#also: what does julian do with this information?

[kamisama1kiss]

Hiii!! I’m back idk if it’s too early for me to request again, 😭 I was thinking maybe you can do a headcanons for the ninja when their lover Y/n calls them a cute name in middle of battle and for Lloyd it could be “Green Bean” but for Kai “Hotshot” (used by skylor) but I can’t think of the other ninja, maybe you can think of ones for them. The ninja would act like they don’t like the nickname but secretly love it, I really wanna hear your thoughts on this 😭🙏

Honestly, this is a very cutie idea!! 😝🤭 Have been thinking about how to write this one for at least a few days since I got it! It's not the best as I did get stuck on some of the characters more than others 😭🙏

~~~

How they'd react to cute nicknames in probably one of the most unconvinent timings? {Ninjago's Ninjas}

~ Lloyd Garmadon ~ {Green Bean}

He halted in his movements after he heard you call out to him, "Grean Bean, watch your left!" You shouted this being the first time calling him this nickname, "What?" Nonetheless of being confused, he would continue the battle. Whilest he concealed a smile throughout it and would never confess nor agree that he did such.

Would approach you after about how it was most definitely irresponsible with the timing. Let's just say that you did recove maybe a kiss or more than usually after.

Even with how much he denied his like for it he did secretly wish for it to be used on a more casual term rather then open in battle, knowing the enemy would most likely laugh at him and not be able to take him seriously.

~ Kai Smith~ {HotShot}

Having you right behind him as his rock to hold him from bring hurt, "I've got your back HotShot." It's hard to believe he could be irritated, upset, or angry about it, especially as his lover. Feeding his ego as which also pushed him to work even better, confidence rushing through him.

His arm does often rest around your shoulders, even more now. When he knows you're capable of giving out nicknames, your shoulders will meet rest once again.

Wouldn't bring it out up right away, but he would use it against you if you tried anything in the near future.

~ Cole Brookstone ~ {Pebble}

Didn't even think twice about it and just accepted it at the time being, being too busy to worry about nicknames. Even if he'd get a few butterflies in his stomach from you every time.

"Need help, Pebble?" You had asked oh so sweetly, yet he acted as if he didn't wish to hear it. Crossing his arms with a neutral expression acting as if he didnt like it, but deep down, we all know he is just a softie who enjoys giving and receiving nicknames.

~ Zane Julian ~ {Sherbet}

He fully stopped coding and looked over at you. The only word to explain how he looked was confused. "Have you named me after an ice cream sort?" But decided to jump back to what he had to finish either way.

"I turned off the cameras on the first floor, Sherbet." Only informing him about the updates yet being confronted with a more suspicious reaction then intended.

~ Jay Walker ~ {Blitz}

"Catch Blitz!" Was the only words he heard before he was hit on the shoulder by the the nunchucks someone kicked out of his grip. His heart raced alongside his cheeks, heating up but luckily hidden under his mask.

He truly did appreciate and adore nicknames from the one and only you! He was embarrassed that it was in front of others, so he would "complain" about how he didn't like it even when he thought it was adorable. Flared his nose and shook his head when it came to this topic of liking the nickname.

~ Nya Smith~ {Lily Pads}

"Use the water, Lily Pads!" Her eyes widened, but shook it off quickly to continue her main gaol at this moment. She was confused at first but did find it cute, so she decided not to comment until a better time, at least until there wasn't someone trying to kill them was there.

Ended up never even mentioning it, but she looked unpleased about it. Having gotten used to you spitting out cute names here and there didn't bother her too much after a while.

A scowl on her lips about it, knowing it's best to show you that it wasn't okay for the nicknames to be spat out in important timings.

[walkingstackofbooks]

Julian decides he wants to learn more about gardening because Garak likes it, but obviously he can't just ask Garak, so he asks Keiko instead.

And Keiko's a great teacher! And she's really funny and pretty and they have a lot in common - they're both giant nerds and she finds his type of biology just as interesting as he's ended up finding botany - and they both wonder why they haven't previously hung out more.

Keiko is also way more emotionally in-tune with herself than either Garak or Miles, so when she realises that actually, she likes Julian, she informs Miles of her intentions (who assures her that of course it's fine, they've had this arrangement for years, of course he's not going to be weird about it being Julian...) and asks Julian out.

And Julian's surprised, of course, but at this point he's certain Garak's not into him - his new interest in flowers doesn't seem to have affected anything - and he really does like Keiko.... So after taking a little time to think, and to check in with Miles (who assures him that of course it's fine, no he's not going to be weird about it, just make sure you treat her right and make her happy, okay?) they start dating. And it's cute! It's nice! It's pretty much the same as their old arboretum dates apart from now with added hand-holding and kissing!

Julian's oblivious to Garak's jealousy over the whole matter... Meanwhile, Keiko is painfully aware how jealous Miles is - not because he's not happy for either of them, but because he hasn't figured out that he'd like to be dating Julian, too - but she also knows she can't do anything more than nudge him until he realises it for himself.

(It takes the changeling/prison camp situation for Miles to get themselves in gear. Miles still says his stupid "you were easier to get along with" comment but seeing Julian's reaction forces himself to explain that actually, now the real Julian's come back, he's realised there was something missing from the changeling!Julian... whatever it is about Julian that makes Miles, uh, attracted, he guesses, to him, and um, that did make it easier to be around because he didn't have to fight any stupid feelings and he just thought it was because changeling!you had broken up with Keiko but no, he's probably always been a little bit in lo-- Oookay, and we're kissing now? Julian are you crying?)

(It takes even longer for Garak to realise he still has a chance even though Julian's now dating both O'Briens. In the end, it's Keiko and Miles who push him into it - Julian says something which they both misinterpret as Garak asked him out, and they both go separately to Garak's shop that day to welcome him to the family/give him the shovel talk and Garak tries to just play it off because he wouldn't want to let on that he's confused... But later on he asks Julian "Your lovers seem to believe that we are a couple - and apparently have no objections to it, aside from the worry that I might hurt you" and Julian's like "Why would they think that but also yeah of course they wouldn't have objections I can date who I want" and Garak's like "Would you have objections to dating me?" and Julian's like "Definitely not but you'd have objections to dating me, right?" and Garak's like "What in the world have you that impression, my dear?" and Julian's like "Literally every interaction we've had in the past few months since I started dating... Ohhhhh."

And then they kiss.)

[bringingheavendown]

Trustworthy readers who I’ve ordered from

Updated 1/10/2025

*I was asked to write this post to help other people avoid scammers, so I’m going to provide a list of readers who I trust & would recommend to anyone*

(This is in no particular order of favoritism) - these are readers that have great communication, provide amazing readings & happily answer any questions

TAROT

1. @galene-gothic - I ordered a FS reading from her and she gave me the MOST in depth reading ever!!! The reading was so long & informational & I really enjoyed every minute of it. Truly one of my favorite readings I’ve received!

2. @the-wild-candy - I ordered a nsfw FS reading from her & omg the messages she was able to channel!!! I was giggling & kicking my feet reading it LOL - she has great communication which I really appreciated & kept me updated with the delivery of my reading!

3. @leoascendente - omg she sent me the most beautiful FS reading! Her delivery was very quick, but it was not rushed at all because she provided me a great deal of information & thoroughly explained every single topic - again, one of the best readings I’ve received!

4. @punkpandapatrixk - I love this woman 🤭 she was so sweet & helped me pick which questions to ask for my reading! We went back & forth & she patiently listened to what information I wanted to hear & made up questions based on that! I had a wonderful experience ordering from her & I received a lovely reading that I still reread to this day!!

5. @freyatarotreadings8 - she did such an amazing job explaining what each card meant in the context of my future spouse. I don’t read tarot myself, so I have very little knowledge on what they mean in different contexts, but she was so good at writing the explanations in a very understandable way for me.

