#[ Hypocrisy exposed! ]

[cc1010fox]

Ahsoka: So...you can sense the Force... Fox, grunting: I guess... Anakin: And you hate us because we use the Force, which you can sense... Fox, defensively: It throws me off! Obi-Wan: Since you can sense the Force, you can sense a target moving... Fox: ...Yes...? Plo: Which is you utilizing the Force. Fox, stunned into silence: ... Wolffe: ...Pfft! Rex, laughing: The irony! Cody: You're biased against them for doing what you do! Bly: This is golden. I need to update Aayla.

[starkid-smosh]

So talking about amanda and angela wanting to kiss with tongue is normal but us saying damien and angela are looking at each other more fondly recently and thinking it's sweet is weird and we're freaks.... interesting.. it's almost like shipping real people isn't actually the problem 🧐🤔

[tumblingxelian]

There is something really weird about people who bailed on RWBY because they felt it wasn't queer enough for them. Only to go and stan a series with like, literally one canonized gay character and very limited story but act like its the gayest thing in the world.

Like what you like.

But I think in this case its pretty clear they were more interested in having something akin to a toy box or sandpit to play with; rather than an actual story.

But they don't want to admit that and so have to pretend there's something wrong with RWBY's queer rep to justify their interest in the new thing because media engagement is a contest I guess?

[fantastic-nonsense]

What are five of your favourite Grishaverse quotes? Send this ask to 5 of your favourite grishaverse blogs!

Thank you so much for sending this, and sorry it took me such a long time to get to it 😭

Choosing was super hard because there are so many insanely good quotes in the books and I love several of them for very different reasons, but I'll try and give it a go anyways. So: five of my favorite Six of Crows quotes (because I still haven't read the SaB trilogy), in no particular order:

Kaz and Inej, on getting back up after a fall:

Get it together, Brekker, he scolded himself harshly. It didn’t help. He was going to faint again, and this would all be over. Inej had once offered to teach him how to fall. “The trick is not getting knocked down,” he’d told her with a laugh. “No, Kaz,” she’d said, “the trick is in getting back up.” More Suli platitudes, but somehow even the memory of her voice helped. He was better than this. He had to be. Not just for Jordie, but for his crew. He’d brought these people here. He’d brought Inej here. It was his job to bring them out again. The trick is in getting back up. He kept her voice in his head, repeating those words, again and again, as he stripped off his boots, his clothes, and finally his gloves. -Ch. 22, Six of Crows

Matthias asking for mercy for monsters/the "we are all someone's monster" observation:

“Nina,” he said, hand still pressed over the smooth skin on his chest where a bullet wound should be. “Nina, please.” “You know they would not offer you mercy, Matthias.” “I know. I know. But let them live in shame instead.” She hesitated. “Nina, you taught me to be something better. They could be taught, too.” Nina shifted her gaze to his. Her eyes were ferocious, the deep green of forests; the pupils, dark wells. The air around her seemed to shimmer with power, as if she was alight with some secret flame. “They fear you as I once feared you,” he said. “As you once feared me. We are all someone’s monster, Nina.” -Ch. 41, Six of Crows

Wylan and Kaz's entire conversation about disability and vulnerability while cracking Van Eck's safe:

He thumbed quickly through the ledger and said, “When people see a cripple walking down the street, leaning on his cane, what do they feel?” Wylan looked away. People always did when Kaz talked about his limp, as if he didn’t know what he was or how the world saw him. “They feel pity. Now, what do they think when they see me coming?” Wylan’s mouth quirked up at the corner. “They think they’d better cross the street.” Kaz tossed the ledger back in the safe. “You’re not weak because you can’t read. You’re weak because you’re afraid of people seeing your weakness. You’re letting shame decide who you are. Help me with the painting.” They lifted the portrait back into place over the gaping hole in the safe. Martin Van Eck glared down at them. “Think on it, Wylan,” Kaz said as he straightened the frame. “It’s shame that lines my pockets, shame that keeps the Barrel teeming with fools ready to put on a mask just so they can have what they want with no one the wiser for it. We can endure all kinds of pain. It’s shame that eats men whole.” -Ch. 18, Crooked Kingdom

