#i actually don't know how the british police system works

[row-theboat]

I might be cooking up an AU....

[mywingsareonwheels]

It's funny how much interpretations can vary. I saw another post where someone felt Lewis was too soft on Thursday by showing us what happened and therefore making us know that how it played out wasn't quite as bad as what Morse was probably imagining.

Although I disagree with you re: Thursday, I sympathize with the mixed feelings. I think there's a few factors with Endeavour which will influence how you feel about it. There's people who will know Morse through the books, people who know him from Inspector Morse, and then fans like me who were introduced to him as the young man in Endeavour. Fans of each of these versions seem to have wanted different things, and I reckon the problem Lewis ran into was trying to make everybody happy.

Like me for instance, I honestly feel he would've been better off pretending Inspector Morse didn't exist because then he wouldn't have been limited to twisting the story towards it and could take Morse and the other characters in a more organic direction. Endeavour might be a prequel, but it was made in such a different era of television, and I think it's ok for it to do something new. However, fans of Inspector Morse hoping to see how he became his older self would be disappointed if he did that. While watching the series I read old reviews from when each season aired and was surprised by the number of people impatient for the Thursday plotline to end to make way for McNutt. Then you have someone like Shaun Evans who read the books but didn't see the show, and that's perhaps why his interpretation of Morse and his future was darker.

At the same time that openness of how the character can be perceived is part of the joy and does allow you to get more out of what the ending means.

I actually really liked what they did with Thursday and how they connected it to Big Pete because I felt it went along with the recurring theme throughout the series that no matter how much these characters want to do good, as policemen they are still part of a messed up system causing harm, and they're not immune to protecting their own over doing what's right for the public they serve. That includes Morse. The whole tragedy of Big Pete and Blenheim Vale is an indictment of the police and remains so.

My takeaway regarding the Morse/Thursday ending is that it wasn't so much about Thursday being a bad person and Morse regretting the relationship because of it, as it was him being confronted with the reality that he had put him on a pedestal. He needed to let go of his naivety. I don't agree with the above point that Lewis was too soft on Thursday, but I do find it interesting that there is a distinction between Morse's perspective and ours. We saw parts of Thursday he didn't and we saw parts of Morse which Thursday didn't. They never truly knew each other because of being suppressed 20th century British men, and maybe that's the real tragedy of Endeavour.

Nonetheless, Morse still credits him with being the best mentor and loves him enough to protect him and his family. I think that's why he ultimately feels he has to close himself up. Because getting too close to the Thursdays put him in a position where he had to compromise his principles and couldn't get justice for Jakes, Big Pete, and the others. THAT'S what really hurt him imo. I also feel like the connection to Inspector Morse can work in that IM is him opening himself back up and Lewis bringing back a side of him which had been missing. I like the idea of Morse being a character constantly learning and changing.

Sorry, I didn't mean for this to turn into a whole essay. lmao

Hee, never apologies for writing a thoughtful essay about "Endeavour". :D

And yeah, as you say you and I don't fully agree about the show (esp. Thursday) but I found your thoughts so interesting and I really enjoyed reading them! Thank you. :)

Also that's a darn good point about Shaun. I've only read a couple of the books and I've seen I think about 1/3 of Inspector Morse (I mean, I watched a bit when I was a kid (I was 9 when it first started) but never got into it fully until I'd seen Endeavour and am meaning to catch up on more v soon), and Thaw's Morse is definitely different from Dexter's original Morse. So... yeah, it makes sense that Shaun had a different trajectory from the one I'm more familiar with. :) (And, well, then you have Roger who likes to play as much drama and emotional intensity as possible, so... ;-) )

Morse constantly learning and changing: yes, definitely. I like that. :D

[super-ion]

(more Ion & Emily)

This is supposed to be the heist of the century: just a couple pals stealing and repatriating the Elgin Marbles.

But Ion, you might say, repatriating the Elgin Marbles doesn't sound particularly evil.

Listen, being a super villain isn't about being evil. It's about breaking the law in the most dramatic way possible.

Take our little team, for example.

Arachnid is the muscle. He's an 8 foot tall human-spider hybrid with 6 arms. He's an entomologist and he's all about wildlife conservation and eco terrorism.

