Posts Tagged ‘abuse’

Ranting Raving Robin

In Uncategorized on December 17, 2010 at 6:32 am

Wasn’t it Karl Marx who argued that “quantity has a quality all its own”?  Then perhaps Robin Edgar is attempting to apply Marxist theory to his “Emerson Avenger” blog.

In the past day, he has posted three times.  Does he believe that drowning us in more repetitious ranting will somehow make more progress than his years and years of childish attacks and insults?  Or perhaps he’s in one of his particularly more manic and obsessive phases?

Robin Edgar’s first post is yet another rage-filled attack on anybody who dares to critcize or question him without revealing their names.  Do tell, Mister Edgar, why you will not then reveal the name of the UU minister whom you allege praised you as “prophetic” by way of “electronic communication”.  You, sir, who love to condemn hypocrisy, perhaps you should look in the mirror.

Then Robin Edgar tries once again to compare the Unitarian Universalist Association with the Roman Catholic church with regard to sexual abuse by clergy.  He quotes Kay Montgomery’s admission of how the UUA had fallen short of dealing with the problem, but in a way which strongly implies that nothing had been done.  Ms. Montgomery’s words were said at a UUA General Assembly ten years ago, and since then both the UUA and the UU Ministerial Association has done considerable work in addressing the issue, including measures to screen out potential abusers.  Oh, and while we’re at it, perhaps Mister Edgar forgot about the letter addressed to him by a group of sexual abuse survivors a year ago.  (see our March post: Abuse Survivors to Robin Edgar: You Don’t Speak for Us)

Robin Edgar’s last attack is directed to Meg Riley.  As she laments the recent tax-cut package ratified by the US Congress, he asks why the UUA did not organize the kind of resistance which she had wanted to see.  Perhaps he is unaware that the US Constitution’s separation of church and state severely limits what religious denominations can do in response to specific legislation.  Then again, perhaps he is aware, but chooses to ignore the fact because it would spoil yet another chance for him to lash out at UU ministers, and therefore continue to nurse the grudge which he has been carrying for close to two decades now.

Worse, he believes that, because the newspaper website on which he posted his comment to Riley calls for “civil, thought-provoking and high-quality public discussion”, and because they left his comment on (for now, at least) that he can call the totality of his juvenile attacks in this light.  Yet another example of Robin Edgar’s self-centered and warped view of reality: he is all good, UUs (and especially UU ministers) are all bad.  Even when he tries to qualify such statements with the word some, he feels compelled to bracket the qualifier in asterisks (strange that he can figure out all sorts of computer tricks, but italics and bold-face elude him) as if to show off: “See, I’m not as extreme as those boneheaded Big Fat U*U asshats would have you believe!”  Since you’ve failed to notice, Mister Edgar, UUs don’t need to make anybody else believe such things about you, as you  have successfully done so yourself.

There is no quality in Robin Edgar’s written ranting and raving, no matter the quantity he turns out.  He is merely repeated the same tired complaints and insults.  Unfortunately, he doesn’t stop at his computer keyboard (assuming that he actually has a computer of his own) but feels the obsessive need to harass Montreal Unitarians on the street, in a vain attempt to make himself feel utterly right and righteous.  “Look at me!  Look at me!  I’m protesting!  I’m making them look bad!  That makes me look good, right?”

Wrong, Mister Edgar.  But you just go on believing that your antics actually mean anything.  Go on believing that being deliberately annoying and insulting (your own words) will actually accomplish anything constructive.  Go on harassing, stalking and bullying people who are wise to how mean-spirited and disturbed you truly are.


The Lesson for UUs

In Uncategorized on December 16, 2010 at 8:45 am

Is there anything which Unitarian Universalists can learn from Robin Edgar’s incessant, childish and rage-filled attacks against our denomination?  Yes.  It is that, as much as we would like to see the good in human beings, there are some individuals with whom even a liberal and generous movement such as ours simply cannot and should not work with.

Robin Edgar wants UUs to listen to him.  We have.  We have heard the same complaints, insults and irrational demands for “justice” over and over and over again.  Robin Edgar continues to repeat himself, and will not stop.  The time for listening is past.

