Lori Alexander 42: Biblically A Bitch, Now Dressed Up In White Privilege

[delphinium65]

1 hour ago, EowynW said:

I noticed he's given up harassing Rachelle. 

Because she can back up what she's saying, and he can't silence her. 

[cara]

Ken's posts are the length of a short college essay and they don't make any sense. I can't believe people like him manage to become so rich and successful.

 

[dairyfreelife]

Once again, for LorKen and their humpers. 

Slander is spoken NOT written. 

Libel is written. 

If it is true, then it's neither. It only applies to false statements made that are clearly designed to damage someone's reputation. 

Libel and slander are highly difficult cases to process, so good fucking luck LorKen. 

[SuperNova]

4 hours ago, Momto2Princesses said:

Her blog cannot be the receptacle for the latest Christina feminist discovery in the Word that is based on a shred of a verse that is then made into a full-blown theology for modern day women; that by change looks just like feminism! Oh if these people were just willing to pull out one of the many commentaries where men have spent their whole life studying the meaning of each word and phase in the Bible before they came to their conclusions.

Holy shit. To the first bolding. Isn't Lori's entire bullshit blog/insta/fb based on titus 2? To the second. *Sigh* Classic horse of truth mansplaining. If only us pin-headed women would just listen and follow what the great and powerful menfolk have studied we would all be better for it. Why don't we learn? Long suffering Ken and his massive brain, he's an intellectual island.

And this:

Is Lori calling Ken her Lord, her federal head? I know who's getting a special 15 minutes and lube tonight!

[refugee]

10 hours ago, Red Hair, Black Dress said:

From Transformed WIFE 2.0:

Ken has thrown down the gauntlet.  Do we accept his challenge and bombard him with screen shots?

 

Email him? Make it easy for him to stalk and harass? I don’t think so.

[EowynW]

[lilwriter85]

Didn't Ken harass that blogger Shiela for awhile online after she had some kind of spat with Lori?

[EowynW]

4 minutes ago, lilwriter85 said:

Didn't Ken harass that blogger Shiela for awhile online after she had some kind of spat with Lori?

Yes he did. Came to set her straight. 

[Petronella]

7 hours ago, SuperNova said:

Holy shit. To the first bolding. Isn't Lori's entire bullshit blog/insta/fb based on titus 2? To the second. *Sigh* Classic horse of truth mansplaining. If only us pin-headed women would just listen and follow what the great and powerful menfolk have studied we would all be better for it. Why don't we learn? Long suffering Ken and his massive brain, he's an intellectual island.

And this:

Is Lori calling Ken her Lord, her federal head? I know who's getting a special 15 minutes and lube tonight!

Wait, isn't Transformed Wife 2.0 satire? Help and clarity, please!

[SweetLaurel]

50 minutes ago, Petronella said:

ait, isn't Transformed Wife 2.0 satire? Help and clarity, please!

Yes, it is.  Written by another person, who sometimes 'talks' as Lori, only with sarcasm and humor and insight.   However, that makes Ken feel violated, apparently.  Which I think is kinda amusing considering all the women Lori makes feel violated.   (Blocked for saying as a widow with two kids, I didn't see God paying my power bill or mortgage, and the darn kids just need to eat every single day,  and so I work. According to Lori,  I must simply not believe enough or don't pray hard enough.  Bad on me.  If 'God's perfect plan' includes my kids starving, well, Ken says that isn't a bad way to go but oddly I'm not real excited about it.)   

[Jellybean]

9 hours ago, lilwriter85 said:

Didn't Ken harass that blogger Shiela for awhile online after she had some kind of spat with Lori?

That’s one of the things that pops up in a google search of the email address Ken gave. The blog author (Sheila) was asking her readers for their thoughts about whether she should delete comments and Ken’s comment on that post was highlighted as an example of distasteful responses that the author would usually delete (and that she promised to delete in future). Well done Ken! 

I really don’t understand how Ken’s clients (and prospective clients) don’t have a problem with his online statements. Some of them make me incredibly uncomfortable, for example his posts about how molestation of children by their siblings is only a problem because we make it so by being all whiny. 