6. @helianthus-tarot - I’ve gotten quite a few readings from Julian & I’ve loved every single one. They are always open to answering any questions you may have & does their best to answer them. They also have some of the best PACs I’ve ever read on their tumblr!

7. @cozycottagetarot - the sweetest & kindest soul! She sent me a thorough future spouse reading & even took extra time & energy to further clarify the messages for me 🤍 she has amazing communication & you can tell she really cares about you as a client! I had the absolute best experience with her!

8. @crystallilytarot - the personal readings she has done for me have been AMAZING!! She is one of the few tarot accounts where her general PACs resonate with me 100% & I just love her energy so much, she’s a gem 🤍

9. @blueskiestarot - she is so sweet & does amazing personal readings! She dives deep into the details & is so kind & communicative. I have ordered multiple readings from her & have been happy with every single one!

10. @fishnapple - I just started ordering readings from River & their readings are so amazing & so thorough!! I love the way they word their writing & I’ve just had such a wonderful experience with them 🤍 I just ordered my 3rd reading 🤭

ASTROLOGY

1. @astroismypassion - I ordered a Juno persona chart from them & omg I loved it!! They do such an amazing job explaining the degrees, house placements, & signs. They are so full of information & also answer plenty of astrology related questions on their tumblr!

2. @cosmicpuzzle - he read my Vedic chart (I didn’t really know how to read it myself) & broke down my personality, best choices for my career, & my future spouse - he explained everything so well & he taught me so much! He does voice memos & it’s nice to just hear him freely explain everything he’s seeing in my chart.

3. @ariesjupiter - she read my astrocartography chart & it confirmed that I’m currently living in the right place for career success 🤭 she was so easy to communicate with & provided me with an excellent reading! It was very thorough & I frequently refer back to it!

[whispsofwind]

Tbh I still absolutely refuse to entertain the idea of Ziyal as a love interest for Garak because it just - isn't thematically interesting nor coherent with the rest of the series??

Like, there's so much importance on fatherhood and parental figures on DS9.

There's Ben Sisko and his relationship with both his own father and his son Jake, and how the positive relationship with his father translated into a virtuose generational cycle where he does his absolute best for Jake, always. Also, Sisko acts as a Moses figure in Bajoran religion, becoming as a paternal figure of sorts of Kira and as a Captain he acts a paternal figure for all of the Station, much more than Kirk or Picard ever did imo. (And quite frankly he is basically the MC so his character arc informs the whole series)

There's Julian and his relationship with his parents and especially his father - the father who became his architect because his son was "defective" and then resented Julian for it.

There's Rom and Nog and their mutually supportive relationships.

There is Kira Nerys and her relationship to multiple father figures - her biological father, sure, but also Ben Sisko and Tekeny Ghemor, and all the complicated messy feelings that those bring in their intersection with religious and political elements. And then the fact that Kira was a surrogate for the O'brien family and all the complicated feelings there, and her role as a parental figure to Ziyal.

There's Dukat and his absolute disaster of a relationship with his daughter (and his implied relationship with the rest of his children - and the implication that Dukat is not a good father by neither Federation or Cardassian standards).

There is Garak and the absolutely fucked up relationship he has with Tain and the intersection between Tain as a representative of the State and Tain as a father and the State as a parental figure to Cardassia.

In a smaller capacity there's also Miles who literally becomes a father a second time in DS9 and Worf and his complicated relationship with Alexander.

Odo and his complicated relationship with his "father", who wasn't his father at all but in a way wasn't he in the way he shaped Odo and his perspective of the world?

Even Dax, one could argue if stretching the argument enough, can be read through the lens of parental figures- Curzon as a father figure of sorts to Benjamin, albeit in a more fun dad sense, and Ezri as a metaphorical daughter figure to both Jadzia and Curzon, the young one with such big shoes to fill - I feel like I am not stretching it toooooo much here ok.

Just - so much of DS9 narrative revolves about being children of someone, and parents of someone. What it means to be a good father, a good parent, and how parents shape and form ad hurt and traumatise you.

And the writers were aware of that! So many episodes directly parallel two or more different plots about these elements with either the main characters or one-shot characters.

So, like, the subplot with Ziyal and Garak is basically already written?? Garak supplanting Dukat as a father to Ziyal is so thematically resonant with Garak and Dukat's storylines in the context of the broader implications of the show. It works on multiple levels in terms of Dukat not deserving fatherhood, and Garak breaking away from Tain's cycle of trauma and reconciling with a more humane and natural approach to family, and it also serves Ziyal's character arc in bridging her Cardassian and Bajoran sides through her putative parents, Garak and Nerys.

It's unfortunate that they really needed to make sure Garak looked straight and they chose Ziyal for it, because I truly think it was such a bad choice. I do not believe for a second that Garak is straight, so it didn't even work, but it surely ruined a perfectly good thematic streak they had going on.

[tycarstairs]

ready to fight for my life for ty blackthorn when twp is released because the way people are already infantilizing and patronizing him bc he’s autistic is so….

no one asked for this but i’ve seen a lot of people have weird takes on his autism so as an autistic woman i need to clear some things up ok 😭 so buckle up, this is gonna be a long one (seriously, it’s long)

the main arguments i’ve seen are: (i’m paraphrasing here btw)

“ty didn’t cry when livvy died but he did cry when kit said he wished he’d never known him so it’s clear that he does love kit.”

and

“ty clearly loves kit because he cried when they argued and it’s hard for autistic people to cry.”

and

“ty gets on my nerves because he didn’t react at all when kit told him he loved him”

like. i do get what you’re saying (with the first one. not the second one, that’s a stereotype, and also not the third one bc that’s just weird), because it does show that ty cares but like. obviously? all his actions before that showed that he cared too.

saying “he cried when him and kit fought but not when livvy died” just comes off as acting like he’s more upset about kit leaving and insulting him than he is about kit dying and that just rubs me the wrong way.

i know this is not common knowledge but autistic people often have delayed processing, especially when we’re grieving because it can be so overstimulating and even when we do grieve, it’s not gonna look the same as when an allistic person grieves.

so, delayed processing:

delayed processing in autism is where you are recording/aknowledge events as they happen, however that information is stored elsewhere in the brain and isn't taken in.

once the brain is ready or has capacity the information is suddenly taken in. this could be hours, weeks, days or even months later.

an example (from justkeepstimming_ on instagram):

An autistic person whose mother died at quite a young age. At the time, when his father was grieving, it did not appear the autistic son was upset.

However, one year after his mother's death, he suddenly processed that she was gone (permanently) and only then started the grieving process.

that example is pretty much exactly what happened with ty in qoaad.

partly, ty didn’t cry when livvy died because he didn’t accept that she was dead. he was so sure that he was gonna bring her back and for a long time, he probably didn’t even consider the fact that he might fail.

after livvy dies, kit says this:

“Everyone had been terrified. Ty would fall apart, they’d thought. Kit remembered Julian standing over Ty as he slept, one hand stroking his brother’s hair, and he’d been praying—Kit didn’t even know Shadowhunters prayed, but Julian definitely had been. Ty would crumble in a world without his sister, they’d all thought; he’d fall away to ashes just like Livvy’s body.”

if ty were allistic, he probably would have reacted like this immediately. and he does react like this eventually when his brain fully processes that the ritual didn’t work, that livvy is actually not coming back:

“Livvy!” Ty didn’t scream the word so much as it was ripped from him; he curled up, hugging himself, as if desperate to keep his body from shattering apart.”

this is when ty actually processes that his sister is gone. so saying, “ty didn’t cry when his sister died but he cried when him and kit fought” as if it’s some really romantic thing that he was sadder about kit leaving than livvy dying (which is not true) is just iffy because it’s such a stereotype and a misconception that autistic people don’t seem to care at all when people die, and way too many people from this fandom are feeding into that so much.

