Super ineffective interview. Should've shown up with facts, stats, names, dates, to disprove his points that the lgbtq community is in any way linked to pesos, unlike straight men who are committing most of these vile offenses and also press him on whether "narsa" or whatever he's referring to is an lgbtq group. Why allow him to conflate the two and not call him on it. And why let him invoke the boogeyman of "antifa" without presenting the solid facts. I dont understand the point of this interview. We already know what their positions are. I thought i might hear an insightful conversation, and this was definitely not.
It really was. I am all for getting their perspective and understand why they think the way they do, but we learned nothing new. Well, I did learn that they only care about Evangelicals, Baptists, etc. raping children if they held a "We're Going to Sexualize Children" meeting. But other than that, they don't care.
As a UK reader and as someone who's conducted interviews for work, I found this pretty insightful. I think there's a lot given away by the pretty off the wall, erratic answers. It set up a bunch of questions for me to look into after reading.
The same PDF messaging is landing in the UK too, there's a coordinated complaint campaign against a MAGA style 'news' channel, triggered by instagram.com/liamrondi/ - with a similar presentation of "facts", left unchallenged.
If the writers are looking for some stats, Liam's managed to collate some good counter data.
I appreciated this interview for the exploration it was, following what sounds like an introduction between James and UM years ago. Sometimes we show up and listen, feel our way, learn.
Not all readers start at the same place here at UM; I learned, for example, that there are assumed differences between the perspectives and methods of the Patriot Front and the Proud Boys, at least from James's point-of-view. I also learned, from what James said, that individual Proud Boys may have differing personal beliefs, which hints at less of some sort of perma-sealed oath that I thought bound members of these groups.
I found that Brien James is capable of discernment (whether we agree with him or not): he left the KKK because he found its members not open to "change" and not realistic about race in America. That's a choice he made, partially owing, it seems, to the knowledge of his own mixed heritage. It would seem that, under the right circumstances, James could show such discernment again.
Yes, James is in a right-wing media bubble, but many of us could be accused of the same on the left. For example, his emphasis on NARSOL seems based on a very broad understanding of the issues with which that particular group is concerned; on the other hand, I haven't heard or read anything about them in, I think, several years. Is that because I'm missing coverage? I don't know. I think NARSOL advocated, as just one example, for not adding minors to a sex offenders' registry for life (or maybe at all) following, say, a sexting incident. That's all I recall, but it points to one of the main issues with groups like the Proud Boys: they like to come in like bulls in a china shop rather than take the time to learn the facts and complexities of what they think they are protesting for or against. Listening needs to be a two-way street.
Shutting down a drag queen reading story books to a group of children (typically accompanied by their own parents or librarians) is another example of these men refusing to override their discomfort, or question their zealous self-righteousness or a media headline, in order to learn about a subject enough to understand the nuances and then figure out best practices for advocating for or against something.
Ironically, with a better informed pivot, a willingness to listen, a different world view... a group like the Proud Boys could choose to be a productive force for good, helping people in actual stress, or children living in rural or urban poverty. But that takes a dose of humble pie. I'd be amenable to supporting the Proud Boys if they took on a practical, noble endeavor; however, these men would first need to understand and accept that pedophilia is an unhealthy [and illegal] compulsion that is not in any way inherently connected to any particular sexual orientation or gender identity, much less the LGBTQ "movement."
Good interview. When you guys were talking about the drag queen story hour and he explained that his group shows up at those events to protect the kids from so-called "grooming", I wish you would have pointed out that the kids are brought there by their own parents, and asked him how he reconciles his opinion (and he admits that it's an opinion) that "the entire LGBTQ movement is always creeping towards trying to normalize pedophilia" with the liberty of parents who don't share his opinion. Does he think these parents aren't interested in protecting their own kids from pedophiles?
Super ineffective interview. Should've shown up with facts, stats, names, dates, to disprove his points that the lgbtq community is in any way linked to pesos, unlike straight men who are committing most of these vile offenses and also press him on whether "narsa" or whatever he's referring to is an lgbtq group. Why allow him to conflate the two and not call him on it. And why let him invoke the boogeyman of "antifa" without presenting the solid facts. I dont understand the point of this interview. We already know what their positions are. I thought i might hear an insightful conversation, and this was definitely not.
I apologize for the lack of appropriate punctuation. I didn't proofread, and it wont let me edit
It really was. I am all for getting their perspective and understand why they think the way they do, but we learned nothing new. Well, I did learn that they only care about Evangelicals, Baptists, etc. raping children if they held a "We're Going to Sexualize Children" meeting. But other than that, they don't care.
As a UK reader and as someone who's conducted interviews for work, I found this pretty insightful. I think there's a lot given away by the pretty off the wall, erratic answers. It set up a bunch of questions for me to look into after reading.
The same PDF messaging is landing in the UK too, there's a coordinated complaint campaign against a MAGA style 'news' channel, triggered by instagram.com/liamrondi/ - with a similar presentation of "facts", left unchallenged.
If the writers are looking for some stats, Liam's managed to collate some good counter data.
I appreciated this interview for the exploration it was, following what sounds like an introduction between James and UM years ago. Sometimes we show up and listen, feel our way, learn.
Not all readers start at the same place here at UM; I learned, for example, that there are assumed differences between the perspectives and methods of the Patriot Front and the Proud Boys, at least from James's point-of-view. I also learned, from what James said, that individual Proud Boys may have differing personal beliefs, which hints at less of some sort of perma-sealed oath that I thought bound members of these groups.
I found that Brien James is capable of discernment (whether we agree with him or not): he left the KKK because he found its members not open to "change" and not realistic about race in America. That's a choice he made, partially owing, it seems, to the knowledge of his own mixed heritage. It would seem that, under the right circumstances, James could show such discernment again.
Yes, James is in a right-wing media bubble, but many of us could be accused of the same on the left. For example, his emphasis on NARSOL seems based on a very broad understanding of the issues with which that particular group is concerned; on the other hand, I haven't heard or read anything about them in, I think, several years. Is that because I'm missing coverage? I don't know. I think NARSOL advocated, as just one example, for not adding minors to a sex offenders' registry for life (or maybe at all) following, say, a sexting incident. That's all I recall, but it points to one of the main issues with groups like the Proud Boys: they like to come in like bulls in a china shop rather than take the time to learn the facts and complexities of what they think they are protesting for or against. Listening needs to be a two-way street.
Shutting down a drag queen reading story books to a group of children (typically accompanied by their own parents or librarians) is another example of these men refusing to override their discomfort, or question their zealous self-righteousness or a media headline, in order to learn about a subject enough to understand the nuances and then figure out best practices for advocating for or against something.
Ironically, with a better informed pivot, a willingness to listen, a different world view... a group like the Proud Boys could choose to be a productive force for good, helping people in actual stress, or children living in rural or urban poverty. But that takes a dose of humble pie. I'd be amenable to supporting the Proud Boys if they took on a practical, noble endeavor; however, these men would first need to understand and accept that pedophilia is an unhealthy [and illegal] compulsion that is not in any way inherently connected to any particular sexual orientation or gender identity, much less the LGBTQ "movement."
Good interview. When you guys were talking about the drag queen story hour and he explained that his group shows up at those events to protect the kids from so-called "grooming", I wish you would have pointed out that the kids are brought there by their own parents, and asked him how he reconciles his opinion (and he admits that it's an opinion) that "the entire LGBTQ movement is always creeping towards trying to normalize pedophilia" with the liberty of parents who don't share his opinion. Does he think these parents aren't interested in protecting their own kids from pedophiles?