Inej vs. Dunyasha on the Church of Barter rooftop, refusing to be cowed on her own turf:

“The blood you spill is the blood of kings,” seethed Dunyasha. “You are not fit for such a gift.” Inej almost felt sorry for her. Dunyasha really believed she was the Lantsov heir, and maybe she was. But wasn’t that what every girl dreamed? That she’d wake and find herself a princess? Or blessed with magical powers and a grand destiny? Maybe there were people who lived those lives. Maybe this girl was one of them. But what about the rest of us? What about the nobodies and the nothings, the invisible girls? We learn to hold our heads as if we wear crowns. We learn to wring magic from the ordinary. That was how you survived when you weren’t chosen, when there was no royal blood in your veins. When the world owed you nothing, you demanded something of it anyway. Inej raised a brow and slowly wiped the blood of kings on her trousers. -Ch. 35, Crooked Kingdom

And Inej at the harbor...hopeful, in love, and ready to take on the world with her boy and her ship:

Had she really thought the world didn’t change? She was a fool. The world was made of miracles, unexpected earthquakes, storms that came from nowhere and might reshape a continent. The boy beside her. The future before her. Anything was possible. -Ch. 44, Crooked Kingdom

[dotthings]

This has never actually been a fandom war. spn fandom has always been political, with a rigid and narrow minded element waging an ideological war against anything that violated or disturbed their status quo, against anything that said family of the heart and marginalized characters matter. “Family values” where only blood family counts and narrow ideas follow textbook American conservativism, dressed up in a “ship war” hat. Post spn era it metastasized and has grown less opaque but it was always this and I have had to fight it since I entered the fandom when season 1 aired.

[queenarielviolet]

.

[mrstsung]

Ok look so i caved in and said fuck it. If I'm gonna have mk12/mk1 shang tsung.

I'm gonna write him my way. Fuck canon at this point. So nrs can suck it. I'm taking him from NRS.

Anyways. Here's some edits of my husband.

One pink edit and one reg sparkle edit.

He still makes me go *agshfjjflhlhlkl* and *exasperated squees* 💖💖💖💖

*DO NOT USE WITHOUT PERMISSION!*

[gaybaseball-fan]

[insidejupiter]

jingliu is a perfect example of "if this female character was male, shed be universally loved instead of heavily criticized"

[soreiya]

If you have an irrational fear of criticism. Perhaps it would be in your best interests to actively avoid it for your own mental health? I’ve recently witnessed some individuals become so defensive that they tried to project their own negative emotions onto others. In which case, they are only making themselves more miserable by sending condescending anon messages, obsessively scouring fandom tags/other people’s pages, and comment responses looking for something to be upset about. Getting angry enough to do things like this makes it apparent that this is very much a ‘you’ problem and not a fandom issue.

---

Criticism is not anti behavior. I’m going to try my best to explain the difference. Hopefully this will clear things up a bit.

---

A critic will elaborate and break down their opinions in an attempt to get other people to understand their point of view. This is usually done on their individual page and will be tagged to the appropriate fandom/s in question. If a criticism post has been tagged incorrectly, kindly inform the author about the issue. Block the new criticism tag, or the author in question if you don’t want to be exposed to anything more.

Criticism might be annoying to see sometimes, but it can also give you an opportunity to learn something new or view things from a different perspective.

People who genuinely enjoy something are not going to stop doing so just because of some random stranger’s thoughts on the subject. More often than not fandom decline comes from someone simply losing interest and moving on to another fandom. Thinking otherwise might be a bit delusional.

---

Anti behavior is invasive. These people will go out of their way to express their hatred for something by directly commenting on other people’s posts/fanworks. They act entitled as if it’s justified to want the content gone. They will try to harass people in an attempt to get them to leave the community. If that doesn’t work, they may go as far as attempting to socially cancel you with lies, or other ignorant statements. When writing their own posts, antis will condemn others for liking content that they do not. They will insult people, or label them as something inappropriate in order to give them a sense of superiority as if they are taking the moral high ground by being mean to other fans.

