llendrinall

[llendrinall]

The Robert Rankin ss is from his personal FB account, where he comments the allegations about Neil Gaiman.

[llendrinall]

About that Scientology connection...

One of the details that came to light this week in the latest article detailing the horrific allegations against Neil Gaiman (which I believe are true, to be clear, but not the primary focus of what I'm writing about here) is the extent of his ties to the Church of Scientology. I was most engaged with Neil's work as a teenager and in my early 20s, and I didn't recall seeing mention of the connection at the time (granted, that was more than few years ago!). I couldn't let it go after reading the Vulture article, so I started to dig a bit and found a lot of information being shared on Reddit and even further digging uncovered archived forum posts from over a decade ago by former CoS members.

There are a lot of details in this article by Mikey Crotty, who appears to be an independent comics journalist, which was published by Mike Rinder on his blog in 2023. Rinder was famously an executive in the "church" in Australia and ran SeaOrg (the elite force of CoS, essentially, and responsible for internal discipline within the broader org) before ultimately leaving the organization and speaking out as loudly as he could about the abuses he had been complicit in as a member (at great personal risk, as anyone who is familiar with the tactics used against former CoS members will know).

The piece was written as an exposé about Gaiman's then recently published novel, The Ocean at the End of the Lane, which was semi-autobiographical. Crotty discusses details about Gaiman's family, Gaiman's participation in CoS, and the coverup his father orchestrated for an apparent suicide of a student of Scientology who had immigrated to the UK and was living with the Gaimans at the time. This suicide is written into The Ocean at the End of the Lane.

Neil's father, David Gaiman, was head of worldwide communications for the Church of Scientology in the 60s, and was leading the PR spin to protect the organization from increasing legal scrutiny in the UK at the time. Around the same time, a suicide occurred while a young man, Johannes Scheepers, was living with them (the Gaiman's took in CoS students as lodgers at their home on a regular basis, apparently). The Gaiman family launched a campaign to depict him as a broken down gambler to avoid further scandal for the organization. The logic doesn't quite add up, and it's more likely that Johannes was a new adherent who had been badly taken advantage of. You can read more details in the article I linked. Crotty makes the case that not only were the Gaimans lying about the death of the student, even going so far as to claim he wasn't actually lodging with them, but that Neil then went further to spread these lies in the form of fiction decades later (we now know this book was written as a result of the prompting of Amanda Palmer, who was encouraging him to confront his childhood experiences with CoS per the article in Vulture).

The article also points out evidence of Neil's continued involvement with Scientology:

Neil Gaiman’s history with Scientology is very murky; deliberately so. His family are practically Scientology royalty in the UK, he met his first wife Mary McGrath while she was studying Scientology and lodging at Harrow House and he himself worked as a Scientology Auditor for several years in the Eighties and was a Director of a Scientologist’s property company ‘Centrepoint’ until 1999.  He now won’t discuss his own Scientology connections and states, without any details, that he’s no longer a member of the Cult that supported Apartheid up until the mid eighties, believes homosexuals are deviants and mental illness is a manifestation of personal failure in the sufferer’s current or past life; beliefs which are anathema to most of Neil’s adoring audience. His connection to Scientology and apparent departure from the cult first went public as part of a court case in 2002 where when asked “Are you still involved with the Church of Scientology?” Neil said “I don’t understand the question”, subsequently asked “Are you still a member of the Church of Scientology?” he replied “I don’t consider myself as such”. Even then his admission that he worked for the Church for 3 years is somewhat confusing: “I worked for a 3 year period after getting out of school as a ‘Counsellor’ for the Church of Scientology”; in fact he actually worked as an ‘Auditor’ in a process made famous in the award winning 2015 Documentary ‘Going Clear’ which explains how officials in the Church of Scientology keep in-depth records on everything its members say during private ‘auditing’ sessions and then use their secrets against them. Renowned Journalist and author on Scientology Tony Ortega says that Gaiman “became a Class VIII auditor, and even ran the Birmingham “org” as its ED, executive director. “. While there is no contradiction in Neil’s actual admission of working for Scientology up till the late Nineties and subsequently leaving the cult and its beliefs sometime in the early Noughties, conflicting details arise in the period since, when Neil has insisted he’s not a Scientologist. According to public records he was a shareholder in the family firm G&G Foods, which produces the vitamins used in Scientology’s highly criticized Narconon and De-Tox practices, since 2011. He transferred approximately a quarter of a million shares to Scientologist shareholders in 2013. There’s the book ‘Ocean’ also from 2013 and then there’s also his production company ‘The Blank Corporation’. ‘The Blank Corporation’ is Neil’s production company which works on all his adaptations such as ‘Sandman’, ‘Anansi Boys’, ‘Good Omens’ and the upcoming ‘Ocean at the End of the Lane’ in partnership with Netflix, Amazon, Warner Bros, the BBC and others. According to the website and any interviews, Neil founded ‘The Blank Corporation’ in 2016 with his Vice President and former P.A. Cat Mihos. According to the official Companies registration however, the company was actually set up by Neil and then wife (and still devout Scientologist) Mary McGrath in 2000. The company is still registered to a Scientologist’s P.O Box in Wisconsin, where Mary McGrath still works for the Church of Scientology. One company; two very different stories, it’s just another mystery, like what really happened to cause Johannes Scheepers to take his own life in 1968.

