#Sophie slander is so unless like why

[hellsbellschime]

Are you implying that those who write the article know that this is all slander and still release a hoax to defame Sophie? Why not write the truth, why continue the slanderous campaign against a young woman, the mother of two kids? Sophie is so wonderful, she doesn't deserve all of this

LOL I'm sorry but are you familiar with TMZ in the slightest? They are the sleaziest tabloid outlet out there and they will write whatever a celebrity tells them to write and that they are legally allowed to. TMZ was actually created by a lawyer named Harvey Levin, and the thing is that they will spin the shittiest, falsest narratives imaginable, but they DON'T slander anyone, like they will LITERALLY go right up to the line of what they can legally say without defaming someone but they leave just enough leeway to escape any liability for writing something that is undeniably false.

So while I'm not an expert, I have some extra insight into this because of my job, and a lot of TMZ's tactics are incredibly transparent and it's not hard to figure out what's going on and who they're serving. Because again, they are the scummiest, lowest of the low in tabloid journalism, so if they are the ones who broke a story then, unless they broke that story because they literally found court documents filed by a celebrity (which they actually do fairly often), that story is coming from someone directly involved in said story. In this instance, it is comically obvious that they're being fed info directly from Joe Jonas and/or his PR.

And because TMZ is so sleazy, if you ever see someone who is actually famous who appears to be feeding info and trying to spin their own narrative via TMZ, then that is because they know that TMZ will put whatever spin that they want on the story in order to get the exclusive. Like in this situation, they have "sources" saying that Sophie is a partier and a negligent mother and blah blah blah, and they can say that because TECHNICALLY that is true, they are being directly told this by someone on Team Jonas, but because they can deflect onto their "source" they can print whatever they want and it's not considered slander even though they did nothing to verify what they're being told.

TMZ will also game search engine optimization to favor the celebrity that is spilling the tea, which is why you'll see them suddenly churn out a dozen articles about the same topic with the same spin, because having a bunch of content on a topic will make search engines categorize them as more of an authority on that topic, ergo their content will be pushed towards the top of the pile.

Beyond that, they (and a lot of other tabloids do this, but TMZ is the worst because again they'll just print whatever wild shit they're told with no regard for whether or not it's true) break a story and include a source because once other outlets start reporting on the story, they will refer to TMZ and repeat what the source has said. It's actually an incredibly quick and easy way to craft a narrative, because essentially if the other sites who are covering the story don't include what these "sources" have said then it will make their coverage seem less credible. So, in a matter of hours, there are 20+ articles that include at least something referring to Sophie Turner being a party girl who abandoned her kids, and to people who don't understand how this all works it makes those allegations seem credible because EVERYONE is reporting on it. However, EVERYONE is saying this in reference to one single source, and that source is probably just someone acting on Joe Jonas' behalf and saying something that they know is a lie but that can be spun into a story and dominate the narrative.

Lucky for Sophie, there isn't a lot to actually back this narrative up, but again, tabloids will run a lot of bullshit stories if they think they can get some traction off of it, and TMZ is unequivocally the worst of the worst when it comes to spewing absolute bullshit so they can get a scoop and get more inside info from a celebrity. They also know how to game the fuck out of SEO and how to craft articles in a way that lowkey forces every other outlet that reports on it to refer back to them. So as an incredibly tl;dr answer to your question, they aren't reporting the truth because they have an in with Joe Jonas specifically because they're willing to lie on his behalf, and that is far more valuable to them than actually writing the truth.

[sayruq]

Now that everything has turned against him, Joe at the concert says not to believe anything unless he says it. Hypocrite. Why didn't he say that to protect Sophie when it all started. No one believes this shit, everyone knows it's his dirty smear campaign. I also believe that something will come from him, but not so directly that it does not spoil his reputation like now. Although I think that it will not help him. Most of the people are on the side of our Queen Sophie. I can't imagine how difficult it was for Sophie, seeing all this, those photos with children, slanders and knowing that all this is from your close one, who already caused pain, and then still does all this. I would probably cry all the time and do nothing, and Sophie, well done, continues to work and does not fall for his dirty games.

Now that everything has turned against him, Joe at the concert says not to believe anything unless he says it.

