Mark O'Donnell is a bit of an enigma. The warning signs regarding Lloyd Evans/John Cedars were there for years, but he ignored them. He never gave me a good reason why.
Prove me wrong Mark. I hope I am way off the mark here. Iād hate to see your work be tarnished by continued association with Jabba the Hutt.
In fact I got attacked on Twitter (only by men š) because my post about misogyny included Mark. In fairness, it is right to be said that many men had agree with me. This is not a man vs woman battle. But it is certain that 'some' men especially with a microphone attached, have never lost their elder status. Does this have anything to do with mr Evans? Yes it does. First of all there is a "vacancy" to be filled in the community.
But also this. It was ok and cool to interview Kim for the Lloyd Evans scandal. She brought a lot of "viewers" in the end. That's was fine. It had to be done. But why is it that Kim is only contacted for the Lloyd Evans scandal? She has worked on so many cases. Can she be asked opinions and a point of view about something else but Evans? Or is she just helpful for the "gossip" because as a 'sister' she can only be useful for that? Or is it because being too close with Kim is too dangerous as someone with a leather jacket may be angry with that decision? Prove me wrong!
And this can be said on many other women in the community. Why can't they be part of panels? Why can't they be "authoritative"? Why are they so useful for the scandal talks like the sisters in the KH? What makes Mark O'Donnell more authoritative than Kim Silvio or Sofia or S. Walker or Jillian, or Stephanie or Joseelyne or P/Bob or Sarah or Louise or Michelle and many other fabulous female activists?
And I know many men especially in this forum share the same viewpoint and this can only be reassuring. For the minority of men that don't, we will get you exposed sooner or later.