I want to note that based on what I've read, being a Class VIII auditor is the highest level you can go as an auditor in CoS without becoming a member of SeaOrg. Auditors are individuals who are key to the brainwashing process members of CoS undergo; they utilize the org's "technology" to identify past sins by doing intensive interrogation sessions with members. This means Neil was well trained in how to psychologically interrogate org members and held a position of relative power over them as he documented their dearest secrets for the org (primarily to blackmail them with should they ever want to leave, based on CoS records and former members' experiences).

I found forum posts where others reviewed public records that confirmed the majority of these claims, although unable to confirm the PO Box in Wisconsin. His sister, Lizzy Calcioli, is the current company director of G&G, which supplies pseudoscientific vitamin treatments to drug rehabilitation seekers that are horribly abused by Narconon (CoS does not allow actual medical intervention or medical practices in its org). According to public filings, Neil still owns shares in G&G.

There is also this interview from 2010 with the New Yorker, in which Neil claims he is no longer a member of CoS, but expresses sympathy to them:

These days, Gaiman tends to avoid questions about his faith, but says he is not a Scientologist. Like Judaism, Scientology is the religion of his family, and he feels some solidarity with them. “I will stand with groups when I feel like they’re being properly persecuted,” he told me.

It is also well known that celebrity members of CoS are encouraged/allowed to lie about their connection to it in order to support their monetary success. Because of course they're going to contribute back to the organization through that success, which it appears Neil has done.

Additionally, we know from public accounts of CoS's practices and leaked documents that once someone "goes clear" and leaves the organization, they are not allowed to continue to associate with anyone within the cult. Isolation of former victims is one of the many tools used against them. The fact that Neil maintained a marriage for decades to an active member who still works for CoS, as well as relationships with his family members who are leaders in CoS, indicates he is either still on the books as a member or is contributing to CoS in order to avoid alienation from his family. Any sympathy a desire to remain connected with his family might conjure is misguided in my opinion, because we know that he's likely profiting off of shares in a company that takes advantage of and contributes to the traumatization of vulnerable patients as a CoS affiliated business.

Had I known Neil Gaiman was so closely connected to the "church" sooner (one degree away from L. Ron Hubbard himself as a child!), I would not have supported his work in the way that I did in the past. And I think he knew that a significant portion of his audience would respond the same way, which is why he obfuscated and downplayed those connections.

His alleged ongoing involvement also changes the way I perceive his actions - Deception and manipulation is, by former member's accounts, standard procedure for leaders within Scientology. It should come as no surprise that he will continue to deny any evidence, attempt to blame his victims, and lie lie lie to avoid potential consequences. It is, after all, the example he was given and trained in as an active participant in a destructive cult that he has never publicly disavowed and that he appears to continue to support.

I think this information should be taken into account in how former (hopefully) fans react to his responses to these accusations. I wish for peace for the victims who are now speaking out, and I hope they are able to reach the resolution they deserve.

[llendrinall]

I know the internet is full of hyperbole but I can honestly say that[to me] every Superman production has missed the mark on the Clark/Superman difference until now. I can confidently say that because it’s irked me for years.

This might be the first production to actually really get into the weeds with some simple changes, use lighting, costuming, hair&makeup (peep the contour!)to convey that Clark and Supes look nothing alike. This is so cool to me!!!!! They finally did it.

