by Newly Enlightened 11530 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Interviewing an exjw who happened to have an Onlyfans account in the normal scheme of things wouldn't at all reflect badly on someone's child abuse campaigning.
Diogenesister, I agree with you. In this particular case the woman is doing of her own free will what she wants to do. There is also nothing wrong with someone voicing a concern about it in a private message. Lloyd making a public statement about this private message is a bit tacky, but not out of character.
her school didn't pick her to sing it for a play
His complaint seems to be that they were nice and encouraging, as you should be to any kid auditioning. Does he honestly want them to say "your child is shit and has no talent"?
Kind of weird and unbalanced to make it into a complaint in the first place, but to then interpret the comment as someone having a go? Odd.
Whatever the situation, whatever the message, Lloyd seems to interpret it as an attack and him as the victim. One has to wonder how he lives and interacts with people in the real world ...
"What sauce would you like on your sub sir?"
"OMG, I can't believe you're another HATER!!!"
In this particular case the woman is doing of her own free will what she wants to do. There is also nothing wrong with someone voicing a concern about it in a private message.
Absolutely. Even interviewing people who do sex work, when you claim to be a CSA advocate, is really "off" and if he wasn't such a pompous ass he'd appreciate the valuable feedback someone was giving him privately. To then make it public so he can play little miss victim about it, very bad etiquette.
And if being associated with sex workers through interviewing them raises concerns for how it looks to someone professing to be an advocate is bad, that means he can't be surprised that going off to regularly use prostitutes for many years, some half his age is thoroughly incompatible.
And if being associated with sex workers through interviewing them
Haha, I must remember that!
No, dear, I wasn’t playing up, I was just interviewing her !
And if being associated with sex workers through interviewing them raises concerns for how it looks to someone professing to be an advocate is bad, that means he can't be surprised that going off to regularly use prostitutes for many years, some half his age is thoroughly incompatible
I always found it very weird that he kept repeating the phrase about "what two consenting adults do is no other people business" or something like that. While I agree with this sentence in theory, what I found strange was the number of times he used it, almost as if he was projecting and somehow convincing himself that he was doing nothing wrong.
Now I really think that this is exactly what happened. Either that or he was willingly trying to mentally prepare his audience in case his sexcapades would one day become public.
I feel he is incapable or unwilling to grasp the fact that his sexual proclivities create a conflict with his line of work. Now cheating on the wife with prostitutes is not likely to destroy a career of a rock star or Hollywood celebrity, though it would certainly create a scandal (i.e. Hugh Grant in 1995). Someone who makes a career out of helping others by means of activism towards an abusive organisation faces different standards, especially one who relies on donations. He can argue all he wants about how unfair it is, but no one forced him into this line of work.
Think of a sport referee who has been exposed as a gambling addict. Did he bet on games? Did he bet on games he was officiating? Gambling is legal in a lot of countries and many famous people are known as partakers. But a sporting official? His integrity is compromised and his decisions as an official in the past are now all suspect. Without a single exception, such a person would be ejected and banned permanently from officiating in any and every country in the world.
It's Lloyd's private life and if he wants to keep seeing sex workers, then it's going to be that way. And if his wife wants to put up with it, then they are probably suited for one another. But he needs to find another career as this one has been hopelessly compromised. Was he privately interested in the details those CSA survivors were giving him in interviews? Did he ask certain questions about the abuse because he was turned on by it?
Of course we all know the answer to the overall question because the money and adulation from exJW activism he gets from this had been his calling card for the last decade. No way this guy is going back to landscaping or passing off his wife's translations as his own.
This is why the subject is still going on. If he truly wants privacy, then a career change is a must.
Was he privately interested in the details those CSA survivors were giving him in interviews? Did he ask certain questions about the abuse because he was turned on by it?
Yeah, it's a simple equation - someone who admits they can't control themselves sexually and sees nothing wrong with "using" women, should NEVER be seeking out victims of sexual abuse. It's so inappropriate to be laughable for someone to not see that, and yet he's still doing his "nothing wrong" act as though everything is OK.
It's not.
But he doesn't care, because his main focus is making money off people. Everyone is simply an asset for him to use - whether a girl, sexually, or a volunteer providing their time for free. It's all about "what can someone do for him".
@Las Malvinas, many years ago there was a famous baseball player named Pete Rose and he was involved in a gambling scandal similar to what you described. Something along the lines of was he rigging games he bet on? I can't remember the exact scandal now. He was kicked out of the game, and I have not followed up to see whatever happened to him.
We definitely have a lot of social problems that are not likely to be resolved any time soon. I don't see ANYONE in main stream media going to bat with pornography.
I feel he is incapable or unwilling to grasp the fact that his sexual proclivities create a conflict with his line of work
^^^ This.
It is obvious that Evans didn't leave the Witnesses because of an intellectual rejection of doctrine or practice. He ran away to avoid the consequences of his immorality. That makes his opposition to the Watchtower fraudulent.
Discovering that "it wasn't the truth" after being kicked out for immorality and stupidity is self justification. It is not intellectual honesty. Too many X-Witness activists follow this same pattern. They pick on anything to justify themselves. Find something in the 1940 Watchtower! It's a scandal!
Some youtube makers need a real life.
