Dim Chijindu

We are going to have a fundamental difference of opinion if you think the answer to boys not reading is to write about “boy stuff” and not rethink how we engage with boys in general let alone as readers. No specific interest or taste should be placed on a gender binary!!!

For those who have been defending this fellow and showing him sympathy simply because his hypocrisy has been called out, I think it’s important to provide some context. What you’ve witnessed here did not happen in isolation. There is a history of provocation that many of you know absolutely nothing about. Earlier this year, and again sometime later, Afam repeatedly ridiculed me in a private group chat because of my political opinions. At one point, he even went as far as insinuating that I might be gay simply because I supported certain liberal policies. He joined others in the group in directing personal insults at me, turning what should have been a civil political discussion into an opportunity for mockery and personal attacks and then started complaining when I returned same energy. He subsequently tried to portray me as the person who introduced politics into the group, when I had merely contributed to an ongoing discussion. Among the issues discussed were ICE operations across American cities and the death of Alex Pretti, an ICU nurse who protested against ICE. During those exchanges, Afam expressed the view that Pretti deserved to be shot for standing up against ICE. That statement, in particular, revealed to me just how far our values had diverged. In the same group, undocumented immigrants were casually dismissed as “illegals,” with little regard for their humanity or individual circumstances. I found that attitude particularly troubling coming from someone who has himself navigated the American immigration system. He also claimed that other people had been complaining to him about me, which raised questions about the conversations being held behind my back. Yet this is the same individual some of you now expect me to shield from criticism because he once attended my wedding. Yes, I invited him to my wedding. He accepted, attended, and I appreciated his presence. But since when did attending someone’s wedding become a lifetime entitlement to their loyalty, silence, or political agreement? A wedding invitation is not a certificate of immunity from accountability. My objection has never been that Afam holds conservative political views. He is entitled to them. My objection is to the personal attacks, the sweeping judgments about other people’s political motivations, and what I consider a glaring double standard in how he treats others compared with how he expects to be treated. You cannot repeatedly ridicule people, question their motives, and make deeply personal insinuations, only to suddenly seek sympathy when your own conduct comes under scrutiny. And to those insisting that I went too far, you’re entitled to that opinion. But at least understand the history before passing judgment on a confrontation whose origins you know very little about. I refuse to subscribe to a culture where someone can continually dish out disrespect but must be protected from receiving criticism because of a past social association. This may well be the last time I address this issue or engage in any further back-and-forth. I’ve said what I needed to say, and I have no intention of turning this into an endless spectacle.

Don’t mind that guy, he can never be redeemed. Someone who married an older white woman, held his wedding on a plantation as if the venue came with a reminder of where enslaved people were expected to belong then used his green card to enlist in the U.S. Army and eventually secure citizenship now has the audacity to lecture people online. The irony is doing backflips, and the self-awareness is nowhere to be found. @General_Oluchi come and see the typical mentality of I better pass my neighbor

Being outwardly religious doesn’t free political leaders of secularist presumptions and worldviews. Many were Freemasonic deists and secularists, even if they were outwardly Christian. Christianity’s downfall in the US is partly due to its foundation on a Western secular liberal base rather than a Christian one. Nothing is neutral, which is why the former is winning while the latter is losing. This position only makes sense for Christian sects with little capacity for institutional governance and hierarchy, like Baptists and Pentecostals, which is why they had to borrow from an opposing framework. And I don’t even regard those sects as truly Christian.