Shout out to the departments. Shout out to whoever realized they needed way bigger (longer)eyeglass frames with a thick bridge that would alter the appearance of his nose making him unclockable. Whoever you are, I love this work. I love how the base of the cape on the shoulders and the collar work together. It gets the job done but also looks like it was comfortable to wear during hours of shooting. I love that supes has a bit of contouring in the makeup differing from Clark. Shout out to whoever decided to make Clark’s suits oversized and flimsy! It accurately demonstrates Clark’s attempt to look like a little fish in a big pond. He’s not just like that; everything is a choice with him.

Shout out to Peter King and Lindsay McCallister on the hair design/hair story. They did their big one. Clark’s hair is such a big change(so fluffy and undressed!) and accurately shows how someone would manipulate their curly hair to change their appearance. Superman’s hair really works. Honey, that hair is dressed! It is reminiscent enough to please fans but different enough to feel fresh. I like that it’s rounded on top instead of square.

Also I’ve never seen this actor before in my life but he is embodying my man in the trailer so that is also exciting. I don’t even care if the movie is good. I’m a bit over hero movies but I love me some Supes. Everyone seems to really be invested in the visuals of this project. The commitment to color is commendable after years of dark grey low lit mess. Anyway…

I love new faces. I love movies! I love departments! I love unions! I hate David Zaslav!

[llendrinall]

How to kill a woman online all over again (How to recognize a smear campaign)

“It's actually sad because it just shows you have people who really want to hate on women” Melissa Nathan – Professional Online Assassin (PR Crisis Manager)

In December 2024 The New York Times published a story about a targeted campaign of harassment and character assassination against actress Blake Lively. I won't rehash the details of the case here. Be it enough to know that Lively suffered sexual harassment during the filming of It Ends With Us. Baldoni, the perpetrator, orchestrated a campaign against her to preemptively mar her character so that any allegations against him would be dismissed.

I won’t dwell on that here. Instead, having read a lot of what has been published, I want to describe how these public relations campaigns work.

The main idea is that the rich and powerful can and will hire people (Melissa Nathan being the most famous at the moment) to turn public opinion against their victims. This has two benefits for them:

Victims are less likely to speak up when they find themselves targets of attack.

Prosecutors, judges and jurors can be swayed by these campaigns.

Ultimately the idea is that only good, saintly, women are victims of abuse. If the woman is less than perfect then she is either lying or deserving of the abuse.

How do we recognize these campaigns? These are the traits I have noticed so far.

The target is a woman.

The attacks comes from within and without. So there will be “inside” stories as well as “public” stories.

Inside stories can be something like a “journalist” claiming something terrible happened behind the cameras, leaking videos out of context, etc.

Public stories are ideas supposedly noticed by the public. Someone commenting on the victim’s outfits, accessories or behaviors and extrapolating to their character. For example, if she uses a leather bag, she is supporting animal abuse, but if she uses a plastic bag, she is bad for the environment.

Of course, since people are far from perfect, some of these stories will point to actual bad behavior. That still is no justification for abuse.

3. The campaign is multi-platform.

Traditional media pick up the story. This doesn’t mean proper, trust-worthy media, but it’s important that some paper tabloid like, say, The Daily Mail will mention it.

Online media also pick up the story.

Social media pick up and spread the story through all platforms. This, to me, is the most tell-tale sign that something fishy is going on, when Reddit, Instagram reels, Tik-tok videos and Youtube short are all in agreement that this woman is nasty. Some posts will be bots, some created by actual humans working by the PR firm and many more made by users following the trend because as Nathan notices, people like to hate on women.

4. The story jumps the algorithm and now you are hearing about it.

Think of this: You enter Tik-tok and Instagram and stare at a short video of someone tying a knot. It’s a cool knot so you watch the video half a dozen times to learn how to do it. Next time you enter the site, your feed offers you nothing but knot-tying videos. That’s the algorithm working.

Now, when you are peacefully watching knot-tying videos and in pops a video of someone mocking the ridiculous way this woman drinks water, that’s a jump in the algorithm.

In other words, I can’t tell you any other films in which Blake Lively has starred, I have no interest in her whatsoever, and yet I got videos saying how horrible and tone-deaf she was during promotion.

If you are learning nasty things about a person even though you care nothing about them, their job or even their industry, then we should take pause. I’m not saying dismiss it, but ask yourself why are you seeing this.

5. There is a comparison with a man.

It’s not enough that the victim is a bad woman. She must be compared to a man, most likely her abuser, who is a much better person. He would never use a leather/plastic/cotton bag, don’t you know?