Again, it's like he doesn't understand it's 2023, not 2008. The public understands that the media (in this case gossip rags like TMZ and Page 6) won't suddenly rag on someone to make another celebrity look good unless that celebrity was paying them.

I can't imagine how difficult it was for Sophie, seeing all this, those photos with children, slanders and knowing that all this is from your close one, who already caused pain, and then still does all this. I would probably cry all the time and do nothing, and Sophie, well done, continues to work and does not fall for his dirty games.

It really was so needlessly cruel.

[anthonybialy]

The Runner-Up Worst

Joe Biden can’t brag about anything dull like achievements.  But he can claim to somehow be only the second-worst option.  The only truthful thing he’s ever uttered fittingly involves the person for which he’s again competing for one job.  A declining octogenarian who was an imbecile in his prime couldn’t have chosen a better foe.  The only people who can beat each other face off again in a most formidable challenge to logic as we know it.

The last incumbent who deserves assistance can run on Donald Trump sucking.   Bipartisan assistance isn’t as appealing as it may seem in concept.  A wholly inspirational message of the other guy being demonstrably appalling has created the exact morale you’d figure.  It’s coincidentally the only case his similarly tiresome foe can make?  As far as which one, it doesn’t matter.

You were sick of this in 2016.  Sweet folks in 1984 tired of Trump’s grating shtick without realizing they’d be enduring it for decades and on a far grander scale than bringing tackiness to Atlantic City’s boardwalk.  A plague of phony alpha success will culminate in another wretched term whether it’s somehow winning or letting Biden complete the most undeserved tenure in human history.  Selectors should probably figure it out by one of these presidential years.

The leader of the once-free world is obviously going to make preposterous claims in his Bidenesque way.  Even his surrogates who can formulate sentences without notecards are unable to avoid calling a potential loss the Fourth Reich’s start.  A vague threat of imposing white supremacy by law comes before claiming Trump would divide the country.

Every single Republican option is branded racist before uttering a word.  The maniacal charge is similar to claiming the right to negotiate without subsidies equates to hating the poor.  We would presently be hearing about how the fantasy decent nominee dreams of wearing Klan robes to the inauguration.

AI-generated Democrats on alternate DC Comics Earths are issuing identically nonsensical slanders against a calm governor who’s only noticeable for creating jobs when it’s most unpopular.  The fact they’re right this one time by coincidence makes Trump’s infuriating nomination somehow even more appalling.

Using the challenger’s only successful business strategy would be cunning if it weren’t instinctual.  An utter failure of an executive is wagering on serving as only the second-worst possible nominee.  In the spirit of respecting the other side, that’s same way Trump won, namely by running against the worst possible candidate imaginable.  Today’s devilish decision is Hillary Clinton���s fault in her way.  

Politics appeals to black holes of humanity who just have to pretend to be less worse.  The election that makes Sophie’s Choice seem like it was between Jeni’s Splendid Ice Cream and Cold Stone Creamery is the precise opposite of a free market with an endless array of options.  By contrast, one just must be better than the other one.  How did Biden get 81 million votes? This same way he will this year, namely by being a human being who is not Trump.

Noting Trump is a tantrum in human form is not quite a cunning election strategy.  But you can’t expect much from the person who spent half a century in politics thinking he’d finally make everyone rich by sending out checks.  The choice of all-time dreadful idiots who have lucked into roles mistakenly linked with success shows why the private sector is always better.  Imagine only getting to pick between Trump Ice and Trump Vodka if you’re thirsty.

Two candidates who have nothing but calling the other one awful are grateful for codependency.  Railing against each other is the only time each is accurate.

Nobody is happy, so let’s try more of what sucks.  A breakthrough is inevitable unless patterns are consistent, and life should feature more surprises.  Right now, nothing’s shocking.  This is a rather painful way to learn predictability can be torture.  Dinner at Burger King is out of reach even for royalty.  The only people not harassed are criminals and those sneaking into the country.

A competent candidate’s greatest worry against Joe Biden would be excessive cockiness.  The electoral vote total would be even higher than he can usually count.  Instead, the person who makes us feel the least worst might be at a disadvantage.  The sole thing older than Biden is the case against his beliefs.  The ghastly ideology of an idiot who doesn’t understand reality can be downplayed because his repeating adversary is on record as not getting anything he promised done.

