BBM. No Hope, I feel the exact same way, although I do see that what TexMex saying about Travis's being critical of other Mormons (holier than thou) was hypocritical. I don't however hold it against him. Jodi was a far bigger hypocrite. When was it ever discussed what a lousy Mormon she was??? He wasn't harsh, he was honest.
What he said on May 26. I assume whatever objections folks may have about what Travis said relate to calling her a *advertiser censored*, a 3 hole wonder and the like, given that telling her she was evil and a liar was saying the plain objective truth.
IMO, he didn't pull out the *advertiser censored* card to be "mean," and it wasn't randomly chosen.
She may or may not have told him about the sex tape (I think she may have, or did so by phone after the GChat), but she had definitely told him she felt a need to go to her bishop, "stat."
IMO, in terms of what he said on May 26, it's irrelevant whether or not he felt threatened by that, or by the sex tape if she'd brought it up.
What he certainly felt was anger, and gauging the words he chose, anger that was largely very specifically related to sexual activity.
We've discussed recently the possibility (IMO,likelihood) the had "threatened" him before, perhaps repeatedly, about going to her bishop, in the guise of feeling a spiritual need to do so....in order to be a good Mormon.
If true, can you imagine how Travis would have felt when she told him that? Forget fear or whatever. IMO he would have been most likely to feel significant and painful guilt, not just about his own lapses, but because, as she did allegedly bring up to use against him, he had brought her into the faith, baptized her, was (he believed), her spiritual mentor.
Beyond the guilt of "corrupting" her, he would have been in an extremely difficult position. She was in the right. Both of them were obligated to go to their bishop, confess, and repent. As her mentor, he should have agreed, encouraged her to go, and have been proud of her desire to get right. As the person who was involved in the activity and who may well have been reluctant to risk losing his TR again just when he most needed to hurry up and get married? Not so much. (He went to his bishop in late January, but she made sure as soon as she could that there was reason to go again).
I think that well into May 2008 he mostly blamed himself, not her, for their sexual transgressions, and that when he said she was a "better" person, that's what he meant.
By May 26, though, he had seen through that manipulation. He said so -- "you were never who you said you were," and, why did you choose me (to seduce)? And, you tried to ruin me, and " you didn't try to love, you succeeded in hating me," and: your offering up fantasies etc., the "being noble in the sack," was for your own "objective."
He called her *advertiser censored* IMO out of rage because of the times she had in essence held herself as morally superior to him by claiming a need to come clean to her bishop, and there she was, he thought, pulling that crap on him one time too many (going to the Bishop).
*advertiser censored* *advertiser censored* *advertiser censored*. A response to having been deliberately guilted by a unreligious who he thought wanted, above all else, to get him to have sex with her. *advertiser censored* *advertiser censored* *advertiser censored*. Appropriate to the context on May 26, and apt. Jmo.