and ty does show is grieving throughout qoaad but because it’s not in the allistic way, a lot of readers don’t recognize it.

(i was actually so positively surprised to see that cassandra clare, an allistic woman, wrote the grieving process for an autistic character—and everything else about being autistic tbh—so well but it gives me so much hope for twp)

for example, autistic people (this is obviously not all autistic people as all autistic people are different but i'm just listing the signs i've seen in ty in qoaad) when they're grieving might show their grief gradually in more subtle ways by hurting themselves, emotionally or physically, which ty does do:

"The only person he was unkind to, Kit thought, was himself."

and we also see in gotsm that ty is continuously punishing himself because he is still grieving. livvy is simultaneously there and dead, and ty has to live with both the grief of her death and the guilt of her being stuck as a ghost.

there's also the fact that kit observes that ty starts keeping secrets and doing things alone, which is also common when trying to process emotions that haven’t fully caught up yet:

“In the past days, though, since Julian and Emma had woken up, Ty had been harder to find. If he was working on something, he hadn’t included Kit in it—a thought that hurt with surprising intensity.”

like. ty is pulling away because he is trying to process everything that’s happening. him excluding kit is very likely a symptom of some kind of delayed grief because it’s very unlike him to exclude kit from anything, as we can see when he says multiple times outright that he doesn’t want to do things without kit.

just because it’s more subtle than breaking down into tears doesn’t mean that he doesn’t feel it at all. it’s more likely that he simply feels too much and is shutting down because of it.

and of course his grief is gonna be subtle when he hasn’t even accepted and processed the fact that she’s dead yet.

and yes, he cried when kit told him he wished he’d never met him but that is so different because there was no room for denial. kit told him that word for word, the processing wasn’t delayed this time because there wasn’t really that much to process.

ty truly believed right away that his only friend wished he had never known him, and when livvy died he didn’t accept that she was dead. those things are different and pitting them against each other is weird.

so, onto the second argument/misconception i’ve seen that:

“ty clearly loves kit because he cried when they argued and it’s hard for autistic people to cry.”

this is a misconception stemming from the stereotype that autistic people are emotionless. yes, some autistic people might have a harder time crying because of shutdowns etc. but generalizing it to it’s hard for autistic people to cry is just wrong, especially because this has never been implied about ty in the text.

in fact, it’s the opposite:

“Ty heard everything twice as loud and fast as everyone else. The headphones and the music, Kit sensed, were a buffer: They deadened not just other noises, but also feelings that would otherwise be too intense. They protected him from hurt.

He couldn’t help but wonder what it would be like to live so intensely, to feel things so much, to have the world sway into and out of too-bright colors and too-bright noises. When every sound and feeling was jacked up to eleven, it only made sense to calm yourself by concentrating all your energy on something small that you could master—a mass of pipe cleaners to unravel, the pebbled surface of a glass between your fingers.”

so implying that it’s harder for ty to either cry or feel sad is just wrong. kit notes that “every sound and feeling was jacked up to eleven”, and this includes ty’s grief. him not crying when livvy died has nothing to do with how much he may or may not be feeling and everything to do with how delayed his processing was.

and the third complaint of ty is frustrating because he didn’t react when kit told him he loved him.

first of all, i don’t know if it’s my autistic ass not understanding allistic people but is it not normal to be in shock when someone tells you they love you in the middle of a necromancy ritual???

and second of all, this scene from city of heavenly fire where julian says “i know it’s hard to understand, ty, but we love you” like it’s supposed to explain their actions and ty reacts like this:

Ty looked at him blankly. He knew what “I love you” meant, and he knew it was good, but he didn’t understand why it was an explanation for anything.”

ty looking at kit blankly in surprise in qoaad is not him “not reacting”, it’s him trying to process 1) what that has to do with anything and 2) why that would be an explanation or an argument as to why ty should stop the ritual.

(it is probably also partly because ty thought kit had feelings for livvy at this point but that’s just speculation so i won’t get into it now)

to kit, this was probably his way of saying that because he loves him, ty can stop the ritual and kit will help him with the aftermath.

to ty, kit’s confession made no sense in that moment because why would kit loving him mean that he should stop the ritual? and this was most likely also the moment when his grief was really starting to kick in, so that just adds to it.

yeah idk if anyone made it to the end but as you can tell, i have a lot to say and i’m tired of people romanticizing ty’s grief.

[shakespearesdaughters]

The Secret History Theories

I’m currently re-reading Donna Tartt’s The Secret History right now and I have several theories but no one to share them with, so I thought I would put them here to see what you all think!

Richard pushed Bunny. ​

Richard said he hates authors who skip over the grisly parts of their crimes out of shame/embarrassment/guilt but he does it.

He was not only involved in the planning of Bunny’s murder but encouraged it by telling Henry what Bunny told him about the farmers murder knowing that Henry was already thinking about killing him.

While he showed some guilt about the murder afterwards he had no qualms about going through with it and was involved in the planning of it every step of the way.

He had a vested interest in Bunny dying not just to help protect the group but because Bunny knew/implied he knew about Richard’s true background and that he was lying about having money. He would have wanted to keep his secrets. He also wanted to secure his place in the group and what better way to do so than to kill someone.

We don’t know how Bunny died, as Richard purposely skips over this information. The only thing we do know is that Henry walked towards him, Camilla checked to make sure Bunny was dead. But what exactly did Richard do? If Richard didn’t kill Bunny why wouldn’t he tell us how Bunny died? 

​

2. Julian was more involved than Richard either was aware or wanted to admit. 

I think he was the person Camilla remembered seeing at the Bacchanal. He and Henry had spoken before the Bacchanal and Julian had told him to do what was necessary.

Henry got the idea to do the Bacchanal from Julian. Henry and Francis both were interested in acquiring the land with Francis wanting to purchase the house and Henry finding the land sacred. Henry is implied to have spent more time with Julian than the others having been to his home and had private conversations. ​

He also calls Bunny by his nickname for the first time when it came to Bunny’s suicide note which was odd. He said he knew or was able to predict what his students were doing and with how close he was to Henry there’s no way he didn’t know what they were up to. Which is probably why he had to leave and did leave so quickly. 

​

3. Richard was the author of Bunny’s suicide note as a confession. He spent a lot of time with Bunny and with Henry. He could have gotten the paper from either of them. The typewriter was in the study room for anyone to use. ​

Richard was an excellent student and could have written the note convincingly enough to sound like Bunny. It gives him the perfect out in the murder of the farmer because he’s not named once in them and it implicates the group especially Henry. Which could be Richards payback against Henry implicating him to the FBI. Also it’s the only way for Richard to confess just like he is confessing to us with the book for his guilt without having to actually atone for anything.

Richard also flip flops between insisting that Bunny was the author to it being possibly someone else. We also don’t know when the letter was dropped off because Julian doesn’t mention it. But from the way he was acting when he spoke to Richard and Francis and why he initially took it as a joke/brushed it off before speaking with Henry one could infer it was delivered after Bunny’s death. 

