After Watching The Movie Three Times
I don't know what to believe. Joyce is either the most romantic woman in the world or a complete nut. There's definitely some delusion there,but how much is true?
That's the thing with this documentary. It's kind of a have-to-figure-it-out-for-yourself deal. The one guy who was a prior Mormon and now a Gay Activist was saying that on both sides (Joyce's and the Mormons or Kirk) they each have their own stories and the truth is kind of a combination of each of those stories. Personally, I think that Kirk was not abducted by the Mormons but did go with them under duress. He didn't really leave her. He really did love her but he was so dependent and easily dominated by his mother and the church and couldn't make decisions without their approval. I think he was a very screwed up and confused person and possibly didn't realize how much of his life would get ruined by allowing his mother and the church to control it until he was too old and it was too late to where he couldn't regain all he had lost. Most of what Joyce is saying about the events when she snatched him was accurate (except for being a virgin or virginal) and that she truly loved him and was trying to help him get his thinking straight after it had been twisted around by the Mormons. Kirk seemed to say whatever anyone was asking wanted to hear in order to protect himself. He truly was a mess, imo.
The thing I don't understand was her obsession with him after the fact. Why did she let this one relationship dominate her entire life? The guy wasn't worth deciding to never have a relationship or find love again with someone else. I feel sorry for him because he was so pathetic but why she didn't just let it go and move on I don't get. That part is just depressing to me. She talks about this "forever love" like it's something beautiful and eternal but really she just gave up and sentenced herself to a life alone for this guy.
"You think you know, what you are, what's to come--You haven't even begun." BtVS
And this is the problem with the way this film was made and presented.
A delusional criminal gets to put their side of the story without direct contradiction and some people believe it. Of course, there was enough there for most people to work out that Joyce was nutty and probably lying about 90% of the time but there will always be some people who wonder or accept her version.
If it was an interview with any mass murderer or mass rapist or genocidal general - do you think that they would have given them a platform to air their delusion with only indirect contradiction and allow the audience to form their own conclusions?
"They who... give up... liberty to obtain... safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
The fact of the matter is that nobody apart from Joyce and Kirk knew what actually happened during the alleged 3-day sexual encounter (although it remained largely unclear to me what Keith's involvement was during this time). The event could have been either consensual or nonconsensual, and in the former case Kirk could have just decided to lie afterwards to protect his religious and social position.
Joyce is clearly barking mad but you can also clearly see that she is obsessed and loved this man, and it would seem irrational for her to deliberately harm him although I guess it is the same deal as with child molesters who in most cases genuinely think that they weren't doing any harm to their victims.
This all comes down to the biggest "flaw" in the film which was the lack of an interview with Kirk, although I fully understand why someone would want to leave behind unwanted memories of such stressful events in one's life. What started as a short-lived romatic distraction for Kirk, ended up being a lifetime obsession for Joyce.
I think Joyce was given the platform because (1) she was the one willing to speak and (2) she made a fairly sustained attack on the Mormon church, which is still widely distrusted and unpopular, particularly in the U.S. today, for their position on gay issues. As to the first issue, I remember reading "Closing Time: the True Story of the Goodbar Murder" many years ago and realizing that when it comes to journalistic portrayals, generally whoever talks most/is most charismatic wins. Miss McKinney certainly emerges victorious on both those fronts in spades.
As to the second issue, she was able to manipulate a then existing and continuing suspicion and distrust in the general public of the Mormon Church as secretive and cultish (and I acknowledge that I'm not a big fan of organized religion generally). Like many people with personality disorders, she's nothing if not manipulative. This isn't to say that I have a solid, incontrovertible belief that she kidnapped and raped this man. But the downside to being such a big personality is that it's hard for her to hide the crazy, so it's also hard to believe any version of events she presents.
I suspect this film will be used in psychological studies to depict someone who is delusional and obsessive. It's clear she is also glossing over the truth about her virginity. She is manipulative suggesting narcissism. All of these characteristics point to insanity. I feel sorry for her parents.
I feel no fondness toward Mormonism, and I do feel it is cultish. But Joyce should have just moved on, and if she were mentally okay, she would have done so.
I think you hit the nail on the head. You have two immature, emotionally fragile people stuck in a childlike state and so it's near impossible to get a clear picture of what really happened between the two. The answer lies somewhere in between his story (which we never get to hear but honestly even if he did agree to be interviewed, I don't think he'll provide any sense of clarity as to what really conspired because he's so easily manipulated by others) and hers.
share