UUs have asked Robin Edgar to behave, at the very least, in a civil and cordial manner.  He has done so on only rare occasions, and more often has launched into ad hominen attacks, vulgar and juvenile insults, and outrageous denunciations.

UUs have tried to ignore him.  But narcissists like Robin Edgar, like Glenn Close’s borderline character in Fatal Attraction, are not going to be ignored.  So he continues to picket, bloviate, and obsess at the slightest provocation.  The only question is whether he is making up provocations for the excuse of lashing out, or whether he actually sees them where none exist.

When Meg Riley talks about a vote in the United States Senate, he uses it as a platform for talking about “Unitarian*Universalist clergy misconduct of ALL kinds” (and, for those of you unfamiliar with “Robin-speak”, this is his way of saying how much he thinks UU ministers deserve to be vilified and harassed by his “Emerson Avenger persona” because he did not like the way he alleges one minister talked to him, and that nobody has found cause to pursue his endless complaints and demands for retribution).

When one member of the Unitarian Church of Montreal allegedly makes an off-colour remark in his direction, he latches onto the man like a rabid pit bull on a child, obsessively attacking and belittling him, rather than take the high road like the “reasonable” and “well-behaved” person he claims to “really” be.

A number of UU bloggers have commented on how, too often, leaders of UU congregations are overly tolerant of clearly destructive individuals who come into their midst.  Robin Edgar is the worst-case example of such an individual.  As much as we believe in the worth and dignity of every person, that very same principle demands that we protect ourselves and others from those who, by their very destructive actions, demonstrate more than anything how little they respect or understand that principle.

It is high time that the Unitarian Church of Montreal protect its members and visitors from this destructive individual – permanently.  It is high time that the UCM’s leadership utilised the legal options available in Canada’s criminal code, and see to it that Robin Edgar is given a taste of real justice.

Robin Edgar Just Keeps Spiralling Down

In Uncategorized on December 13, 2010 at 4:00 am

We have not made recent posts to this blog, for the simple reason that we have found very little to post about regarding Robin Edgar, self-described “Transcendentalist Super Hero”, and obsessive anti-UU stalker and harasser.  He is simply repeating his same shamelessly egotistical, monomanaical rants and antics over and over and over and over and over…

It’s been asked before, so we might as well ask again: Does this man even have a life???

We can’t see how he does, when he wastes spends so much of his time picketing a church which rightfully threw him out for his outlandish and abusive behaviour, and lashing out at anybody and everybody within the orbit of Unitarian Universalism who will not join his single-minded crusade.

Now it appears that he is beginning to manufacture allies for himself.  Not surprising, as he has seen naive attempts to mediate on his behalf, or merely state that even disturbed individuals such as he have a right to express themselves, as another blow against “Big Fat U*U Idiots” and their “injustices, abuses and hypocrisies”.  In this case, however, he alleges that an unnamed UU minister sent an “electronic communication” showing “appreciation” for his supposedly “prophetic work”; and yet Robin Edgar, who is so prone to naming names whenever anybody either praises or criticises him, cannot name this alleged supporter of his “work”!  Considering his penchant for exaggeration and distortion, we are apt to doubt this allegation until he can produce proof.

In the meantime, we are wondering just how long the Unitarian Church of Montreal is going to bear with this man’s rage-filled harassment.  No individual would tolerate such abusive and obsessive behaviour; they would, as we have urged, use Canada’s laws regarding stalking (or, as the statute describes it, “criminal harassment”) to enjoin relief.  It is clear this man will not listen to reason.  The time for restrained warnings is long past.  It is time for this man to be restrained once and for all.

Our Advice to the Unitarian Church of Montreal

In Uncategorized on November 23, 2010 at 1:30 am

Once again, Robin Edgar gloats and rants about his latest antics in front of the Unitarian Church of Montreal, this time picketing them during an annual fundraiser.  When a woman complained to police that he had shoved her, he naturally calls her a “big fat U*U liar”, just as he has accused so many against whom he lashes out of always lying — because, after all, Robin Edgar is never ever wrong, and how dare anybody question him!

We have stated before that it is high time that the criminal nature of Mister Edgar’s continual obsessive harassment should not only be seen for what it is, but that he be held to account for it once and for all.

