Backroads

Now that Elemental hit Disney+, I finally got around to seeing it.
The nonbinary character was water dude's youngest sibling.  "That's my little sib Lake, and her girlfriend Ghibli."  Had like one line in the entire movie.  I didn't really notice anything to signal the status.  I guess the movie gets to have the final say.  Cut just 5 seconds of the scene, and the movie could sell in China or wherever.  Easy enough to believe so the scene could be virtue-signaled to the alphabet and alphabet-adjacent crowd.  Easy enough to deny or overlook, the movie still appeals to the more conservative crowd.  These years, "Disney magic" means successfully pandering to different cultural and global elements without ticking off others. (shrug)

 
It's a fine 'love conquers all' movie.  It even conquers the laws of physics and biology, but I guess if you're gonna create a world with sentient elements, you get to create your own laws of physics and biology too.
If this movie had been made 35 years ago, people would have understood it as an "it's ok to date another race" movie.   Anyone old enough to remember how worried we all were about that?

My parents were on a cruise with her last month. Said she's delightful.

I see what you're saying. I think that many people want a counselor that has some understanding of their faith. I agree with JaG that it's likely rare to have that as the only qualification. But I see the appeal. When I talked to a counselor I profiled for one that did include faith (general Christianity)

I am of the opinion that there'd be no war in the Ukraine if Trump had won a 2nd term.
We all saw the war coming.  If the bombastic orange dealmaker had been there at the time, he would have made a deal with Putin to keep it from happening.  Eastward NATO expansion was becoming intolerable to Russia.  So Trump would have worked a deal where Putin didn't go to war, Russia would get some NATO expansion curtailing treaty or deal or something, and both of 'em would get some mutually beneficial deal regarding Russian oil exporting and Ukrainian grain.
And he would have been all loud and self righteous about it on Twitter every step of the way.  Shaming NATO member nations into paying more, crowing about how he owned Russia, shaming the Biden pay-for-access family mafia over their involvement with the corrupt Ukraine, basically taking really loud credit for every bit of good to come out of him leading the free world, while at the same time publicly humiliating his opponents and enemies.   And we would have all hated him for it.  And there would be no war in Ukraine right now.

I see what you're saying. I think that many people want a counselor that has some understanding of their faith. I agree with JaG that it's likely rare to have that as the only qualification. But I see the appeal. When I talked to a counselor I profiled for one that did include faith (general Christianity)

I get where you’re going here; and generally agree.  But I would note that I think it’s a rare Saint who vets potential counselors solely on their Church membership status or hires the first Mormon counselor they run across.
I cannot speak as to the particular case under discussion in this thread.  But I stand by my general comments earlier in this thread and will propose that the problem with most of the nominally/formerly LDS families who wound up in the news over the past few years isn’t that they listened to their bishops too much; it’s that they didn’t listen to their bishops closely enough.  

I don't think my last sentence implies that only LDS counselors are abusers because obviously it isn't the case. But let me explain again in case my comment was misunderstood. I just speak out against choosing a mental health professional solely based on their Church/religious affiliation.  I observe this often and it has become a serious concern for both clients and professionals who are out there trying their best. Being an LDS counselor doesn't automatically make you a good professional and yes it applies to every other religion but the reason I mentioned this specifically is because Bishops recommended Jodi Hildebrandt and clearly, members trusted the suggestion. I was trying to explain this to my sister but all I can say is that she has been living in UT for too long.

I think, these days, practically anyone can get some certificate or another to make it appear they are a counselor or therapist. @Vort is right this is a very muddied science these days, and add in "I can give you my thoughts and advice" from any Rando.
I've also met people who simply don't believe in it, that their private business is theirs alone to figure out. 
Edit: I'd also add that therapy is weirdly popular these days. On one hand, I think seeking help from a good therapist is great for many people. But I also get suspicious when things are too popular. 
On a personal and petty note, I have weird mock prejudice against the people of Salt Lake and Utah counties. That these two were operating out of that area where all sorts of weirdos are seeking special treatment for their weird issues (I am so sorry but this is the impression I have!) makes me think of, well, weird people and weird therapists.

Stuff like this is why I won't go near the lds freedom forum.

I'm trying to figure out where the husband is in all this.

I won't go into the major details or news, it's easily looked up, but it's got me thinking about the whole notion of pride cycles. I believe this is something that wheels itself throughout history with no particular respect to people or creed and all are potentially susceptible.
But particular to the case, this influencer, by all accounts, is or was a member of our church and the situation seems pretty awful. I know enough wonderful members of the church to not buy into the popular meme "Those Mormons are so awful!" social media would tout, but I can't help there may be some legitimate connection.
I don't believe in prosperity gospel nor do I observe it in our teachings in any way. What I do see is the very good instructions of provident living, using our skills, hard work, etc. And I believe this can be twisted into prosperity gospel. Not so much "I'm rich because God loves me" but "I worked and was successful and now I'm rich and therefore I have all these blessings to show off so I must be a wonderful blessed person."
I think we're seeing it. Maybe it's new, maybe it's easier to spot, but I feel people, even within something good like the church, are getting too comfortable with  their fame/wealth/success and become untouchable, unable to do no wrong and thus anything they do is right. It's better to pursue the glory of the world but of course it's not for the glory of the world because they are Good People.
Perhaps it's just more obvious to watch the mighty fall but I've seen it at lesser states. Desire to support one's family, be self-sufficient, demonstrate hard work... And get far too caught up in it. I once read a book that spoke of all the Good Things that can ultimately become golden idols. But because they're good things, people may not want to recognize it.
So, after all this rambling, pride cycles appear to be far easier to fall into than we might think. Pretty easy to blame the Nephites and say "never us." Heck, I worry I'm doing it to myself by over-wondering about people.