There are no other options.  I mean, there were.  But primary voters were either too medicated or not enough.  As with getting poorer by printing more money, the result is sadly predictable.  If voters don’t like negative campaigns, then they should stop selecting the surliest messengers around.

The increasingly unlikely prospect of a candidate ever running by making the case for improvement is what voters wanted, so congratulations.  Each side demanding compliance by noting the binary choice should share blame.  It’s the one time collectivism is useful.  Never worrying about how options became this distasteful in the first place works out in the same way ignoring which way the debt clock rolls leads to breaking even.

[thekatebridgerton]

Someday I'm gonna wake up, check my social media and I will not see comments about Sophie being deminish, insulted or erased, Someday I'm gonna wake up and there will only be good and positive comments about her and how brave she was by not letting Araminta brake her spirit in anyway and always manage the way to stood up against everything she went through because I'll never accept her being called weak for her quiet strenght and surviving mechanism, that day will be a good day for me

First of all Anon who do I have to kick? Because some people go around disrespecting our Sophie and that's not nice. Come on give me names, I'll get my vodoo dolls.

Second, I rarely see Sophie hate in my dash because I use the block button liberally and I'm not on Twitter. Because angst is not my thing. (Unless we're talking fanfiction aus with a happy ending) this is an angst free blog. Safe for all of you who want angst free content.

That aside, this IS a blog where one is free to rant about fictional injustice so thank you for coming.

I know a lot of people don't like to hear this but Sophie Beckett is a perfectly fine character! She is not passive, or weak or a coward. I've said this in previous posts, only a person who's been trough the kind of abuse Sophie suffered under Araminta knows exactly WHY she's such a strong character in the first place. And why her quiet defiance is admirable.

If you don't know what it's like to be stuck since childhood with nowhere to go, in an abusive household, where the main abuser is a woman, traditionally seen as a caregiver who instead of offering warmth or love, holds food and shelter over Sophie's head to make her behave, while Sophie had nowhere to turn to and no friends to support her. Then you don't know why she's such a strong character.

Sophie's backstory is super tragic and this is a fact. Araminta was a gaslighter of the highest caliber. And Sophie's status as a bastard meant that she virtually had no rights and wasn't entiled to demand anything from anyone. So her surviving within her circumstances, without becoming an abuser or a cold unemotional asshole, was an act of superhuman mental strength and courage .

Sophie haters are like those people you meet when you're clinically depressed who ask 'But why don't you think more positive?' and 'why don't you smile more'

And you want to tell them 'I don't know Brad, maybe because it's hard? Ever thought about that??? Must be nice living in your head, without self criticism voices telling you that you suck, wonder how that fantasy land feels like'

For those of you who don't know what being a bastard was like in regency england (the following also applies to Gareth Sin Clair, if you're wondering). It was like having a stamp in her national ID, right next to date of birth and natal country, an ugly stamp that said 'born out of wedlock: Do not treat with respect' by all intents and purposes commoners had it better. But Araminta gaslighted Sophie so bad since childhood!!

And I really don't know what's up with people these days and victim blaming. But here's a tip ANYTHING THAT ISN'T KINDNESS AND SUPPORT TOWARDS A VICTIM OF ANY KIND OF ABUSE, IS UN-WEL-COME.

So those people that say Sophie could have gotten out of there, that she could have done this and that or left Araminta, or punched her sooner etc. Check your victim blaming at the door please. It was not Sophie's responsibility to get out of that abusive situation when she was virtually powerless. It WAS ARAMINTA'S RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKE CARE OF HER. Why aren't more people talking about what an absolute asshole Araminta was to do that to little Sophie, for her whole life?? Let's put the blame where it belongs, in Araminta's door and in the Earl of Gunningworth's ass.

Guys Araminta was the bad guy, I know it's obvious enough in An offer from a Gentleman, but let me spell it out, Araminta was an abuser, a gaslighter, a psychopath, the kind that lives under the beds of abusive homes and makes the victims of her criminal behavior call her 'mommy' a ne'rdo well asshole who treated a little girl with the utmost unfairness, who bullied and humiliated Sophie for half her life, just for funsies! She was evil and got away with it.