Keep in mind that most people are afraid to voice their opinions because of people who act like this.

Anti behavior absolutely should not be tolerated under any circumstances. Don’t allow such people to ruin your fandom experience. Block on sight and move on.

[ingek73]

FACT & REPORTAGE

#MediaToo & The Crisis in British Journalism

MailOnline and The Sun Hid Serious Dan Wootton Claims – While Attacking Huw Edwards and the BBC

In the fifth part of our three-year special investigation into the private and professional conduct of GB News star Dan Wootton, Byline Times can reveal how The Sun and MailOnline have been protecting their star celebrity journalist

Dan Evans

28 July 2023

MailOnline knew of serious criminal allegations of a sexual nature about its columnist Dan Wootton in May yet failed to report them to the police and continued to publish his work on five occasions, Byline Times can reveal.

Wootton’s former employer The Sun also failed to report the same detailed allegations to the police despite knowing about them since at least 7 June 2023 – a month before running a controversial front page about a BBC presenter lawfully paying for sexual images.

The matter was reported to the publications by a former male adult entertainer whom Wootton employed to help him catfish men of sexual interest and secretly record them in their homes having sex.

A further allegation was also made, and is known by both newspapers – details of which we are unable to report at this time.

The man told Byline Times: “The Mail said they couldn’t touch the story as Wootton worked for them. They said it sounded like a very serious criminal matter, and said that I should go to the police – which I did.

“I also told The Sun about it and the fact that Wootton had paid one of my colleagues for sex work from their own accounts by pretending he was a source on a story about Amber Heard. They also told me to report it to the police. So, I did that in June.”

Neither publication has since reported at all on the three-year special investigation into the personal and professional conduct of Wootton that Byline Times started breaking 11 days ago, yet The Sun did cover Wootton’s denials in a 143-word piece on 20 July. News UK, its publisher, has since set up an internal inquiry and MailOnline has unofficially ‘paused’ Wootton’s column.

However, the failure of publishers Associated Newspapers Ltd and News UK Ltd to act sooner is attracting strong criticism, given both took aim at the BBC during the same period for its handling of the Huw Edwards affair.

“The fact that Dan Wootton’s employers and previous employers knew of allegations against him and did nothing for at least six weeks before Byline Times started reporting them means that the public interest here is not just on his alleged actions but their actions too as supposedly responsible publishers and employers,” Paul Wragg, Professor of Media Law at the University of Leeds, told this newspaper.

‘I Was Really Surprised they Didn’t Seem Interested’

Today, in the latest part of Byline Times’ #MediaToo investigation into abuses of power in publishing and broadcasting, we can reveal how the ex-adult entertainer first contacted MailOnline on 29 May amid a mounting scandal about the former ITV This Morning presenter Philip Schofield and his lawful relationship with a younger man he worked with.

In a subsequent email to MailOnline on 31 May, the man – who we are not naming for legal reasons – wrote: “After Philip Schofield, the next one on This Morning who should be investigated is Dan Wootton [the presenter previously worked on the magazine show].

“I am an ex-porn star and escort. I have worked for Dan on several occasions. The things he has asked me to do were illegal. He used to ask us to film others without their consent… He also used to pay myself and others to use our Facebooks [profiles] and message who he wanted us to encounter with. How much for a story like this? I have more information on him.”

Wootton has denied any allegations of criminality.

The complainant has since told Byline Times that his interactions with the now GB News star, left him suicidal and living a chaotic life of self-medicating drug use and mental trauma.

Communications with MailOnline continued until this Wednesday, 26 July, during which the man says he was told it could not consider reporting on Wootton because he was an employee of Associated Newspapers.

“After that, I went to The Sun and told them about Wootton and the Amber Heard stuff – evidence of which they obviously have on their own account system. After lots of calls, they just said it was for the police to deal with, not them.