Lady Lacuna is the transportation. She can open portals between various locations including some kind of nightmare hellscape populated by the tentacle monsters. She steals precious gems and rare minerals for renewable energy research. (Also, she's my bff and she hooks me up with the best super tech)

Dr Hands is the mastermind of this little heist. We're not actually sure what he is. Personally, I think he's either some kind of tupla or a forgotten mischief deity. He conjours hands. (Yeah, it's weird, I don't know how it works. I asked Lady L once and she told me it violated the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, so we just don't ask.) He mostly just makes whimsical YouTube videos about comparative mythology in his spare time.

And then there's me, Ion, technomancer extraordinare and hacker girl to this motley crew. I mostly go after financial institutions and expose political corruption and police misconduct. Be gay, do crimes, and all that jazz.

Anyway, one day after a D&D session, Hands is like, "Hey we should repatriate the Elgin Marbles!" And of course we, a bunch of (mostly) benign supervillains, are like, "Sure, Dr Hands! That sounds like a fun little group bonding activity!" Six weeks later, we all meet up in London, do a little sightseeing and embark on the greatest heist ever.

Now, just a quick disclaimer: I've done team ups before, I've even worked one on one with Arachnid and Lady L, but I've never actually been on a team composed of multiple villains, so this should be an interesting experience.

We get there, I crack security, we get in. Easy peasy.

We run into the problem right after Lady L finishes portaling the first piece of the Marbles to the secret cave on Hands' French estate when I get a ping in the security system. Somebody else has the same idea we did.

Actually, it's not quite the exact same idea. Yeah, they're robbing the British Museum, except they're looking for something in the double-secret sub-basement. (Before you ask, yes, there is a double-secret sub-basement where they keep cursed artefacts. Sounds fake, but it's definitely a thing.) Anyway, somebody's in the system making queries and trying to bypass security. Whoever they are, they're good… but I'm better. They might be in the system, but I'm IN the system.

"Hey boss," I tell Hands as I track their efforts. "We got a problem."

"Oh do tell, lass!" he huffs excitedly.

"There's somebody else here," I tell him. "Looks like they're trying to find… lot 9-354-67, the Stele of… Alf.. thir…something."

"Ah yes," he interrupts. "Ælfthryth, 5th century Saxon witch. They must be trying to unleash her curse. Capital!"

Lady L wipes her hands and narrows her eyes.

"How do you just… know that?" she asks.

I miss his reply as I start throwing up countermeasures for whoever this is. I don't know… something about the phrase "unleash her curse" makes me uneasy. Curses usually get innocent people hurt and I'm definitely not about that.

Meanwhile, I'm also trying to tap into the security feeds to see who we're dealing with.

"Uh, hey guys," I say, interupting a debate on the ethical ramifications of unleashing a 1600 year old curse on the modern world. "I count four of them.Their tech guy is definitely Etheris, but I'm a little rusty on my European supervillains. I've got… a chimpanzee with a bowler hat and cigar. Some dude in a green suit with a biohazard symbol. And… uhh… like a woman with blue hair."

"Bully!" Dr Hands shouts. "Les Redoutables Quatre! We simply must fight them and test our respective prowess!"

"Great," Arachnid mutters with a sigh. He's a little more worldly than Lady L or myself, and I'm not super delighted by the enthusiasm of his response.

"What are we dealing with?" Lady L asks, looking suddenly apprehensive.

I've already mentally brought up the Wikipedia page for Les Redoutables Quatre, Northern France's premier supervillain team.

"Okay, uh…" I say. "Etheris - tech stuff, but mostly electromagnetism. Biologique - makes people sick. Sylphe - telekinesis. Garoutte… uh, literally just a chimp with above average human intelligence."

Dr Hands claps in delight and there's a weird echo… like a whole lot of hands clapping. He's actually excited for a fight. I mean, normally I am too, but like… we're already on a job, I don't like having my carefully laid plans disrupted.

Lady L looks at us and nods. She hates curses and magic, they mess with her experiments in unexpected ways. The fewer curses in the world the better.

Arachnid is already rolling out his various shoulders. In all fairness, he just loves a good brawl.

I sigh. I guess we're fighting.

And if we're fighting, I gotta record it. I send a swarm of drones out of my harness. They're hardened, so hopefully Etheris can't fry them too bad.

"What's the match up?" Arachnid asks me, because of course I've been running simulations ever since Hands said "bully".