So when we meet Sophie in an offer from a Gentleman, we meet her after years of THIS 👆 And what we meet isn't a jaded, depressed girl. We meet Sophie, Sophie who is a kind, stubborn, warm-hearted person with only her integrity to comfort her against the world that has hurt her. By the time Sophie meets Benedict, Araminta has already taken everything else she has.

The psychopath she's lived with her whole life probably used the words 'your mother was nothing more than a _____' to further verbally abuse Sophie all the time.

When she meets Benedict, Sophie is clear that the ONLY thing she has that can't be taken from her is her agency. She's constantly using her agency around Benedict. Because it's something Araminta denied her for so long!. So of course she refused to be his mistress. She CAN, that's the whole point, she's been robbed of choices her whole life.

And now that Sophie sort of escapes, now that she can make her own choices she's saying NO! Call it morals, integrity or simply Sophie expecting Benedict to respect her use of agency. Saying No to Benedict might not look empowering for us but it IS empowering for her! And that makes Sophie Beckett awesome.

And I know I know, Benedict is a product of his environment and ya di dah. but the Book is titled 'An offer from a Gentleman' for a reason! It's a sarcastic dig at the fact that Benedict doesn't behave as a gentleman for almost all the book. Because a true gentleman would never ask any woman to be their mistress under any circumstance. Virgin, married or widowed.

Benedict SHOULDN'T HAVE ASKED. Had he truly been thinking like a gentleman he would have done that gentlemanly thing and rescued Sophie chivalrously, worked towards bettering her life circumstances and eventually asked her to marry him like a character out of an Arturian legend. But Benedict is no sir Galahad. The whole irony of the book title is right there. That people in the ton call him a gentleman but in reality he's a total poser. He's faking it, he's pretending, he's of as ungentlemanly as his brothers! Sophie's just calling him out on it!

And Sophie who is a woman and a bastard, who is penniless and is by every means supposed to be inferior than him. STILL HAS MORE INTEGRITY. Her morals are better than his, she keeps her word, she feels more guilty, has more patience and definitely takes more responsibility! Sophie in every sense of the word might not have been born a Lady but she IS better than Benedict. Who's the brother of a Viscount.

Go Sophie! You Rock!

I'm just glad Benedict recognizes what an absolute goddess he married and spends the rest of his life worshipping the ground she walks in because it's what Sophie deserves.

I hope she's already been casted, I hope it's an incredible actress that brings us the mix of absolute innocence and fierceness that is Sophie Beckett. Because it's what I want to see.

And you know me #JusticeForSophie4k I'll always be here to support our one only non problematic fave. Sophie has done nothing wrong ever, she's a fun chaotic sister in law and we love her just like Benedict. End of story

[doctortwhohiddles]

Spot on Anon

So I found the ask that seemed to have sent Gator over the edge. I copied the ask since it’s too long to screencap. Gator’s response is in italic.

All right Gator, let’s see if you’re brave enough to post this (I bet you won’t).

So you call us obsessed and deluded. Have you seen my blog? I dare you to find post were I analyze Benedict’s private life. I dare you to find a post were you see me analyzing every photos taken of him and his wife. I really don’t think you can say that about your blog, can you?

You see, us “nans” as you like to call us live in the real world. A world were Ben is happily married with two children. A world were we know that we don’t have a say in his private life and nerver will. A world were we don’t feel the need to insult a complete stranger to feel better about ourselves. You think what we’re doing to you is disgusting? Honey, that’s nothing to what you’ve been doing to Sophie and her kids for the last 3 years. What we’re doing is calling out your lies and your behavior. You’re the bully dear, not us. Let me prove that to you.

1) You never, ever call Sophie by her name. Always by some mean nicknames, like Zero or Octopus. That’s a totally normal thing to do for someone your age. NOT.

2) You over analyze every single photo of Benedict. Always saying there’s something wrong with him. Unless Sophie isn’t in the photo, because then he looks great. Even in pictures were Sophie was cropped out of. You always scream “Photoshop”. Because for some reason, you can’t bear to see them together.