[ViolaSebastian]

In re-reading Ken’s comments on 2.0, I was really struck by his remark that he had never felt violated before. That’s telling, to me. He has no basis for feeling, for example, how a woman feels when she’s told she has to joyfully submit to her abuser. Or have sex on demand, no matter how she feels. Or told how she needs to give up her hopes and career aspirations to raise children that she may not even want—and that she’s going against God and will be sent to hell if she doesn’t. Or if she’s told her major depression is because she doesn’t stay home with her children and keep a clean home. You know, violated. 

[lilwriter85]

11 minutes ago, Jellybean said:

 

I really don’t understand how Ken’s clients (and prospective clients) don’t have a problem with his online statements. Some of them make me incredibly uncomfortable, for example his posts about how molestation of children by their siblings is only a problem because we make it so by being all whiny. 

A part of me thinks Ken has lost potential clients due to his online activities with Lori's blog. Some potential client may have done deep research on Ken and came across Lori's blog or her Facebook page.  As for his current clients, I'm guessing that some of them are in the dark to Ken and Lori's online activities. Or, if some clients know they may already have some kind of loyalty to Ken. The molestation comments were just awful.

Last week, I looked through the Wayback machine archives on Ken's old business site and there were slideshows and pictures of him with the many women who work in his clients' offices. When Ken was on FJ, he said his whole thing about respecting working women. Like I said before, I don't believe he actually respects working women. My take is that he knows that his clients' ortho practices can't survive without working women, but he also dislikes the women for working. Sometime last year, a woman on Lori Alexander Undeleted or some another FB page shared a email correspondence she had with Ken. From what I remember, Ken said that he was ok with working mothers/wives, but then he said that taxes eat up women's paychecks and that he felt that women working didn't help all that much for families. He also said something to the effect that he feels that wages for men would rise if women didn't work. I'll try to find that post later on because I recall someone got a screenshot of it.

[Petronella]

3 hours ago, SweetLaurel said:

Yes, it is.  Written by another person, who sometimes 'talks' as Lori, only with sarcasm and humor and insight.   However, that makes Ken feel violated, apparently.  Which I think is kinda amusing considering all the women Lori makes feel violated.   (Blocked for saying as a widow with two kids, I didn't see God paying my power bill or mortgage, and the darn kids just need to eat every single day,  and so I work. According to Lori,  I must simply not believe enough or don't pray hard enough.  Bad on me.  If 'God's perfect plan' includes my kids starving, well, Ken says that isn't a bad way to go but oddly I'm not real excited about it.)   

It's funny and makes serious points, but I worry that quotes from 2.0 are being confused with actual Lori quotes by some. Her own words are exaggerated enough.

[quiversR4hunting]

whew - finally caught up! between busy with the Triduum, going to the in-laws and phone issues I am finally caught up on this thread!

@AlwaysDiscerning That is weird with the review on amazon. I will have to dig through some old screenshots and see if I snagged the original review but I doubt it. I did screenshot this comment on Amazon from the reviewer Hannah

[AlwaysDiscerning]

@quiversR4hunting Thank you! Great catch. It is so fishy what is going on with her. No one can change their tune that quickly. She was totally hating Lori to now being her BFF and biggest supporter over night. 

I too am just getting caught up fully. I am working up a response to Ken's post with a screenshot for each point Rachelle brought up. Its going to probably be 20 or more pages with the shots. If anyone can refer back to Rachelle's original comment (somewhere in first few pages of this thread) and find me the shots for each one of her so called "lies" that would be greatly appreciated. Some are easy to find but others will take a lot more digging. This will probably take me all week to complete. 

[EowynW]

5 hours ago, AlwaysDiscerning said:

@quiversR4hunting Thank you! Great catch. It is so fishy what is going on with her. No one can change their tune that quickly. She was totally hating Lori to now being her BFF and biggest supporter over night. 

I too am just getting caught up fully. I am working up a response to Ken's post with a screenshot for each point Rachelle brought up. Its going to probably be 20 or more pages with the shots. If anyone can refer back to Rachelle's original comment (somewhere in first few pages of this thread) and find me the shots for each one of her so called "lies" that would be greatly appreciated. Some are easy to find but others will take a lot more digging. This will probably take me all week to complete. 