​

4. Charles is the only other person who could have written the note because he was also close to Bunny and Richard notes he is an expert forger and the letter is one big middle finger to Henry and the only other person who had a reason to hate/implicate Henry as revenge besides Richard would be Charles. ​

5. Francis is a predator who was possibly abusing Charles and no one in the group seemed to care. He also tried to have sex/ SA Richard and foreshadowed doing it when he said “if you drank as much as he(Charles) does, I daresay I would have been in bed with you, too.” ​

6. A catamount killed the farmer, Henry lied about it so he could manipulate the group and to murder bunny. 

There’s several hints about it being a big cat from Charles bite, to the way the body was found I mean how on earth did they rip open the stomach of a grown man and mutilate him without any weapons? They even go the catamount inn. ​

There would be something so deliciously ironic and really fulfill the themes of it being a Greek tragedy if it had all been a wild animal and Bunny was killed for nothing. ​

​

7. I think Richard was there at the Bacchanal and it was one of the many things he omitted. 

He is a self professed liar, an excellent one at that. He has no problem going where he’s not supposed to as we saw him entering the room and calling the number to find out about the plane tickets Henry purchased. He was following the group around. It wouldn’t be a hard stretch that he followed them to the woods and saw the bacchanal/orgy. 

He would have been upset he wasn’t invited because of his socioeconomic background. And upset that Bunny was invited over him. ​

Camilla thought she saw another person there. Henry thought he saw Dionysus there. Though it could have been Julian it could have also been Richard. ​

He admits he omits things and considered lying about Julian, he romanticizes Henry despite the murder, he easily went along with the murder of Bunny and has a thought of attacking and SAing Camilla and there is an implication he WAS lying about something very important. Which leads up to question what did he lie about? ​

He is not as horrified or concerned like a normal person would be when hearing your new friends just committed a brutal ritualistic murder. I think he was there, either as voyeur/bystander or he actually participated and was afraid Bunny might know or would find out which is why he goes along with it.

[iliveforyouilongforyouvesuvia]

Will you ever become a writer? Because your writing and interpretation is insanely detailed and accurate. I wanted to ask how would the M6 act with a MC who's an actual investigator? And incorporating magic with their work!

-🦷

The Arcana Mini-HCs: With a detective MC

~ Believe it or not, I have written a small collection of short stories for kids before! Would you ever be interested if I posted them here? ~

Julian: oh, he is all about the investigator lifestyle. he doesn't really put that much stock in your magic, though - tell you what, you should hire him as your secretary! he's a whiz at reading books and taking notes, he can research for you tirelessly! he also can't keep secrets

Asra: they love the vibes and they're always on the lookout for useful new spells to teach you. he's happy to let you do your own thing career wise, but if you'd ever like a trickster's point of view he's happy to be your co-detective for a bit. loves hearing you think out loud

Nadia: why do you think she hired you? she thinks the way you combine both of your crafts is excellent and inspiring and she wants that kind of innovative thought at her side as she leads Vesuvia. the way your creativity and intelligence is so attractive is a bonus ...

Muriel: so you're telling him. that the same thing he uses to hide and stay safe. is what you're using to poke your nose into the business of very dangerous people who would leave you alone otherwise. thinks you're stupid but also finds it annoyingly endearing and wants to help

Portia: oh, she's on board. you do the magic side of things, and she'll do the information gathering side of things. she knows how to keep a secret, and she also knows the gossip of half the town. drop a name and she'll have a social profile for you in 24 hours. loves your work

Lucio: he gets annoyed easily. why? because you do all this work, and pull off all these stunts, and accomplish all these things, and then keep it all a secret and never get public credit for it. Who does that?! Is surprised when he already knows whoever you're investigating

[littlebunnywitch]

Agere Julian Bashir Rambles

To start off I do kin Julian so my preferences and HC are influenced by that.

Since I'm not to sure where to start with this post I will start with some general information about Julian I HC. He's Autistic and has Adhd. This was not "fixed" by the genetic modification. They treated some side effects, enhance his intelligent capability and physically changed parts of him but alot of it was also them teaching and training him to mask / punishing him for behavior they deemed bad. He canonically has Echolalia (Through out the show we see him repeat others sometimes afew times before reacting to what they have said). He does stim in the show as well. One of my personal HC though is that he has a soft spot for Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes. It was one of the few books when he was younger and just found out what his parents did to him that made him feel... more like a person then a monster. It isn't a very well known book due to being rather old though. He also has a love hate relationship with Frankestein by Mary Shelley

He is a Demasking Regressor / Vent & Trauma Regressor. Garak is his main CG but Miles O'Brien or Odo will look after him if Garak can't. However he doesn't call any CG by parental terms due to his own trauma relating to his mother and father. Often instead calling them by nicknames (Gargar for Garak) (Mi for Miles) (Dodo for Odo)

HOWEVER Miles and His relationship was damaged when O'Brien claimed that the changeling was easier to get along with. When Julian stopped going to Miles when he was little that is when Garak introduced Odo to Little Julian because Garak didn't want to leave Julian without anyone else on station he could be little around and Garak trusts Odo. The shapeshifter does enjoy Julian's company when the doctor is little (even if he won't always admit it). His age range is baby to 7 year old. He has a tendency to go semi verbal to nonverbal when little.

Little Julian has a soft spot for Winnie the Pooh (Tigger is his favorite character because Kukalaka is way better then Winnie) but he does have a Winnie the Pooh Chess set.

Both Little or Not Julian often has stim toys on him and he has a large collection of stim toys in his room and in the infirmary. The ones kept in the infirmary he'll sometimes give away to Patients who need them.

Sometimes it can be hard for others to tell if Julian is little or not due to his more cheerful and playful attitude normally.

It takes him a long while to understand and accept that he didn't kill Jules. And that he and Jules was and are the same person. But over time he does accept the nickname Jules when he's little as a way to reclaim the childhood he should have had.

The picture I drew of Little Julian - Just assume that Garak made Jules teddy bear hoodie that's inside has fabric that looks like space.

[xaharadesert]

Part Time Spy MC - Headcanon

Arcana Characters (Main 3) x MC

A/N: another lovely anon from over a year ago! But we’re making progress! Please let me know if there are any spelling or grammar mistakes :) requests are open!

❤️Julian❤️

He’s torn between admiration and worry

On one hand, being a spy sounds like one of the most fascinating jobs in the world, and he’s sure you’ll have some exciting stories to tell every time you come home

On the other, he knows for a fact that it’s on the most dangerous, and he’s worried you won’t come home at all

He offers to “borrow” some costumes, wigs, and makeup from the community theatre for you

If your target is near home, he may try to pull off some spying of his own despite his inexperience

Luckily you’ll be able to catch him before he puts either of you in any real danger, and he’ll head home after a light scolding

When you do return home, he’ll want to know all the details of the mission

Best not to make it sound too exciting; Julian isn’t a snitch by any means, but sometimes it’s hard not to brag about how amazing you are

If you’re ever hurt during a mission, he insists that you should come to him immediately so he can patch you up

He’s supportive of your occupation, he just hopes you take the necessary precautions to ensure a safe return

He doesn’t know what he would do if you ever went missing during a mission, and he doesn’t want to find out

💙Asra💙

He wants to travel with you for your missions

The problem is that he’s not huge on being discrete; it’s not like he’s the centre of attention, he just makes little to no effort to hide

It might be fine once or twice, but some people may pick up the pattern when he’s always present before information is leaked

Best to keep him at home, or at least out of sight

He won’t try to talk you out of it. He assumes that you knew the risks when you picked the job, and as long as you’re not being forced into it, he has no problems

Admittedly he will go a bit overboard in trying to be supportive out of worry and protectiveness

Charms, potions, and basic spells have become a regular part of your routine before you step even a foot out the door

Even if you could do those things yourself, Asra likes to know that it’s his work helping to keep you safe (not that he doubts your powers)

He tries to be relaxed about mission timelines, but he does get antsy if you’re away for too long, and he has to restrain himself from checking on you because he knows it could mess up your mission

Instead he keeps himself busy with small projects and new ideas to help aid your next mission

💜Nadia💜

Respectfully, this is a pretty big problem for her

While she understands that professions like yours are necessary for exposing corruption in unjust hierarchies and such, it’s also an issue for her public image

Nadia runs Vesuvia with as much transparency as she can reasonably provide, and having someone who specializes in deception at her side can be… tricky

Even if your job is kept a secret from the people, it leaves a bad taste in her mouth when she has you with her in diplomatic meetings

She trusts that you would never betray her, and fully believes that she has nothing to hide anyway, so it’s not an issue of trust in the relationship

It’s simply a question of whether or not it’s ethical or moral for a politician to be in a romantic relationship with someone in the business of espionage

She understands that it’s a monumental request, but she does ask if you’re willing to leave your job behind in order to be with her

If yes, then she’s overjoyed, and does everything she can to help you find a new passion worth pursuing

If no, then she understands, but she will be ending the relationship. She loves you, but she has a duty to her people first and foremost, and she won’t betray them for anyone or anything

[klm-zoflorr]

Anyhow here's the timeline for heads of the Institute i was talking about. Part 1. Disclaimer some of this information is canon but most are my own headcanons or like. Literally stuff i made up on the spot.