“They said there wasn’t any evidence, even though I was directly involved. I even told them the name of the accounts person who dealt with it. I was really surprised they didn’t seem interested.”

Byline Times has verified the email and other communications with MailOnline and can confirm that at least eight phone calls were made to and from The Sun newsdesk between 7 June and 27 July about Wootton, who last night was still presenting a prime-time show on GB News.

The Huw Edwards Parallel

During this period, both MailOnline and The Sun broke stories about Huw Edwards, who is no longer on air for the BBC and has been receiving help, according to his wife, with “serious mental health issues”.

In a defence of its articles about Edwards, which have been heavily criticised, The Sun wrote in a comment piece on 13 July: “A desperate couple approached us with firm evidence that he was paying large sums to a young person with a spiralling drug addiction – and that the star had been sent sexual pictures.

“But police said nothing could be done and, despite a detailed complaint to the BBC, it did nothing either. What do our critics, especially Mr Edwards’ pious media friends, think we should have done? Told the family to shove off? Turned a blind eye to what appeared to be a clear abuse of power by a household name… ?”

MailOnline has been similarly critical of the BBC for posing as the “moral conscience of the nation” over the Edwards saga.

On Wednesday, its columnist Brendan O’Neill wrote: “Their authoritarian urge to elevate certain stories and diminish others robs ordinary people of the right to know what is really happening in this country. There is nothing ‘virtuous’ about it. On the contrary: these are the despotic antics of people who think they should have the power to control the flow of information itself.”

For Prof Wragg, “Dan Wootton has set himself up as a moral arbiter whose job it is to condemn others for moral flaws – and that means that his own moral flaws are a matter of clear public interest”.

“He is a man who has been instrumental in exposing the highly sensitive details of the private lives of many people in public life, including the television presenter Philip Schofield and the musical entertainer Duncan James,” he told Byline Times.

“He’s made a career out of subjecting others to vitriol but now seems to want the protection of the law as a matter of privacy and defamation now that his own alleged actions are being subjected to scrutiny.”

He added: “During this precise time-frame, The Sun was breaking a big story about the BBC News anchor Huw Edwards and it seems extraordinary that they would not have taken the opportunity to refer the serious allegations against Mr Wootton to the police themselves.

“At the very least, this inaction and the decision by MailOnline to allow Mr Wootton to continue to publish columns under its name seriously undermines the moral stance it has taken by criticising the BBC’s conduct in relation to Mr Edwards.

“It also undermines their credibility as a serious news organisation. This is a clear ethical failing that IPSO, the press complaints handler, should investigate given that it claims to uphold high editorial standards.”

Wootton has written five columns for MailOnline since the man first contacted it with his allegations.

In one column on 30 May, Wootton discussed Philip Schofield, saying: “I would have thought in this day and age that a mainstream broadcaster such as ITV ought to be seen to be doing all it can to deal with issues like this, find out where the truth lies and, in the meantime, suspend those who the rumours concern.”

Wootton also called for “the truth, this time; not the saccharin fairy-tale Schofield offered up on the sofa to an unsuspecting British public”.

In a follow-up column on 15 June, Wootton wrote of ITV’s treatment of the Schofield affair: “As a result of this cover-up and PR disaster that has followed, many loyal viewers will never trust This Morning or the channel its broadcast on again.”

Byline Times put a series of questions connected to this article to News UK and Associated Newspapers but received no response. This newspaper will update this article if it does.

A spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said: “In June 2023, the Metropolitan Police was contacted with regards to allegations of sexual offences committed by a man. Officers are assessing information to establish whether any criminal offence has taken place. There is no police investigation at this time.”

Dan Evans is a former colleague of Dan Wootton’s from the News of the World. None of the sources in this article were paid for their testimony

-

Earlier stories(see link below)

[enbyzombies2]

do you ever write an oc and its like oh fuck. I accidentally wrote an allegory for homophobic ideas about the AIDS crisis.

[benicebefunny]

My building at work has been overrun by white youths speaking French and smoking cigarettes.

[gaybaseball-fan]