induced her to turn and release the equivalent of photocopied private correspondence I have no idea but I can hazard some guesses.

I am well aware of sexism that is becoming MORE, not LESS rampant,pushed largely by a media-driven agenda.

It is many years since I watched a Hollywood movie but I am told that in films women are being relegated once again to being sex objects.

All the while every form of ‘identity politics’ is being pushed so that every form of sexual perversion is put on a pedestal while ‘red-blooded heterosexuals’ (women as well as men) are being castigated in the present toxic, febrile environment, especially, it seems, in America.

There is a climate of blame.

Somebody, ALWAYS, has to be to blame. Whatever happened to acceptance of human nature.

If there was a crime in this case it was of being naive and too trusting of people one doesn’t know personally.

Nobody was truly taken advantage of. Nobody was raped. It was all consensual in an environment that should have remained strictly private.

But I can bet that every word Guy McPherson writes, publically or privately, every word on Messenger will be being read in realtime by the Masters of the Universe.

In case you ask, NO, I will not share the documents that have been shared with me in confidence. That is a strictly private affair that has nothing to do with me or the people that have been loud in their condemnation.

I am angry, very upset and almost through with Facebook, and with the toxicity of the people that inhabit it. It encourages people to rush off to post their opinions even when these are at odds with the evidence.

I am contemplating giving up on Facebook and managing without it. I am not far off wanting to exit from all this shit.

If I disappear off Facebook I may well have decided to do just that.

Want to disagree? That’s fine but I doubt you will remain a Facebook “friend” longer than 5 minutes.

End of sermon.

Kevin Hester, Lisa Stewart, Pauline Panagiotou Schneider,

Pauline Panagiotou Schneider replied · 2 Replies · 38 mins
Robin Westenra
Robin Westenra “Mike Sliwa is right now using Guy’s internet at the Mud Hut.

Talk about hypocrisy. And ethics.”
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
7
· 8 hrs
Manage
Torstein Viddal
Torstein Viddal Don’t give up on face, Robin! This, too, will pass. And anyway, we need you! :)
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
9
· 7 hrs
Manage
Robin Westenra
Robin Westenra I am contemplating moving away from work and the blog – only Facebook
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
4
· 7 hrs
Manage
Gargi Gogoi replied · 1 Reply
Torstein Viddal
Torstein Viddal Sounds reasonable. Blog is a lot of work and sort of yesterday’s platform.
LikeShow more reactions
· Reply ·
2
· 7 hrs
Manage
Gina Webb
Gina Webb Beautifully put Robin, I have been more than disappointed by the personal attacks, disheartened even. Seems to be a mad witch hunt. I really appreciate your level headed perspective Robin, I would miss your posts if you weren’t about.

6 thoughts on “

  1. Actually very sad, if true. Another man of potential greatness brought low by his uncontrollable appetites. This does explain why all those people “betrayed” him – Mike Sliwa especially.

  2. I find the McPherson story interesting as a metaphor in this – the new mythology of a dying planet – more as a study in human nature than as a cautionary tale. We rise above the mileu to gain a subjective view, only to be brought back down – back into the soup of life – by the forces that govern our physical bodies – sex, hunger, avoidance of pain, dopamine, etc. It’s a continual give and take. It’s the material that artists deal with when Art is doing its job. But the beauty of what we, as humans, have achieved will vanish along with the more profoundly beautiful harmonics of our precious planet – whale song, bird song, the jet stream – when the fragility of it all is revealed at last. And that “when” would be now. Carrying the weight of this knowledge is both a burden and a privilege … we all deal with it in our own ways, learning from others and from our mistakes – but to what end if we lose our home? The stakes are high. So carry on Robin, your efforts are much appreciated. And thank you for this blog. Thank you for working through your pain and posting new and important material every day.

  3. First, I would like to say I admire Robin’s reporting on Climate Change and his including Margo’s reports. However, I am disturbed by his right-wing politics. He has become a Trump fascist, which to my mind contradicts his faith in science. I wonder why a New Zealander would care about politics in the USA, especially if he knew the world will end by 2024.

    1. I am NOT a “right-wing fascist” and was never “pro-Trump”. Your blinkered mind might think so but my thesis was always that Trump (like Biden) are overseeing the collapse of America. If he did not exist someone would have to have invented him. I do use some right-wing sources as well as reliable left wing sources as a counterweight to media propaganda which you seem to have uncritically swallowed. if you don’t like what I have to say, rather than call me fascist you could (and should) exercise your right to bugger off somewhere else where you can find views that confirm your prejudices. For what it’s worth, Margo and I are generally at one over much of what you are talking about. IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT GO AWAY!.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Wordpress Social Share Plugin powered by Ultimatelysocial
RSS