Jonah Magnus (1818-1872)

Born 1785, which makes him 33 when he founds the Institute.

Trans!!

Pocket-sized (like REALLY short. He wears the tallest heels known to mankind and still only manages to be kinda short), auburn curly hair that gets a bit wild, thin eyebrows and face, button up nose. Those cheekbones bring all the boys to the yard. There's a sharpness to him that remains even as he ages. Ngl he's a ball of energy and can't really be stopped when he gets into a mood.

Did the Eye extend his life? Probably did

In 1867, attempts the Watcher's Crown after Smirke's death (he was 82 then, Smirke was 93)

It fails, he gets Panopticon powers, starts making preparations to both move the Institute and move his counsciousness into another body.

Disappears in 1872, at 87. Body is never found.

Julian Morgan (1872-1898)

Julian is a name that means Youthful. Little easter egg lmao

Ngl he kinda looks like Ben Meredith because I thought it was funny.

Facial hair!! Jonah went a bit buckwild. He will calm down after this don't worry

Has a face that flushes easily, straight nose and dark, striking eyebrows, full lips. Big ears. He has light, straight hair. Jonah likes having light hair, it reminds him of his original but without being, you know, a ginger (he was bored of the jokes). Neater hairdo than Jonah ever had. Soft voice.

Finished moving the Institute to London, overseeing the construction of it. He didn't like leaving his body too far out of reach. (<-author has no idea how long it takes to make a building btw)

Was 34 when Jonah took over, 60 when he died. Jonah got scared of death and strokes and allthat and perhaps switched sooner than was necessary.

Michael Lewis (1898-1903)

Another Michael!!!

Round/full cheeks, very nice skin (circus approved for sure), thick eyebrows, curling mustache. Dark and curly-ish hair, is starting to bald. He does look a bit older than he is, he was 29 when Jonah took over and 34 when he "died". Is perhaps a bit on the shorter side.

I don't know what happened to him, but something sure forced Jonah to switch out vessels sooner than he was expecting.

Anyways, we're done for this part! I still need to color the others lol. And give Richard a weave. Planning on doing some full body outfits too. Bye for now! Also @jonahfagnus you wanted to see so here goes

[snobgoblin]

re: this ask

god not to find an excuse to write the courtiers more (MY BELOVEDS) but it's fun to think about what Reise's future dynamic with the court might be. like they're demons they've been alive for a long time they'll still be around when Reise is an adult obviously so it's like huh. I wonder if they would try to strike any deals with him? hard to say because Valerius STATED in Muriel's route that he would never make a deal with Lucio- and their frame of reference for this kid is mostly gonna be like. tiny Lucio. they might see him as gullible

anyway Valerius says he would never make a deal with Lucio but it's also like... we know from Nadia's route he doesn't actually know he's a demon? or at least he's unaware of the physical transformation that took place. and, before this interaction he mentions "I'm a busy man you'll have to be more specific" so I'm sure Valerius is talking like business deals and not like Demon Deals TM- anyway anyway the point still stands, Valerius is smart enough to not deal with Lucio. and after Lucio's first deal with Vlastomil... it probably should have been obvious to other demons that they shouldn't deal with him? he doesn't pay up! much to their frustration. but the other three did continue to deal with him despite him being in debt with Vlastomil already

so, with that in mind. would they target Reise. I'm not sure right now. but I do think at least Vulgora would be really really interested in seeing how his fighting skills develop- I didn't screenshot every Vulgora line so don't quote me on this but Vulgora seemed excited to fight Morga. they had heard about her at least and refers to her as "Eirsdottir" without her even revealing that information

it will also be interesting seeing how Reise's fire powers work because it seems like that's kind of a lost art at this point, or something that's not common in Vesuvia, anyway. Asra is so bad at it that they burn off Julian's eyebrows when they try and they have a pet salamander specifically to make fires for him, not to mention the Apprentice, who's really only familiar with Vesuvia, actually doesn't realize magic can involve blood and fire (both Lucio and Morga use it this way and it will be interesting if Reise does as well I think)

>Morga using blood and fire see: I think it's her fight with Lucio in Muriel's route, she slices open her palm and her spear catches on fire

>Lucio using blood and fire see: Dawn of the Grub, where Lucio slits open his feet and sets a fire to summon Vlastomil

*and I don't think the blood part was entirely unheard of on the Apprentice's part considering how Lucio's route starts, but, they are notably hesitant to use it. the fire part does seem particularly uncommon

I'm getting unexpectedly invested in this kid LMFAO

OH ALSO I FORGOT TO ELABORATE ON WHY VALDEMAR GIVES A SHIT okay Valdemar is eager to dissect Julian, Lucio, and the player because they have come back from the dead so I think they'd be very curious about someone that was literally born from two of those people AND... if Reise doesn't pay up... there's a chance the plague could come back... and wouldn't that just be terrible (they're lying)

[worflesbian]

right okay i dont know exactly how persistent an issue this is bc i almost never go into the tags on this website, but even ive noticed this happening so i feel like that’s justification to make a post about it. the whitewashing of julian bashir as an established Thing not just in the fandom but in official merch has been discussed before, but recently i’ve noticed the inverse happening with martok and b’elanna, a white character and a lighter latina character who people seem to often draw darker than they are in canon. and there’s like. a Lot going on there to unpack.

so this video goes into some detail about the racism baked into the origins and design of the klingons in tos, it’s very informative about the anti-asian stereotypes especially in a 60s context but i feel like it doesnt really cover the way that antiblackness becomes a more significant factor in the next gen era so like. if you didn’t know, the majority of the klingon characters in the next gen-ds9-voyager era are either played by actors with dark skin or Very frequently by white actors in heavy dark makeup. if you look up the actors of grilka, alexander, kehleyr, and sirella for example you’ll see what im talking about like the difference is Stark and these are some of the main recurring klingons across both shows. hopefully i do not need to explain why packing white actors in brown makeup to play members of a species characterised as violent, warlike and animalistic is racist. i say hopefully bc who knows with this website. anyway i’d recommend this video for a wider context on the legacy of blackface in tv!

martok is a rare example of a klingon played by a white actor who, as far as i can tell, does not have his skin significantly darkened. so to see him frequently being drawn with darker skin is uh Slightly Concerning given everything in the previous paragraph! ive even seen art where he’s drawn darker than julian in the same post which... anyway im not trying to blanket condemn reinterpreting the design of alien characters in fanart, but i am asking white fans like myself in particular to think critically as to why, out of all the white characters and aliens on ds9, martok is the one you want to do that with.