 

Spoiler

 

[quiversR4hunting]

OH! I forgot to mentions something about the amazon reviews. Notice, she doesn't slam all of us that gave negative reviews. My negative review clearly states verified purchase and I kept almost all my entire review on the book (including the table of contents mistake). I wonder what makes Lori decided which negative reviews to attack and which ones not to attack.

[AlwaysDiscerning]

2 minutes ago, quiversR4hunting said:

OH! I forgot to mentions something about the amazon reviews. Notice, she doesn't slam all of us that gave negative reviews. My negative review clearly states verified purchase and I kept almost all my entire review on the book (including the table of contents mistake). I wonder what makes Lori decided which negative reviews to attack and which ones not to attack.

Yes, totally wonder that too. There is no rhyme or reason. I sent you a message. 

[Red Hair, Black Dress]

12 hours ago, refugee said:

Email him? Make it easy for him to stalk and harass? I don’t think so.

Is there some way we could send him the old Undeleted site via a locked down email or just post the Undeleted link from Wayback on the Transformed 2.0 FB? 

I definitely do not want Ken to be able to cyber stalk and harass any of us.

I know he will never publically acknowledge that Lori and he wrote all that we've documented -- but perhaps if he actually sees the evidence (vain hope I know) it would make him stop whining-shrieking writing that we all are telling lies about them. 

Perhaps when he sees the sheer volume of vileness they (mostly Lori) have written and the fact that it is out there forever for anyone to find he'll back off.  Maybe even tell Lori to tone it down/stop because she's 1) making a spectacle of herself and 2) she's potentially harming his business.  The business that allows her to live in the $500K house, take 10-week vacations to Door County and buy all the organic stuff she wants.  She says she believes in and practices submission in her marriage., @Ken tell her to for once not be a hypocrite and live up to what she says.

[squiddysquid]

Has 2.0 already mentioned that Lori put a hole in her diaphragm

because Ken didn't want more kids / told her she has to work until they have a certain number of kids?

[AlwaysDiscerning]

2 minutes ago, squiddysquid said:

Has 2.0 already mentioned that Lori put a hole in her diaphragm

because Ken didn't want more kids / told her she has to work until they have a certain number of kids?

I don't think so. However, I think all the fangirls just excuse that as oh that was before you were transformed, so thats OK. You didn't know better. That was then this is now. 

[AlwaysDiscerning]

@EowynW Sorry, should have clarified. I had the shots of Rachelle's comments. I was just asking if anyone could refer back to those and help me get the screenshots that match up to everything Rachelle said. I just mentioned where they were so other could find them quickly. 

[SilverBeach]

42 minutes ago, AlwaysDiscerning said:

@quiversR4hunting Thank you! Great catch. It is so fishy what is going on with her. No one can change their tune that quickly. She was totally hating Lori to now being her BFF and biggest supporter over night. 

I too am just getting caught up fully. I am working up a response to Ken's post with a screenshot for each point Rachelle brought up. Its going to probably be 20 or more pages with the shots. If anyone can refer back to Rachelle's original comment (somewhere in first few pages of this thread) and find me the shots for each one of her so called "lies" that would be greatly appreciated. Some are easy to find but others will take a lot more digging. This will probably take me all week to complete. 

When the horse came here before, @Koaladid an outstanding job of quoting back to him his and Lori's ugly posts. She handed him his ass multiple times. He knows we have documentation, don't play this farce with him regurgitating that stuff. It's a game with him. I personally recall reading his M&M offer to a poster here, in a misguided effort to be charming since he was losing the fight to convince us bad ol' FJers that he and Lori were just misunderstood. They will never get that the people here are not as gullible and stupid as Lori alexander's fangirls and boys.

When confronted with his and Lori's actual postings, he just tries to gaslight by using walls of meaningless text. These folks are impossible to reason with. 

[SongRed7]

17 hours ago, EowynW said:

He's so damn surprised that people pushing back against them are fellow Christians lol. 

Because God gave us a brain and the gifts of discernment and free will among other things.  He intends for us to use them and question those things that are out of line with his Word....and not just follow people blindly.  Isn't that what Lori wants us to do? Be exactly like her and never question her ways -- and if we do we apparently must hate/despise God's ways -- which we don't!