"Hands doesn't get sick, so he's got Biologique. Arachnid's got no tech and his suit's the least conductive, so he's got Etheris. As for the other two… it's just about even."

I turn to Lady L.

"You want the ape or the psychic?"

"Rock, paper, scissors," she replies. "Loser fights the ape."

She picked paper. I picked rock.

Great. I guess I'm fighting Garoutte

I doubt you've ever fought a hyper intelligent chimp. Let me tell you, it sucks.

We got the drop on them. There was a bit of typical villainous grandstanding and a quick discussion on rules and decorum. I agreed to share any and all footage of the fight. We villains live for our publicity, a good fight is great for our rep even if we lose.

Then we got down to it.

Hands made quick work isolating Biologique from the rest of us, which is great, because I was already feeling a twinge of nausea (which the disembodied hands weren't exactly helping with).

Arachnid likewise got Etheris away from Lady L and me before he could do anything nasty to our tech. I've fought lightning users before and it's hell on anything my powers can interface with. Last time I fought Thundercloud, I had migraines for a week. It sucked.

That left Garoutte and Sylphe vs Lady Lacuna and myself.

I gotta apologize at this point. I'm not very good at describing my own fights. Just imagine a thirtyish 6'2" trans girl in black leather and green spandex with assorted gadgets fighting a hyper intelligent chimpanzee. It's awful. He's strong. He's got nasty, sharp teeth. He's the worst combination of smart and mean.

At one point, I'm back to back with Lady L, and mercifully, one of her portal tentacles wraps around Garoutte and he's monetarily distracted as he screams and bites and claws at it.

"Hey," I say between panting breaths. "Can we trade?"

There's suddenly a flurry of stolen artefacts hurtling through the air. Lady L manages to block most of them with a well placed portal, returning them to sender. I glance over my shoulder at the hovering figure of Sylphe, her eyes are blazing white and her blue hair is whipping around her. Shards of pottery and ornamental blades swirl around her. She's absolutely terrifying.

"You're welcome to her!" Lady L snaps.

"You know what?" I reply. "I'm good."

I lunge to the side as Garoutte breaks free.

We do a little tag teaming, playing off each other's strengths. I mentioned earlier, but we've worked together before. We've got a couple dance moves down. Teamwork makes the dream work, you know?

She's got portals, I got tech, so this time imagine the trans girl from before fighting alongside a waifish gal dressed all in black and red as a mad scientist, but in like a burlesque way (I have no idea how to describe it, but she rocks it). We're surrounded by portals to hell with whipping tentacles. It looks really cool, you should see it sometime.

For all their fiersome reputation, Les Redoutables Quatre don't actually fight too well together (at least not these two). They fight like individuals rather than a cohesive team, which works great for us.

We're both sweating and panting by the time we get them both knocked out and we share a half hearted high five.

"Go team!"

"Yay, us!"

Arachnid and Hands show up a couple minutes later, also victorious.

"Oh! Splendid!" Hands announces. "Positively splendid!"

I'm reviewing the recording of the fight now. I lost a couple drones in the fray, but overall… damn, we look good.

Our victory is short lived as we hear the sound of crunching boots.

We turn in unison to face the new threat. We all collectively gasp at the sight of Captain Dauntless, one of the most powerful superheroes in the world. He's got strength, he's got speed, he can fly, he's bulletproof.

We are totally fucked.

But he just begins a slow clap as he surveys the prostrate figures at our feet.

"Good show," he booms. "You've done the crown a great service this evening!"

Oh goddamnit…

Judging by the barely stifled groans from Arachnid and Lady L, they feel the same.

Only Dr Hands seems unphased. He grins enthusiastically and extends a hand to Dauntless.

"Always good to see you, Captain!"

Oh god, I think they actually know each other.

Hands throws an affable arm around Captain Dauntless' shoulder and begins regaling him with the tale of our escapade.

The three of us blink after them in shock.

Lady Lacuna recovers first

"What the fuck?"

When you and your team of villians try to commit the heist of the century; you have planned for everything. Except another team of villians who are doing the same thing. Yall fight and your team wins. The heroes show up and congratulate the “heroes” for saving the day. You roll with it.

[mottlemoth]

I'm not sure if you answer these, but I thought I'd give it a go! I'm new to Mystrade and really want to write it, but I'm struggling massively.