Section 264 of the Criminal Code of Canada specifies penalties for criminal harassment of the sort which this man has been getting away with for far, far too long.

It is time for the member of UCM to stop waiting for him to picket in order to call a complaint, as it is clear that the police are not taking such complaints seriously.

Instead, we recommend that Reverend Diane Rollert and the Board of UCM collect all evidence of his continual stalking and harassing of the Montreal church, and bring it to the Montreal police in order to file a formal charge that Robin Edgar has knowingly and wilfully violated Section 264 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Mister Edgar can yell “freedom of speech” and “peaceful protest” all that he wants, but any reasonable person who sees the depths to which this man has gone to attack the members and staff of UCM — even lashing out with personal attacks and obscene insults — should be able to see that the totality of his actions have crossed the line.  This is not a man interested in reasonable debate or reconciliation, any more than a stalker doing this to a woman who wants nothing to do with him.

At the very least, the church needs to file for yet another restraining order, if only to provide some short-term relief.  But the only way we can see this ending once and for all is if this self-centered bully is compelled by force of law to refrain from this outrageous behaviour.

The Montreal police need to see his actions in total, not just hear individual complaints whenever he pickets.  While they are at it, we suggest that examples of his cyber-harassment be included into the mix.  That should reveal the true mindset of Robin Edgar to the police.

If Robin Edgar Were Doing This to an Ex-Girlfriend…

In Uncategorized on November 15, 2010 at 7:47 am


We do not mean for a few hours or a night.  His actions would be seen as stalking and criminal harassment, and he would have been sentenced to prison and ordered to end all contact with his victim.

It is time for the police of Montreal to see Mister Edgar’s actions for the harassment and denigrating abuse which they really are.  The whole point of his “protests” is for the Unitarian Church of Montreal to bow down and say they were totally wrong for removing him from their membership rolls, after two suspensions and numerous attempts to deal with him on a rational basis.

Then what, Robin?  Do you really think the members of UCM would take you back in?  Do you think they want to run the risk of more outrageous and disruptive behaviour on your part?  Would you want to be in the same room with somebody who handles disagreements by writing 24-page letters demanding that everybody else cave in to every single request which you make under the sun (eclipsed or not)?  Would you want to sit in church next to somebody who constantly called you an ‘idiotic moron’ and ‘asshat’ amongst other insults.  Would you even feel safe around somebody who constantly threatened ‘retaliation’ for not letting them have what they want every single time they asked for it?

If a man behaved this way towards a romantic interest, and she rightly filed criminal complaints against him, there would be no question that his behaviour would fall outside the bounds of ‘protected speech’.  It would be seen for the menacing, irrational and abusive harassment that it is, and the authorities would have put a stop to it.

This has been going on for far too long.  It is time for the Unitarian Church of Montreal to act in the same manner as a woman being stalked by a disturbed acquaintance.  Explore all legal options, and file the requisite complaints.  Once that is done, it is time that the Montreal police do their duty, not coddle to this so-called ‘gentilhomme’.  Mister Edgar can act very charming when he wants to.  The problem is that obviously those moments are all too rare.

Montreal police: You would not let somebody who stalked a woman sweet-talk you into walking away from engaging in an act of public harassment.  Don’t fall for his tricks again!

Robin Edgar’s Manic Panic

In Uncategorized on August 5, 2010 at 9:06 pm

It’s getting hard to keep up with Robin Edgar.  After his summer hiatus, where his sparse blog posts consisted of noting a Google hit here or there (important to him, yet we still fail to see how it matters), he seems to feel the need to pound out post after post on “The Emerson Avenger” as if to make up for lost time.  Or, let loose all his pent-up rage.

He’s accusing one UU blogger of plagiarism for using a rather well-worn phrase.  Not to mention lashing out at the “Standing on the Side of Love” campaign for allegedly refusing “to stand on the side of love for ALL victims of U*U clergy misconduct” (namely, him); because of this “refusal” he has deemed it fit, once again, to accuse the UUA  to be supporting clergy misconduct.