My brother's side gig is messing with scammers and posting about them on YouTube. Family and friends are always calling him to ask if something is suspect.

As I've noted before, two of the most bigoted, hateful, and willfully ignorant people I've ever had the misfortune of dealing with had doctorates in their chosen field. 
One was an avowed atheist with a degree in the social sciences. 
The other was a minister. 

I heard a lot of that "spiritual, not religious" crap growing up, too. Those who say, "I love spirituality but I don't practice any specific religion" might as well say, "I love linguistics but I don't speak any specific languages."
Even within my own family, I heard one beloved aunt being referred to as "very religious", as if that were some ersatz form of being spiritual. (She was in fact very spiritual, but unabashedly religious.) Since that time, being the stubborn, stonehearted fool I am, I have openly embraced the label of "religious", both in and outside my family. Yes, I'm religious. Very much so. The fact is, I'm not all that spiritual, certainly not where I would like to be. But I'm religious. And I don't even have the good sense to be ashamed of it. I don't think that's backward at all. Religiosity leads to (or at least can lead to) spirituality. I do not believe that irreligiosity helps one be more spiritual.
President Nelson gave a talk in General Conference a few years back where he investigated the etymology of the word "religion", demonstrating how it meant "to tie [one] back [to something]". That's the idea of religion, isn't it? To tie us back to God. I have little patience for those who insist that religion per se is a crutch or a weakness. They can believe what they want, but I reserve the right to label their idiocy for what it is.

I may be betraying my age, but I grew hearing that religion is bad. For Christians, the refrain was, "It's not a religion, it's a relationship." The idea being that everyone else had to be religious because they were trying to reach God. Religion was humanity's attempt to find God. We learned that God came after us by sending Jesus to die for our sins.
Non-Christians, and some progressive ones, were fond of saying, "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual." What they meant was that organized religions were about systems and rules and programs. They were about personally connecting with their higher power. 
My argument, as a chaplain, is that religion is good. If people are trying to reach God the Old Testament, New Testament, and Book of Mormon proclaim that they will find Him. As a great example, I've heard stories of Muslims having dreams of Jesus coming to them. Since Islam teaches that Jesus is a prophet, they listen carefully. After all, we should listen to and heed what prophets tell us, right? (i hear the faithful church members saying 'amen.')  Jesus tells them that he is more than a prophet--he is the Savior--the Son of God. They listen and some convert, because they are religious. Their religion teaches them that Jesus is to be listened to because he is a prophet.
So, no, religion will not redeem anyone. However, religion--a seeking after God--can build a spiritual bridge that can lead the soul to conversion/salvation.
Bottom-line: Religion is good. 

https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2023/9/6/attention-gray-lady-team-latter-day-saints-are-not-the-only-skilled-fantasy-scribes
The Get Religion blog was founded some years ago by a group of veteran news reporters who had experience covering religion and religious topics. Their goal is to examine how various news outlets cover this field, what they call the "Godbeat", and point out the good and bad in different reports as a means of helping other journalists hone their craft. I've been a regular reader for over a decade now, and have commented enough - including submitting a few stories for consideration - that I've had a few chats with some of the regular contributors. 
This bit here is one of their contributors looking over a New York Times story in which the author is flabbergasted by how many members of the church have found their place as science fiction and fantasy authors. Not only is the contributor noting that there are elements of church culture that have contributed to a love of literature (even above and beyond the things the writer notes), the contributor also notes that the writer has failed to mention the long history *of* religious authors being successful, and even influential, in these fields. 
I wonder what would happen if someone explained to the NYT writer just how many of us are in Hollywood...

That’s all true, but it makes me like him even more. 🙂 

I think, these days, practically anyone can get some certificate or another to make it appear they are a counselor or therapist. @Vort is right this is a very muddied science these days, and add in "I can give you my thoughts and advice" from any Rando.
I've also met people who simply don't believe in it, that their private business is theirs alone to figure out. 
Edit: I'd also add that therapy is weirdly popular these days. On one hand, I think seeking help from a good therapist is great for many people. But I also get suspicious when things are too popular. 
On a personal and petty note, I have weird mock prejudice against the people of Salt Lake and Utah counties. That these two were operating out of that area where all sorts of weirdos are seeking special treatment for their weird issues (I am so sorry but this is the impression I have!) makes me think of, well, weird people and weird therapists.

I think there were a few consequences of that where he had to basically say he was a trouble-maker millennial and to be careful with such thins.

Btw @Backroads, can you cash app me 50$ please? 
 
(just playing!!!) 

I really do see some therapies as scams, and I'm one that leans to the side of therapy, when well-researched, being a good thing. I don't know if we are the scam capital of the world still, but Utah still falls for scams, and I think that is definitely what happened with this whole Connexions things. 
On the note of stigma, I saw a joke once comparing generations. One was Back in the day: What if someone finds out I had to see a therapist vs Today: Guess what my therapist told me!

Here's actually a particularly cool one he got kind of famous for (not the video series, just a news bit)

My brother's side gig is messing with scammers and posting about them on YouTube. Family and friends are always calling him to ask if something is suspect.

I think @Backroads is describing a Utah phenomenon - pretty sure we're the scam capital of the world (though maybe that's changed, not sure) - and this makes for people ripe for corrupt therapists....  I also suspect it's a generational thing - from my parents' generation and back, needing a psychologist was surely stigmatized.  I think my generation is the one where this started to change, so my generation is mixed on the topic and younger generations don't have said concerns (as much?).  Apparently it's also cultural - a friend in the UK, younger than I once told me that seeking psychological help of any sort was looked down on there (at least, where she was).

The only time I thought "not my thing" was too extreme was a person who insisted he would rather get a divorce than go to a sex therapist. I get that's very different field of counseling, but I have also been aware of it saving marriages.