Examples:

Knowing how these campaigns work, it’s easier to notice their outline, their shape, under the waves of news and social media. Here are some examples.

The Fallen - Amber Heard vs Johnny Depp. This is the paradigm of online assassination. If you were online in the spring of 2022 it was impossible to avoid the hate against Heard who, I am sure, is a horrible person. Yet she was also abused by Depp. He lost a libel suit against a tabloid. You really have to be a nasty piece to lose a libel suit. Depp, by the way, also used Melissa Nathan as an online gun-for-hire.

The Ones Currently Fighting – Blake Lively against Justin Baldoni is the most recent one. Summer and Fall of 2024 was marked by the hate against her. Again, I am sure she is insufferable, entitled, blonde and all together quite impossible to describe. This doesn’t change the fact that Baldoni sexually harassed her. One should not have men ogling one’s naked body.

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. Did you know that Melissa Nathan not only represented Johnny Depp and Justin Baldoni, but also Brad Pitt? Did you know that once this fact was made public Pitt finally signed the divorced papers after eight (8!) years? Little is known of this story because Angelina Jolie has amazing intuition for public relations. She has been silent for almost a decade, while there are news about Pitt going out with his girlfriend, Pitt missing his children and Pitt being sad that his children are forsaking his last name.

(The report on the 2016 plane incident states that Pitt choked one of the children and hit another in the face. Can’t imagine why they would take the Jolie name after that).

(As an aside, I think there is a racist bias here at work and that people assume he hit the boys, not the girls, and the POC children, not the white ones, so “it’s not as bad”).

The One Success Story so I can finish this on a hopeful note – Sophie Turner and Joe Jonas. The moment the couple split, stories emerged of Sophie being a bad mother for, hear this, going to a wrap-up party, having a career in film instead of staying home and what not. This was in 2023, the sting of the Heard-Depp case was recent and Sophie Turner’s fans were not having it. I remember reading an editorial noting how the campaign had fizzled out and Jonas stop fighting for custody of their children.

Anyway:

Bad women can be victims of abuse.

No one deserves abuse.

If you ever think “why am I being showed this?” that’s an abuser killing his victim online all over again.

[llendrinall]

Random linguistic worldbuilding: A language with six sets of pronouns, which are set by one's current state of existence. There's a separate pronoun for people who are alive, people who are dead, and potential future people who are yet to be born, and the ambiguous ones of "may or may not be alive or aleady dead", "may or may not have even been born yet", and the ultimate general/ambiguous all-covering one that covers all ambiguous states.

The culture has a specific defined term for that tragic span of time when a widow keeps accidentally referring to their spouse with living pronouns. New parents-to-be dropping the happy surprise news of a pregnancy by referring to their future child with the "is yet to be born" pronoun instead of a more ambiguous one and waiting for the "wait what did you just say?" reactions.

Someone jokingly referring to themselves with the dead person pronouns just to highlight how horrible their current hangover is. A notorious aspiring ladies' man who keeps trying to pursue women in their 20s despite of approaching middle age fails to notice the insult when someone asks him when he's planning to get married, and uses the pronoun that implies that his ideal future bride may not even be born yet.

A mother whose young adult child just moved away from home for the first time, who continues to dramatically refer to their child with "may or may not be already dead" until the aforementioned child replies to her on facebook like "ma stop telling people I'm dead" and having her respond with "well how could I possibly know that when you don't even write to us? >:,C"

[llendrinall]

To get in the Christmas’ mood this year I have read Agatha Christie’s Hercule Poirot’s Christmas and I have got a revelation.

This is it. The foundational book. The story everyone else is referencing, parodying, answering to, even if they don’t know it. It has the manor, the suspects, the crime, the inheritance, the toxic family. You read it and you see the game Cluedo, and the Roys from Succesion, and of course Knives Out that was always obvious, but also all the other stories in between.

And you also see what they didn’t take. The women. By Jove, this was written in 1938 and the women are so great. They are the ones carrying the story. None of the works inspired by this book have these women, petty and generous and diverse, so let me tell you about them.

Lydia Lee. Liked by everyone, even the most despicable characters. Thin and energetic. Quotes Lady Macbeth upon finding the murder victim. Poirot asks her permission to solve the case. 10/10.  