because b’elanna is not a white character i think its a slightly different situation, but at the same time she does have lighter skin and i have seen fanart of her drawn much much darker and once again, im not condeming it especially in works ive seen which explore the relationship bewteen her latina and klingon identities, but its something white fans need to handle carefully. in the voyager episode Faces where she gets split into a human and klingon version of her (dont have time to unpack all that) you can see the difference in undertones between human b’elanna and klingon b’elanna (also included a pic of regular b’elanna for reference). the brown makeup is obvious here too and if you can see why it might be racist to attribute a person’s rage and violent impulses to a part of themself that is then personified as darker skinned/more brown, then you might also see some of the wider problems going on here and can understand that this is something that demands a lot of thought and consideration.

i’d like to reiterate that this is a very complex and nuanced issue, especially considering the intersection of fictional race within the setting and the racial biases operating behind the scenes/metatextually, and i’d love to discuss it more (and to cite better sources than youtube videos when i have the time). but for now i’d just like to say yeah just ask yourself what the implications might be to drawing these characters in particular darker than they are in canon, especially if theyre the only characters you do that for, or you’re intentionally contrasting them with other characters (e.g. b/7 fanart) or yk. drawing a white character darker than a character of colour like ive seen people do with julian and martok.

[originalleftist]

PSY-OP ALERT:

Sorry for how long this ended up being, but there's a lot to cover. My sincere gratitude to anyone who actually reads through it.

We have seen again and again how easily supposed progressives, even those considered long-time allies, can quickly fall into believing and acting on fascist psy-ops.

There's no sure way to know that someone is a trustworthy ally. One might say that there is no such thing, since everyone has faults and blind spots and prejudices and is hypocritical to one extent or another.

But here are a few common ways in which so-called Leftists, progressives, feminists, etc get duped into supporting fascist agendas. It's both a litmus test of sorts, red flags that someone may not be as reliable an ally as you think, and also a good shortlist of major narratives the Right uses to try to infiltrate and co-opt progressive communities and divide their opposition, which you should be on the lookout for.

1. Ukraine/Russia. If someone is defending Putin or vilifying Ukraine, they are likely being influenced by Kremlinist-fascist propaganda designed to sway Leftists under the guise of being "anti-imperialism" or "anti-war". This is a larger subset of how opposition to wars and imperialism has been used for decades to draw Left-wingers into supporting conspiracy theorism and hypocritically aligning with dictatorial, even fascist regimes that are seen as opposing "the West".

Note: a specific subset of this, which I've found even people who otherwise don't necessarily fall for it sometimes do, is Assange apologism. Julian Assange is not simply a journalist who was persecuted by the government for exposing its secrets. He is closely-aligned with the Kremlin and its propaganda, and leaked information selectively to hurt Clinton/Democrats help Trump during the 2016 election.

2. Covid. Anti-vax conspiracy theorism used to be a position more associated with the Left, though it has been largely coopted by the fascist Right, thanks to Trump. A lot of this was built on opposition to capitalism/big corporations/"Big Pharma" and probably also environmentalist concerns about toxins in our environment, which appeals to Left-wing sensibilities.

There's also a heavy dose of ableism, particularly fear-mongering about/misrepresenting autism, which is another prejudice that has appeal across the political spectrum. Even if one accepted the (widely-debunked) claims linking vaccines to autism, that means that the central premise of the anti-vax agenda, when you strip it down to its core, can be summarized as "Your child is better off dead of a deadly disease than alive and autistic."

We might also have a word here about support for DNRs*/"assisted dying"/euthanasia and making "assisted dying" more accessible to disabled people, typically framed as letting them "die with dignity" without actually providing them the support that would let them LIVE with dignity (see Canada's MAID controversies). Though I am pleased to see pushback from Left-leaning parties on this recently.

*I should note here that I do not oppose DNRs in principle, nor the right of any patient (assuming they have the ability to do so, and if not that's what living wills are for) to refuse medical care. I DO have a problem when people are mislead or pressured to choose them, or even have them issued without their knowledge/consent (as in the widely-reported case of people with disabilities being given DNR orders in the UK).

3. Trans Rights. Many a proclaimed feminist has shown their true colours once the subject of trans rights came up. Falsely attacking trans people as male predators or fake women does not protect women- trans people are actually one of the most likely groups to be subjected to sexual violence, and if one wants to prey on women, there are far easier and less-stigmatized ways to do so in our society. Transphobia also ultimately serves to oppress cis women, as women who do not perfectly fit white patriarchal standards are investigated and accused of being trans (as seen with anti-drag laws potentially criminalizing non-traditional dress choices, and the attacks on cis female athletes of colour, particularly at the 2024 Olympics).

4. Israel/Palestine. Many so-called Leftists have embraced conspiratorial and even outright genocidal Anti-semitism masquerading as opposing "colonialism" and genocide. This narrative seems to rest on two primary lies- the claim that Jews are not indigenous to the Levant, and therefore colonizers (this is contradicted by overwhelming historical, archaeological, cultural, and genetic evidence), and the usual group-think/collective guilt and "us vs them" mentality (the belief that all Israelis/Jews are collectively guilty for the crimes of the Netanyahu government, and the belief that the rights of Palestinians and Jews cannot coexist, but one must come at the expense of the other).

5. Johnny Depp. Many so-called "feminists" quickly embraced or at least turned a blind eye toward misogynist abuse and conspiracy theories from incels/"Mens' Rights Activists" against a queer activist and DV survivor, out of fandom for Johnny Depp (who also has close ties to both the Kremlin and Saudi governments). Presenting Depp as "the real victim", and Heard as a fake victim undermining "real victims", and as a privileged elite using "white woman tears" to gain sympathy, were other ways in which the Right played on Leftists' sympathies and rhetoric to co-opt them in this case. Amber Heard hate/Johnny Depp fandom is a clear indication that a "progressive" or "feminist" can be swayed to abandon their convictions by celebrity/fandom, and/or lacks understanding of Intersectionality (ie how someone could be relatively privileged in certain ways but still disadvantaged in others, particularly against someone like Depp).

6. Immigration. Many supposed Leftists have proven susceptible to narratives accusing immigrants/foreigners of "stealing" jobs from the working class, while the reality is that immigration also creates jobs (more people means more demand for goods and services), automation is a threat to jobs that has nothing to do with immigration, and immigrants often do jobs most Americans don't want to (which is actually exploitation-in typical DARVO fashion, immigrants are vilified for their own exploitation). Anti-immigrant rhetoric is a divide and conquer tactic used by oligarchs to keep the working class fighting each other, instead of focusing on who's really exploiting them.

7. Housing. Attacks on the Unhoused are one of the most acceptable forms of bigotry in our society on both Left and Right. Often this boils down to simple selfishness- whatever a person's abstract political views, they don't want to see "homeless" or "poor" people around, falsely equate them with criminality/drugs, and are worried about the effect of encampments or even the construction of low-income housing on their property values.

These are all ways in which the Right commonly infiltrates and co-opts Leftwing circles, and pits its opponents against each other (divide and conquer). Of course, there are other issues, other examples. This is not a definitive list. So its important to learn to recognize patterns, so you can spot psy-ops/divide and conquer tactics in other forms/on other issues.

One frequent pattern in these narratives is of course collective guilt/guilt by association: Ukraine is bad because it is aligned with the West, Russia is good because it's against the West. Heard is bad because she's a (relatively) rich famous white woman (somehow Depp isn't, as a rich white man). Israel/Jews are evil because of the crimes of the Israeli government, Hamas is good because they're against Israel. Related to this is the use of DARVO tactics to allow oppressors to falsely claim status as victims, further muddying the waters (and a hard argument to counter, because anyone guilty of it can immediately accuse anyone who points it out of doing the same thing). Assange, an oppressive of the Kremlin, is painted as just a heroic journalist persecuted for exposing the truth. Depp, an extremely wealthy, famous man with a long history of racism, misogyny, violent criminality, and ties to the Mob and dictatorial regimes, is the helpless victim of his ex-wife/a feminist conspiracy. Upper/upper-middle class home owners are the real victims because poor people exist in their communities. White workers are the real victims, not immigrants exploited as cheap labour who don't dare complain if their rights are violated because they might be deported.