I'm not from the UK, so the police ranks confuse me a little, and I'm really struggling with just... getting started. I notice with your stories you always have an excellent understanding of police, detectives etc. Is this just from living in the UK, or researching? (P.s. I'm not lazy, I swear I've tried to research but I cant find any reliable resources).

I want to write an AU where Greg and Mycroft meet in different circumstances, mainly work, but I cant think of how to crowbar them together without understanding Scotland Yard hierarchy. It's so damn hard to write about a detective - I'm too used to writing about vampires and werewolves, lol.

Thank you in advance if you do read this - and I absolutely adore your writing, it is just wonderful and the perfect introduction to Mystrade ♥️

You're 100% right that it's hard to research police ranks in the UK, so don't feel bad if you've struggled ❤️ The police are constantly reorganising and renaming things, which means resources end up out of date very quickly. The Metropolitan Police Service (i.e., Scotland Yard) also has a slightly different system to the rest of the UK, which doesn't help.

If I tried to do a short guide to the whole of the British police force, firstly it wouldn't be short, and secondly I'd constantly be saying "but this doesn't apply to Greg" or "it's different in London so don't actually use this" - instead I'll focus on London for purposes of Mystrade.

I'll also keep it quite general and basic because this is for fanfic writers, not historians/experts.

*all details as correct as I can make them at the time of writing - February 2022*

(1) What is the Metropolitan Police?

Sometimes known as the MPS, the Met, Scotland Yard or (more historically) the Old Bill or the Yard, the Metropolitan Police Service are responsible for policing Greater London... except one tiny area. The central financial district have their own separate force, the City of London Police, who largely specialise in financial crimes like fraud. Ignore these guys for purposes of Mystrade. Greg belongs to the Metropolitan Police, who are also responsible for (1) UK-wide counter-terrorism initiatives (*sparkly Mycroft link stars*) and (2) protection of the Royal Family and members of the UK Government (*further sparkle*).

(2) Who is in charge of the Metropolitan Police?

Riiiight at the top of the tree sits the Mayor of London. She or he appoints a Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, who runs the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC).

These people are politicians rather than police officers, and they don't hold any rank in the police. They distantly supervise and make broader political decisions. You don't really have to know much about these folks.

(The Home Secretary will occasionally be involved with the Metropolitan Police over nationwide security issues, like terrorism. Mycroft probably went to school with any given Home Secretary.)

The actual head of the Metropolitan Police is known as the Commissioner. Our current commissioner is Cressida Dick. She has a Deputy Commissioner, who is her second in command. Both of these people are appointed by the Queen, in consultation with the Mayor of London and the Home Secretary. The Commissioner answers to the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), the Mayor, the Home Secretary, and more broadly to the people of London.

After the Deputy Commissioner come four Assistant Commissioners, appointed by the Mayor of London and the Home Secretary, who each govern one of the following areas ('directorates'):

Specialist Operations

Frontline Policing

Professionalism

Met Operations

These six people (Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and 4 x Assistant Commissioners) make up the management board of Scotland Yard.

Now I'm going to be frank with you here. There's a lot of overlap between the four directorates and they're always swapping responsibilities, so just forget about three of them for now.

Hold onto Frontline Policing - that's where Greg will be.

The Assistant Commissioner has a Deputy Assistant Commissioner, then there are commanders, who are... basically deputy Deputy Assistant Commissioners... they were going to phase this rank out in 2018, but eventually decided against it. Who knows? I kinda just ignore commanders. I imagine their job is mostly emails and golf.

Next, we need to chop Greater London up into smaller, more manageable chunks. These geographic areas are today known as Basic Command Units - so for example, Central South BCU covers Lambeth and Southwark. Before 2000, big areas of London used to be called divisions (hence 'not our division'). There were also 32 of them. In 2018, they merged those 32 geographic areas into just 12. (We can assume Greg's use of 'division' means he's been a part of the London police force since before the Millennium.)

Each BCU/division/unit of the Metropolitan Police Service has a chief superintendent in charge of it.

And finally, we've reached a rank seen in Sherlock.

So... this guy is a chief superintendent. He's the most senior person Greg will encounter on a week to week basis. They're all terrified of him in the show because within his division, his word is law. Above the rank of Chief Superintendent (so Assistant Commissioners, etc) the job is often more politician than police officer - they'll be concerned with policy, strategy and so on. The chief superintendent is the one shouting at you, asking why you haven't solved the murder yet. And yes, it is against the law to chin them.