Robin Edgar just does not get it.  This is not about refusing to address clergy misconduct.  This is about refusing to waste time with a one man’s histrionic and self-centred need to be at the centre of attention.

We don’t expect Robin Edgar to get the hint any time soon.  We would hope, however, that UUs get the hint that nothing they do will placate this man.  They need to stop giving him a forum, and stop responding to him.  Keep an eye on him, yes.  Absolutely!  There is no telling when this individual will cross the line and decide that his abusive and over-the-top verbiage will not be enough, and he will feel the need to take “direct action” of an even more destructive nature.

A Question for Robin Edgar

In Uncategorized on August 5, 2010 at 8:07 pm

Dear Robin Edgar:

We would post this as a comment on your “Emerson Avenger” blog, but you have a nasty habit of tracking down the people who dare to question you, and harassing them all across Cyberspace.  So, we will post it here, and hope it gets your attention.

You say that the purpose of your blog is to speak out about “injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism.”  But lately, a lot of your posts seem to have nothing to do with that, only serving to ridicule UUs simply because you don’t agree with them.

Your most recent post is the worst example we have yet seen of this.  How is a spammer managing to post about Nike shoes on the FUUSE blog fit the criteria of “injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism”?

Perhaps your definition of “injustices and abuses” is anything that falls short of your standards for perfection.  If so, may we ask that you take a good, hard look at your own conduct?  When a UU minister is found to be guilty of false imprisonment and rape — exposed, in fact, by members of his own congregation, then removed from ministerial fellowship, and notice of same acknowledged in a press release by the UUA — you then accuse the UUA and UUs of a non-existent “cover-up”.  Now that would fall short of perfection by anybody’s standards, and could in fact be seen as outright abusive, not to mention as unjust as any false accusation could be.

What about your obsessive fixation over the willingness of UU leaders to put their bodies and freedom on the line to speak out for the rights of immigrants in Arizona?  Not enough to label it all as “ersatz” civil disobedience, you lower yourself to tasteless sexual innuendo.

You claim to speak out against injustices, yet we see a number of examples of unjust accusations by you, Robin Edgar.  You claim to expose abuses, and to be a victim of abuse, but we see even more disturbing cases of abuse perpetrated by you.

You say that you do not hate UUs, only “*some*” of them, yet you seem to go out on a limb to find new targets for your seemingly limitless supply of vitriol. 

We would think that anybody who is serious about exposing injustices and abuses would be more diligent and more serious.  We would think anybody who does so would take the time to check their facts, to keep to relevant matters, and to refrain from personal insults.

So, why haven’t you?  Why do you fall so short of your own mission?  Why is your own behaviour riddled with even more egregious examples of injustice and abuse?

That is our question for you, Robin Edgar.

Oh the (In)humanity

In Uncategorized on June 13, 2010 at 3:03 pm

We have not seen any new posts on Robin Edgar’s blog, but he has been posting comments on other UU blogs.

Most recently a minister raised the question of what sacred texts people refer to.  Here is Robin Edgar’s answer:

“Quite regrettably it is all too human to be inhuman.”

Most ironically, and most regrettably. . . that original saying of mine was inspired by the rather inhuman behavior of s0-called “Humanist” U*Us.

No Bible or Koran, just a single “original” sentence directed at Humanist UUs.  It is certainly worth meditating upon, and especially to remind ourselves to be forgiving of others, and more mindful of our own actions.

Not for Robin Edgar, apparently, who has repeatedly claimed that his persistent insults and harassment are “payback” for the “inhuman” treatment by some UUs towards him.  No turning the other cheek for him, he believes that what goes around comes around, and if you are in his sights he’ll be coming around to get you, and not just once but several times — even after you’re gone.

Falls in line with calling his “legitimate” picketing of UU churches and events an “alternative spiritual practice”.  Where is the spirituality of lashing out in anger, using any excuse to defame a whole community of people, and never ever moving on?

We wonder, and we worry, what a man with such a mentality has next in mind.

Round and Round Robin Edgar Goes

In Uncategorized on May 18, 2010 at 10:47 pm

It’s clear that we have become Robin Edgar’s latest obsession, if his rapid response to our posts is any indication.  He questions whether ‘Robin Edgar Sucks’ should be taken seriously, answering his own question with thousands of words worth of repetitive complaints and denial.