A third common trick is to simultaneously paint the target group as a deadly, even existential threat, and as pathetic and weak. This seeming contradiction is a hallmark of fascist propaganda specifically (Umberto Eco listed it on his list of 14 traits of fascism). For example, unhoused people are all lazy pathetic drug users, but also criminals destroying our neighbourhoods. Amber Heard is both a talentless, obviously lying gold digger, but also powerful and competent enough to terrorize her husband (in his home, surrounded by private security on his payroll) for years and mastermind a vast international conspiracy spanning a decade to frame him. Ukraine is not even a real country, but also a huge threat to Russia's security justifying its invasion (propagandists often sidestep this absurdity by simply treating Ukraine as an extension of the US/NATO- this allows them to simultaneously portray Russia's genocidal war as the underdog defending itself against "Western imperialism", and to reinforce their genocidal narrative that Ukraine is not a real nation).

Learn the tricks. Call them out when you see them. And if someone else says you're falling for them, don't get defensive and immediately double-down- listen and consider whether you are, in fact, being misled.

[herrlindemann]

Interview with Till's lawyer, Simon Bergmann, for Cicero.

Mr. Bergmann, what are the criminal charges against Till Lindemann, which prompted the Berlin public prosecutor to start investigations?

The authorities in Vilnius have already stopped their investigations due to a lack of sufficient suspicion. The investigations by the Berlin public prosecutor's office were not triggered by criminal charges from victims, but by two people and an association who refer to media reports or a YouTube video. 

So the Berlin public prosecutor's office did not officially open proceedings, although the information was publicly available, but only reacted to the criminal charges?

As we can see from the investigation file, this is the case. I cannot say whether the authorities reacted to public pressure. On the other hand, we have nothing against it. An investigation has the advantage that the allegations are clarified by professionals and not by investigative journalists. We'd rather have the public prosecutor's office check that than leave it hanging in the air. I also know of cases like this, where suspicions are reported, but at the same time there are no investigations at all. This is a new phenomenon.     

In the case of Julian Reichelt / Axel Springer, the old publisher Dirk Ippen intervened in Munich and at the last moment prevented any publication about alleged misconduct by the Bild editor-in-chief in the Ippen group. As a result, his investigative team resigned and went to Spiegel together . Der Spiegel must and wants to use these people and make full use of them. 

The most spectacular result so far is the cover story from June 9, 2023: "Rammstein: Sex, power, alcohol - what the young women from 'Row Zero' report", produced by 13 authors. Do you see a pattern in the recent suspicious reporting? Is this a new development with results that were not seen five or ten years ago?

One gets the impression that the topic has gained a whole new spin in the media with the MeToo movement and Harvey Weinstein. You noticed that this topic triggers people. It attracts a lot of attention, just the catchphrase "MeToo" alone, and it guarantees high sales figures, especially in the digital sector. 

That's why you will hardly find any MeToo reports without a payment barrier. They appear in the print edition - which you have to buy - and often in the paid subscription area, so they are not freely accessible. The reason for this is that they also want to make money with it. This has led to a significant increase in impermissible reporting of suspicions and to a dangerous shift in the guidelines. 

Where do you draw the line between permissible and impermissible reporting of suspicions?

This is very complex, actually a case for legal seminars. There is no such thing as black and white. It must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. In order to be able to report identifyingly, a celebrity must usually be affected. If it is not about a celebrity, the story is usually dead, because then there is no public interest in naming or depicting the person. The reporting interest of the public must not only be given, but also relatively high, because the risk of stigmatization is enormous. You are reporting something that has not yet been clarified.

The authors and one of the publisher's legal advisors recently said in a video discussion with selected readers – “ Spiegel – Backstage” from June 29th – themselves: “We don't know whether what we're writing is true.”

That's how it is. There are accusations, there are clues or witnesses or there aren't. The person concerned denies it or does not comment. One does not know whether the person did what someone claims. That has to be clarified by the investigative process or by a court, or it will clear itself up. Only: As long as that is not clarified, the accused has to be considered innocent. That is why there are these strict requirements from the Federal Court of Justice to the Federal Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights.      

As far as the public interest in Rammstein is concerned, you don't have to worry too much: Yes, of course such allegations are also possible in principle. In any case, the lack of prominence is not the KO criterion. Only: The article would not really work for Lieschen Müller or the average consumer anyway. It takes celebrity to make it sell. 

The second hurdle is then the main one: Depending on the severity of the allegations, the press may only report when sufficient evidence is available or has been determined. The press now has to see for itself: Is there enough evidence that the person did it? It must have a minimum number of connecting facts and, if requested, produce them that support its presentation. Only then is she allowed to publish her suspicions. This is where most mistakes are made. 

Do you assume that such legal disputes and even defeats as now before the Hamburg Higher Regional Court, which also cause considerable costs, are factored in by the magazines in their sales expectations from the outset?     

I do believe that publishers see the risks and consciously take them. The Spiegel legal counsel and also the investigative editors have recently commented on the alleged thoroughness of their research, even before a legal dispute arises. I am very surprised that the press obviously feels compelled to justify its research in such a proactive manner, given that it is a matter of course in journalism.

Or she turns the tables and uses the opportunity to celebrate her own professionalism, impartiality, her ethos and thus to do additional advertising. On the one hand you want to arm yourself against criticism, on the other hand it is a marketing tool: "How did our research in the Rammstein/MeToo case go?" New people are attracted to listen to it: Take a look and you can consider getting a subscription. This is really new.

Is that voyeurism that is being exploited and exploited in terms of sales? Especially since you know next to nothing about the private life of the band Rammstein. They isolate themselves and allow no insights, let alone home stories; which makes you really curious.

Definitely. That's also my point of criticism. The alleged perpetrators do not peddle their private lives. In the case of Luke Mockridge, the preliminary investigation had been discontinued when the reports began, in the case of Rammstein suspicious reports were used as the basis for a preliminary investigation, and in the case of the gallery owner Johann König, there was no preliminary investigation at all until today, which did not prevent Die Zeit from getting started against him .

What is the evidence in the Rammstein case ?

I ask for your understanding that I do not want to comment on the status of the criminal investigation. On the other hand, I can judge what was put forward by the publishers in the press law disputes. And the means of making the allegations credible - rape, administration of knockout drops to enable sexual acts - do not convince me in any way.

There is surprisingly little, considering what has been announced in the articles and headlines. Der Spiegel is an example of an approach that I have observed in numerous recent MeToo reports: When the article says: We spoke to around two dozen women and this resulted in a certain pattern, a system. A man who pushes boundaries. A man who does not respect the will of women. You read the article and you think: Well, two dozen women – that sounds pretty bad. There must be something to it. And the higher the number of witnesses, the more one believes that this is true.

As a person affected, you then have to sue, so in this case apply for an injunction against Der Spiegel . Only then do you have a chance to find out what's actually true about it. Most of the time you don't even know who is accusing whom of what. These are often alleged or actual events that happened years ago. So you have to force the press in court to disclose the results of your research.

As part of a process, the court then has to check whether the stated principles of reporting on suspicions have been complied with. Other criteria are whether the reporting was balanced and objective, and whether the opportunity to comment was given. And it shouldn't be prejudiced. Incidentally, all points that I believe were disregarded in the article. Anyway. Then you go to court and then Der Spiegel presents its research results and then you check: where are the two dozen women actually?

The text is about the "casting system", but also about the accusation that Lindemann used knockout drops or had them used to make women compliant. And we only attack this latter, this really serious accusation, because the "casting system" is more a question of moral evaluation. You may ask: Do you still have to go to bed with groupies these days, do you have to make a “selection” based on visual criteria? You can evaluate everything critically and raise the moral index finger. I find this feigned indignation completely exaggerated. For me it's a puritanical hypermorality that's being shown. 