Hilda Lee. Kind. Fat. Plain. Her husband says he is glad to have her as the beneficiary of his insurance policy, which is a wild thing to say in a Christie book. Explains to her husband that women can’t simply divorce because a husband cheated and should stop blaming his mother for staying with his father. 10/10 for letting fat plain women be fat and plain and moral. She doesn’t suddenly glam up nor does she need to.

Magdalene Lee. Not much about her, but it’s nice to see an early example of gaslight, gatekeep girlboss. 7/10

Mrs Lee. Died years before the novel, still very present. Is both a victim of her husband and a toxic influence to her children. 7/10 for letting women be complex.

Pilar Estravados, the poor Spanish relative. Wants to experience an English Christmas. Is disappointed there won’t be a Yule log because of the murder. Tells the police officer investigating that he is very handsome. Says when Spaniards fight, they yell and stab each other, but Englishmen only get red in the face and say nothing. 11/10 should have gotten a whole novel from her perspective.

[llendrinall]

Not an ask exactly, just dropping by to say I adore your fics and probably think about them at least once a day :) Percy in Twenty-Three especially makes me fell better about some of my own thoughts (not sure if he’s supposed to be relatable but he sure is for me!) I asked lovely the-colourful-witch here on Tumblr to illustrate the scene with him biting into a whole kiwi (just for my diary when I need a laugh). I love how she’s depicted his chaotic thoughts. Attaching it here for you too :)

Oh, that image is fantastic. That is the face of a man who had never seen a kiwi before and is not witnessing someone eat one raw and unpeeled. So many questions!

Thank you for much for sharing. <3

[llendrinall]

Something I always loved about Jonathan is that his role is mostly comic relief. This usually means being a clumsy burden to the hero group, but not with him. He is smart and helpful. He boasts that he is a marksman and, look at it, he later proves it true. It's nice to see someone avoid combat but still be a valuable member.

the thing about the mummy movies is that you really spend most of the time thinking "wow brendan fraser's character is so cool" or "man oded fehr is so mysterious and heroic" when the fact of the matter is that these two

are the absolute most batshit insane heroes in the entire franchise

these two are intellectual loner siblings with archeology backgrounds who read and speak ancient egyptian, hire a dude directly out of prison to take them to a lost city of gold, and fight mummies literally with their bare hands. twice.

no one in these movies stands a chance against the carnahans. frankly they're lethal in how willing they are to make the absolute and most undeniably deranged decisions. jonathan pickpockets a dude on fire. evy's resurrected from the dead and immediately remembers how to use sai. they're racking shotguns from a cliff in this scene and then proceed to blow away half the antagonists.

rick and ardeth should be so lucky

[llendrinall]

Every twist and turn in this case is art.

[llendrinall]

Seeing something become a cultural phenomenon in real time.

.

..

...

There was a meeting in Washington Park of CEO Shooter lookalikes with people dressing as him. This has been embraced fast and wholeheartedly. My god.

"Killin Fuckin CEO's"

Freight graff in the Bay Area, California

[llendrinall]

I hope every health insurance exec dies from painful and preventable disease

[llendrinall]

I hope this brings a reckoning with their military because their behaviour was shameful from every point of view.

imagine being a Korean person awake at like one in the morning trying to accept that the president of South Korea actually just tried to go full dictatorship by way of an emergency martial law because he was basically having a political temper tantrum and every agency and corporation in the country is all hands on deck, code red mode on everything and the military is being deployed and then the assembly revokes the martial law and then the president is like lol nevermind and now you have to get ready to work at your shitty job on a Wednesday

[llendrinall]

TIL that the reason lead levels in children’s blood have dropped 85% in the past thirty years is because of an unknown scientist who fought car companies to end leaded gasoline. He also removed it from paint, suggested its removal from pipes, and campaigned for the removal of lead solder from cans.

via ift.tt

[llendrinall]

I had to write YEARS of posts about British Clownfall and South Korea just straight up speed ran theirs a mere seven minutes longer than it takes to watch Wicked

[llendrinall]

every time i listen to “you’re a mean one mr. grinch” i can’t help but sit there and think “what did the grinch do to hurt you?” because dude just stands there for 2 minutes and 58 seconds and drags the grinch into the dirt

[llendrinall]

Ha! Yes, I have read it a few times. Forward and backward.

Summary: A story about murder, the power of writing lists, the interest of the press, the politics of the Department of Magical Transportation and the struggle of being Percy Weasley.

Author: @llendrinall