3) You change theories every 5 seconds. Case and point, the last pap pictures. You started saying that Sophie ambushed him, then when your pal Aeltri decided that it was photoshoped, you changed your story. Because you can’t have an original thought by yourself. And now you’re saying that Sophie is using an old photo to mess with Ben. So which is it? I’ll tell you, it’s none of the above.

4) You’ll believe every lie told to you without questions, as long as it paints Sophie in a bad light. Case and point : the whole Groucho Club story. Again something started by Aeltri. That story is a hoax started by someone who thinks the Royal family are giant shape-shifting lizards. But when someone says something nice about her, you need proof in triplicate with a court seal to believe it. But yeah, we’re the ones that are obsessed.

5) Every time there’s a sighting of Ben and his family, you automatically deny it. You try to look for anything that would discredit it. Again, by ignoring all the facts. And when you can’t, you make up some bullshit theory. Case and point : the whole “it’s too hot in Atlanta to go biking”. But apparently, it’s not hot enough to stop Marvel from getting him to run around in full Doctor Strange costume. And by ignoring that plenty of people live in Atlanta and go by their business, even in summer.

6) You actually think you have mutuals with Benedict. If you haven’t hear from your sources in a while, it’s because they got bored of you. You were trolled. Do you honestly think that anyone with compromising info on Sophie would go to a no name blogger from nowhere USA instead of going to the police or selling the story to the tabloids? In what world does that even make sense?

You want to know why we screencap your blog? Because you crave attention, and reblogging gives you notes. Which is the only thing you want, not Ben’s well being. Because if you cared about that, you would delete your blog and apologize. And to answer one of your anons, we’re not trying to convince ourselves by calling out your lies. Neither are we trying to convince you. Because it’s crystal clear that you’d rather die than to admit you were wrong. No we’re exposing you for what you are, a bully, a liar and a fraud.

I don’t know if I’ve seen your blog, because you sent this in anon.  (I try to avoid any seriously devoted Benedict blogs). I never said all nanny fans are obsessed. But if you are the one buying 16 photo ops in one day with Benedict, you are obsessed. As far as craving attention? WTF? Nope. I don’t care how many notes I get. I’m not in this for me. Never intended to even get involved in the fandom at all. It wasn’t until I saw how horrible Sophie was that I even started posting. I have absolutely nothing to prove to you or anyone. And I’m not the one sending in anon hate to someone with a different opinion/outlook on something, so how am I the bully? I’m not going to dignify the rest of your rant with an answer. Everyone who actually really follows my blog already knows what my response would be. Just know this, I care WAY more about Benedict’s wellbeing than I do about being right. So stop projecting onto me and take a good look at yourself.

Let’s analyze Gator’s response shall we? She first starts by attacking fans lucky enough to go the LFC and have their pictures taken with Ben. I don’t know about you, but that reeks of jealousy. I take comfort in knowing that Ben’s security team have Gator on their watch list. It wasn’t until I saw how horrible Sophie was that I even started posting. That’s Gator speech for “My internet boyfriend found a IRL girlfriend and I can’t take it. I’ll spend my days shitting on her to feel better about myself”. And I’m not the one sending in anon hate to someone with a different opinion/outlook Saying that you think she looks ugly is an opinion. Saying that she’s a drug addict whore, a blackmailer and an abuser is slander. There’s a huge difference between the two. A difference that every bully seem to forget. I care WAY more about Benedict’s wellbeing than I do about being right. I almost choke with laughter when I read this. If she truly cared about his wellbeing, she’d apologize and delete her blog. Not make up even more disgusting lies about Sophie and her family. But she’s right when she says she doesn’t care about being right. If she did, she would have stop by now. I’m not going to dignify the rest of your rant with an answer. Of course she won’t. That’s because she can’t. That anon is spot on about Gator and the rest of the SGB. Even Gator can see that. And we know what your answer would be. It’s the one that Ben and Sophie would like to give her : fuck off.