But: If there were criminal offenses, then I don't want to defend it. I just can't see it at all right now, at least not in terms of a "casting system". And as far as the knockout drops are concerned, I didn't find anything relevant in the documents and evidence provided by Spiegel . The district court of Hamburg has meanwhile also assessed this in the same way. 

So what follows from this? 

The media must find out: Is a statement credible? Are there additional indications, facts? The thesis that in testimony-against-testimony offenses the man always wins because of the principle "in case of doubt for the accused", i.e. it should never be reported on, is wrong. It's not like that. Criminal proceedings on sexual offenses are checked very carefully because the public prosecutor's office does not want to be accused of stopping such proceedings too quickly. 

That's how it should be. It's different from a few years ago. There are other options; you have very well-trained civil servants, above all. There are indications such as Whatsapp messages, signs of injury, cell phone data on whereabouts. This is often the subject of an indictment. Whether or not there will be a conviction is another question, but prosecutors are trying their best. 

But abuse of power is also accused of Lindemann.

Because of serious sexual offences, which, given the current state of affairs, is not even remotely possible and, by the way, is not even covered by the allegations made by Der Spiegel : I did not find any evidence in the file about the knockout drops. At this point, Der Spiegel is already rowing back and says that it did not raise this suspicion at all, but that it primarily came to speak of this "casting system" and of abuse of power.

What is the abuse of power in the Lindemann case?

If you compare this with the Weinstein case, you realize that the abuse of power does not exist. What kind of power is that supposed to be? Rock star prominence is said to be power. He uses it. Only: You could level this accusation against any celebrity who has sex with a woman who may not be his own.

Have you found any indications that your client has given or promised anything to women? Does he put together a backing choir? A dance group? vocals? Or did he conversely threaten them with the end of their careers if they are not compliant?

Nothing like that. The women whom Der Spiegel is now using as witnesses do not claim that either . The affidavits I've seen make no mention of that. On the contrary, the majority of women say they knew there would be sex at the after-show party, and they went anyway. Only two of these affidavits come from women who report from their own experience. Others only report atmospheric. And that they left when they became uncomfortable. 

Were women prevented from walking when they wanted to?

I did n't find anything about this in the documents provided by Spiegel . But I was never there myself. So I can only reproduce the statements I have seen so far. Result: None of the women say they were prevented from leaving the room. And none of the women talk about abuse of power. On the contrary: Most of them, at least that's how I understand the statements, were interested in sex.

I also see the problem that, as a person affected, you first have to put a lot of money on your table before you can even attack an issue of Spiegel or anyone else.

That's added. I have clients who honestly say: Unfortunately, we have to lay down our arms, as sorry as we are. It's no longer financial.

If it goes all the way to the Higher Regional Court and then to Karlsruhe, that will be really expensive - and woe betide you lose in the end. Do you have an example?

I'll give you a case. The client, himself active in the media, was accused. We took action against the mirror , applied for a restraining order. That took a long time. It was issued in essential parts, so initially a success, but the mirror raised a hearing complaint and the BVerfG suspended the enforcement of the temporary injunction. 

Consequence: What we had achieved, the deletion of passages from the article, is reversed and the text can be put online again. Negotiations were then to continue in August, which lost another two months. And Der Spiegel had already announced that it would go through all the instances and also force my client into the main action. Against this background, the continuation of the proceedings no longer made any sense. 

So if things go as Spiegel has threatened, that means: In the injunction proceedings you have two instances with two oral hearings and you then have main proceedings with at least two, but probably three instances, because then it goes from the regional court to the higher regional court to the Federal Court of Justice.   

How much money does that add up to?

This depends on the amount in dispute and the course of the proceedings - the more serious the damage to reputation, the higher the costs. If the client loses in the end, which thank God rarely happens, he has to bear all the costs, including those of the other party. That can add up to a six-figure sum. Of course there are people who can and must afford it, but there are also clients who are prominent but not millionaires. 

And they are brought to their knees.

And the media, the opponents of the trial, know that. They take into account the financial situation of the person concerned. They say to themselves: We'll report on the suspicion despite all our reservations, but the scoop is so big that it definitely pays off and we'll include the lawyer's fees. My impression is that the mirror has now reached the level of an image newspaper. In the specific case even clearly worse than the picture . Methods are used that are actually attributed to tabloid journalism. This is a bad development. 

[ashadowofburnedoutstardust]

If you are an American and you value the right to free speech and the right to protest or are a foreigner to the USA who doesn't think that the US government should have the right to prevent you from being able to speak out against something then you need to educate yourself on what the US Govt is currently trying to do to Julian Assange and the real reasons why they are trying to push through KOSA

The goal is to control the flow of information to hide what we could not see when we couldn't watch what they were doing on our phones

If they manage to extradite him to the USA they will be able to do this to any and all Journalists or citizens of other countries. They are attempting to create a situation that will allow them to violate the sovereignty of other nations through something other than lobbying/bribery

This is why the USA does not care about the deaths of journalists in the Occupied State of Palestine who were exposing the war crimes they have been funding and sponsoring via social media

After the International Criminal court is done with Israel it needs to go after the US and British governments for it's complicity in the Genocide in Palestine, but also the other crimes it has committed previously that Assange managed to expose them for in Iraq and Afghanistan

It is my own personal speculation that copies of what was given to Assange by Chelsea Manning that The Guardian was forced to destroy still exist and they are actively trying to prevent it from going to trial

[natjennie]

WAIT ALSO BECAUSE FUCKING we don't see the letter in the present. we don't see the bomb or the box either, they light the garden waste on fire and the area explodes. so we have no evidence of what was ACTUALLY buried there.

because it's been proven in the series before that things that happen in the past flashbacks sometimes aren't accurate, like it's THEIR recollection of what happened and not necessarily how it was. like with kitty's story about her sister and the whole thomas thorne affair.

BUT those were both directly established as the characters talking about the events and not just. a depiction the events like cap's was. so I don't know what the rules are with regard to past events we see but aren't explicitly stated as being a recollection. like. because he SAYS it was a top secret prototype limpet mine only him and havers knew about it, until "he left me- left for the front" and then that he had to bury it on his own with the blueprints.

but we KNOW categorically that the ghosts can and do misremember things or put their own spin on what happened. so all of that information. I mean it being a bomb is pretty undeniable. but. the fact that only he and havers knew about it, the fact that he buried it by himself, the fact that he buried it with the blueprints, the fact that it was called operation william, the fact that havers left at all. all of that. is subject to question. because we have NO tangible physical evidence in the present of anything he said.

florence is still there, and the ghosts are specifically cautious about mentioning her sister, which corroborate kitty's story. they found thomas' musket ball, he can pull out the letter, his cousin brought the name button to the house, and his wound is visible. pretty solid evidence. pat and julian are modern enough to be in the news and stuff, so they're easy. the plague ghosts left a pit of skeletons. fanny gets flung from the window every morning, not the strongest proof but it's there. they made a documentary about the bone plot so that's humphrey sorted. there was a thing on tv about the caveman reconstruction and the gifted club or w/e from robin. mary's all covered in smoke and dust and puffs up at any mention of fire and can make a burning smell.

cap has NOTHING. NOTHING. there's a picture of a group of soldiers on the ghost chart and an arrow pointing to captain. that's IT. is ANYTHING about him true? where did they get that picture from. does it have his name on it. SOME OF THE GHOSTS WERE THERE WHEN HE WAS STATIONED AT BUTTON HOUSE. why do they never say anything. do they know. how much do they know. surely they would know about the letter. and the bomb. what the fuck is going on why didnt anyone else say anything. WHAT. IM LOSING MY MIND RN