Let’s be clear, that Robin Edgar has done nothing constructive with regard to his campaign of ‘publicly exposing and denouncing Unitarian*Universalist injustices abuses and hypocrisies’.  All he does is harp on the same complaints, the bulk of which revolve around Ray Drennan (retired now for several years) and the Unitarian Church of Montreal.

Robin Edgar insists he does not target UUs for being UUs.  Really?  He bad-mouths and complains about UUs any and every chance he gets, then acts surprised when so many are offended.  Not to mention those who have, in good faith, asked him questions about what he is talking about and what he wants, only to be met with his demanding that others go find out for themselves instead of answering forthrightly, and finally being put on his enemies list  and assaulted with a flurry of verbal abuse.

Robin Edgar’s ‘point for point rebuttal’ of this blog is just more of his going round and round in circles, justifying his attacks, insults and petulant demands for attention with more of the same.  And yet, he insists, he is not obsessed.  How dare anybody even suggest that!

Robin Edgar wants to be compared with Jonathan Swift, Mark Twain, Stephen Leacock and Charlie Chaplin.  Problem is, they were much more creative, they didn’t center their work around themselves, and they knew when to quit.  They didn’t have to justify their satires with endless verbal bludgeoning, they simply let their work stand on the merits, and move on.  Where they would poke fun at the hubris of the world, an enraged and self-centered Robin Edgar persists on beating a dead horse again and again and again and again.

Round and round Robin Edgar goes.  When will he stop?  Nobody knows.

We see only three ways where it can and will end.  The worst case scenario is that, after driving so many people away, he will become so consumed with frustration and rage that he will decide to cross the line and do something more damaging than mere insults.  Next to that, he will have exhausted his health and resources to the point that he can no longer carry on.  The least likely, but most hoped for resolution, is that he will get the help he desperately needs, see how hurtful and self-defeating his behaviour really is, and learns to let go and live a more healthy life.

Is Robin Edgar to be Taken Seriously?

In Uncategorized on May 18, 2010 at 1:27 am

Robin Edgar lashes out and insults people for being UU, demanding what he calls ‘restorative justice’.  When people complain about his obnoxious behavior, or act surprised at the few times he can behave himself, he tells us that the mean-spirited foul-mouthed Emerson Avenger is just a ‘caricature persona’ and not the real Robin Edgar.

When Robin Edgar twists and distorts other people’s words to make it look like they are on his side, and is called to account for it, he berates his critics after the fact for not getting his ‘satire’.  Of course, he can’t stand it when somebody else satirises him with parody blogs such as the ‘Ellery Avenger’.

With all his alleged usage of caricatures and satire, how can we take Robin Edgar seriously?  How can he honestly expect to be taken serious with such outrageous attacking behavior?

We would submit first that there is good reason to doubt these claims.  They are always after the fact, always in response to criticism, and always yet another bizarre attempt to paint all UUs bad and Robin Edgar as the poor pitiful victim.

Robin Edgar is no victim.  He is the one who has engaged on a campaign of harassment, intimidation and insults, sustained with years of rage and bitterness which he refuses to let go.  He is the one who has slowly but surely escalated his attacks.  He is the one who keeps demanding ‘justice’, all the while refusing to describe what exactly he wants, rejecting apologies, and pushing incessantly to fill his desperate, immature need for attention and control.

Robin Edgar is a hypocrite.  He constantly accuses UUs of false charges, then when shown to be guilty, proclaims that he will continue to lash out at UUs because he insists that UUs are all lashing out at him.  Just recently, he has demonstrated such hypocrisy by strongly speculating without one shred of evidence that the young man with a mohawk who stole his picket sign outside the Unitarian Church of Montreal is most likely a UU.  Here he is, berating UUs for false accusations, yet freely doing so himself.  UUs are bad in Robin Edgar’s world, so anybody who does bad against him must be a UU.  Seriously, now!

We submit that Robin Edgar is to be taken serious, but not in the way he would have.  Anybody who would invest so much time and energy on such a vendetta must be taken seriously as a potential threat.