Below the chief superintendent come his deputies, superintendents. Then below those come the ranks you're more likely to have heard of (and more likely to be writing):

Chief inspector

Inspector

Sergeant

Constable

A division/unit will typically have loads of constables, plenty of sergeants, a nice handful of inspectors, and then just a few chief inspectors. For reference, London as a whole has about 25,000 constables, 4500 sergeants, 1200 inspectors and 300 chief inspectors, spread across all units.

(Are the GIFs helping? I hope they're helping xDD)

You have to take a special exam to advance from being a constable to a sergeant, then another one to become an inspector.

In the show, Greg probably ranks as inspector, though there's a newspaper glimpsed at one point which seems to name him as a chief inspector. I've bumped him up to chief inspector in a few fics, for reasons which I'll move into soon.

(3) How does 'detective inspector' come into it?

So, what's the difference between an inspector and a detective inspector?

Very broadly, 'ordinary' police officers (who focus on preventing crimes and responding to them) are known as constable, sergeant, inspector, etc.

Once someone has been in uniform for at least two years, they might decide they want to specialise their career around solving more complex crimes. They'll apply to join the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). It takes about two years to train, in which time they'd be known as Trainee Detective Constable Whoever - then after passing an exam, they become known as Detective Constable.

If they do well, they'll hopefully be promoted in time to Detective Sergeant, Detective Inspector and then Detective Chief Inspector.

Detectives might work at solving crimes on their own, or they might work in teams. You might have seen other British crime dramas where there's one detective inspector followed everywhere by his trusty sergeant. It's not always like that, especially for more serious crimes. (Sometimes, if a crime seems to be very straightforward, they might even just send a detective constable out to clear it up. It all depends how messy things appear to be at first glance.)

At the rank of Detective Chief Inspector, you'd be leading teams in solving more serious or more complicated crimes. Every crime in British policing is assigned an SIO, a Senior Investigating Officer, whose job it is to manage the crime-solving team and push things towards a conclusion. They usually hold the rank of at least chief inspector, though often they're superintendents. Sometimes the SIO sits behind his desk the whole time, just reading the reports sent in by his team. Sometimes they get more hands on. It depends on the resources of the unit and the scale of the crime.

I'll often promote Greg to Detective Chief Inspector Lestrade because it gives him the opportunity to be a Senior Investigating Officer. He'll have more freedom to make command decisions, and he's more likely to be called on to give testimony in court.

(4) Which division/BCU does Greg belong to?

This isn't fully specified in the show, so I'm just going to lay out my best guess. You guys are very welcome to borrow my thinking.

I don't think Greg is assigned to a BCU (a particular geographic area). He's seen solving police work all over London, and he's clearly based at Scotland Yard itself, so I think it's more likely that he belongs to a central specialised unit dealing with a specific type of crime.

As of February 2019, the best fit for Greg is Homicide and Major Crimes Command. Sally Donovan is right that a break-in at the Tower of London really isn't Greg's division but he'll want it.

Earlier in his career, he might have spent a few years working in an area of London with a high rate of murders, gained a lot of experience in investigating them, then applied to join the specialist unit.

The joy of using 'major crimes' as Greg's division is that it can flex to fit all sorts of things. Great news for fic writers.

It also explains why his chief superintendent is hella scary. You'd have to be tough as nails to become head of the murder division at Scotland Yard.

(5) How can Mycroft get involved?

It's a fun challenge if you're sticking to canon, because Greg is clearly very specialised in CID. He's also one of the ground troops who answer to a chief superintendent. If Mycroft ever has dealings with the Metropolitan Police, he's probably going to be dealing with the more-politician-than-police-officer ranks like Assistant Commissioner, who occupy the very highest branches of the tree. He might even go directly to the Home Secretary and tell them just to pass his orders downward.

Mycroft's most obvious connections to Scotland Yard are through things like counter-terrorism or protection command - sadly these fall under Specialist Operations rather than Frontline Policing, where Greg is.

But here are some ideas off the top of my head for how the two directorates could overlap.

An ordinary-looking murder investigated by Greg turns out to involve international terrorism.

An ordinary-looking murder turns out to be part of a threat against a government minister or a member of the royal family.