[thekatebridgerton]

Hello, I just read your response to Benedict giving up everything to be with Sophie and I’m just wondering if he would really be shunned like that for marrying an earls ward? The only ones who know she’s illegitimate and a servant are the Bridgertons and I’m sure they blackmail Araminta to keep it a secret. It’s been a long time since i have read the book though so maybe I’m forgetting. I’m genuinely confused lol

Ah Dear Reader, do add this to the list of unspoken things Julia suggarcoats. So i’ll take a minute to spell this out. If you are one of those who wants to keep beleiving that Benedict sufferend no consequences from marrying Sophie and didn’t have to give up a lot of his class privileges for her. then do skip this post. 

Because I, with my limited knowledge of English lit, was under the impression that in ye olden times the word “Ward” was code for illegitimate daughter. In fact, Jane Eyre, arriving at Thornfield, initially doubt’s Adele’s parentage exactly because Rochester, bachelor gentleman that he is, has taken in a little orphaned girl and hired a governess for her. And honestly, me too, we will never know if Rochester is Adele’s father or not. And this is with Adele looking nothing like Mr Rochester in the book. 

But Sophie? Sophie looks a lot like the Penwoods. So the Bridgertons did what any respectable family at the time would have done if one of their sons wanted to marry the illegitimate daughter of another noble and claimed she WAS born into a wedded family that nobody knows about. So that on paper everything was settled enough. It was a common practice really.

Lets put it this way, even if the girl in question WAS born into well known wedded parents. Say if Sophie had been the legitimate daughter of a famous Mr Beckett and Mrs Beckett and they died leaving her an orphan. The Earl taking her as his 'ward' would still have been super sus, and raised all eyebrows, because he was neither her uncle or her distant relative. So speculation would always abound, why would a noble take an orphaned 'ward' who is not related to him into his household? unless she was his by blows.

On paper, the Bridgertons made her respectable, on PAPER. As in, for all extents of the law, Sophie had a right to be treated like a legitimate born citizen. But it's the same as if the Bridgertons had bought Benedict a title. Everyone would still know and talk about it behind close doors.

And yes the only thing keeping the ton from talking about Sophie's illegitimacy in public where everyone could hear, was in fact, Araminta's dubious silence. Because as long as Araminta doesn't confirm what everyone more or less already knows, then there's a thread of plausible deniability and the Bridgertons can prosecute anybody they want for slandering their beloved sister in law.

But like Anthony says, an illegitimate daughter at least is better than a servant. Benedict marrying a servant in the eyes of society would have definitely been... Sigh, how do I explain the amount of classist, and entitlement themes An offer From a Gentleman touches upon without sounding mean?

Finally I’d like to add that if the author HAD meant to leave it as “Benedict married An Earl’s ward” I wouldn’t have had to explain this. Because yes, say the Earl of Penwood had a life debt to some vicar or some soldier etc who saved his life and promised to take care of their child in the event they died. Earls did have wards that were completely respectable in ye olden times. But Juila didn’t and this is part of why yours truly least liked Bridgerton is Hyacinth. Because of This paragraph in her book 

(I’m going to take a moment to breathe out the enormous amount of rage this little exchange causes me, and just say that Gareth deserved better than a jerk like Hyacinth) 

 “in part because of her past” but you’re right dear reader Benedict and Sophie are definitely not being shunned by society by the time Hyacinth gets married.

The thing is, that Benedict doesn’t mind being shunned, he never regretted his choice to be with Sophie, or any sacrifices he had to make to marry her. I’m sure the life of a country gentleman agrees with him and that Sophie never feels she lacks anything for not being invited to balls or attend high society soirees. She’s got a bunch of upper class sister in laws after all, if Sophie wants to be a part of high society she can hang out with Daphne and Kate for a few days. And come back to live the life of a pampered country gentlewoman. lets put it this way, in status, Benedict and Sophie are more or less in the same line as Mr and Mrs Bennett. Country gentry, Somewhat related to nobility but not really part of it anymore. 

But Benedict grew up as the brother of a Viscount his whole life. He had a life filled with class privilege that he walked away from in order to marry a woman who was little more than a servant when he met her. And honestly yeah good for him. He came to his senses after being a supreme ass to Sophie during his whole book. Realizing that true love with Sophie was worth anything and he made it his mission to shower her with love for the rest of his life.

Benedict's book may not be my favorite but he definitely earns a lot of brownie points for how An offer from a Gentleman ended.

And that's the tea