An important political figure (or a member of the royal family, etc) is murdered. Importantly, Greg is nearby when it happens and becomes the first officer on the scene. This makes him what's known as the Initial Responding Officer, responsible for preserving the integrity of the scene and recording his initial observations. He'd be in charge until someone more senior can get there and his first thoughts would be considered vital evidence. This could happen at the Diogenes maybe, or even at Baker Street.

Mycroft already knows and trusts Greg through Greg's friendship with Sherlock. He might request that Greg is assigned to investigate a particularly sensitive crime - this request is likely to have come 'through the Mayor's Office', filtered down anonymously via commissioner, assistant commissioner and then Greg's boss, the chief superintendent. You might want to promote Greg to Detective Chief Inspector if you're using this idea, so he can act as an SIO (Senior Investigating Officer).

If you're heading into AU territory, Mycroft might make an excellent Assistant Commissioner. He would work primarily at Scotland Yard and could well encounter Greg in the hallway. If Mycroft is Assistant Commissioner of Frontline Policing, he would be Greg's boss's boss, senior to the chief superintendent who commands Greg's unit. Or if he's Assistant Commissioner of Special Operations, he'd be linked to things like national security, counter-terrorism and Protection Command (protecting important figures like the Royal Family). If you want to know a bit more about Assistant Commissioners and their career backgrounds, here are Wikipedia biographies on the current four ( 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 ).

If you don't want Mycroft to be a ranked police officer, he could also work in (or consult for) one of the admin directorates at Scotland Yard, staffed by civilians. They are:

Digital and Technology (currently led by a Chief Digital and Technology Officer)

Corporate Services (led by a Chief of Corporate Services, with sub-directors overseeing Media and Communication, Legal Services, Human Resources, Strategy & Governance, Transformation, Property Services, Finance and Commercial)

This post has gone on for some time now, so it's probably best if I draw things to a close xDD I hope it's been at least partly helpful.

I'm more than happy to try and answer further queries - just drop me a message. Don't worry if it takes me a few days to get back to you. I don't have as much free time on my hands as I used to ❤️

[acrossthewavesoftime]

📓

Sorry for my tardy reply, friend (I had... A Day yesterday, which curiously involved climbing a fence...)!

While the last idea I shared was quite serious, this one is more on the humourous side and I think qualifies as an AU, though not of the cozy coffee shop kind. It involves some of the British protagonists of the American Revolutionary War, but in a retail environment.

I don't recall how I arrived at this, but I think it has potential as a silly, 1990s-flavoured movie:

Picture a chain grocery store somewhere in a run-down part of town somewhere on the East Coast, which is inexpilcably staffed predominantly by ex-pats from the British Isles.

Business isn't going well to the point the location is always on the verge of being closed; manager William Howe is doing the bare minimum to keep the show on going, while his deputy John Burgoyne, a former c-list (or rather, z-list) celebrity fallen on hard times after having been embroiled in a scandal that is often alluded to, but never quite explained, spends his days in the backroom shirking his duties, feeling he has been born for greater things than this.

Behind the cash register sits one Henry Clinton, a depressed middle-aged widower who is *this* close to quitting each and every day, but doesn't, since he needs the money to feed his four kids. In the back, Messrs. Gage and Graves lord over the storage area; always at odds, Gage accuses Graves of occasionally misappropriating wares (he does); Graves accuses Gage of the same (he does). Nobody really wants to deal with them though because of Gage's unpleasant personality and the rumours that Graves knows how to use his fork lift as a weapon. There are also rumours he, and a band of younger guys called his 'nephews' who seem to be at his beck and call, have some kind of illegal scheme going on, but nobody is brave enough to ask.

Over the summer, two idealistic, enthusiastic high school students by the names of Simcoe and André join them, stacking shelves to save up for a trip to go see the world after graduation.

It is around the same time that Mr. Washington, in charge of the relevant local health and safety authority, sends one of his most dreaded inspectors, one Benedict Arnold, over, who isn't pleased to find Burgoyne in a state of suspicious undress in the backroom with a lady to keep him company ("that's Sarah! She isn't naked, she's wearing a toga! Nothing illegal about that, right? Right?"), Clinton nervously hiding below the register, and youngsters Simcoe and André involved in a tomato-powered fight in the fresh produce isle, in which one of André's tomatoes hits Arnold square in the face; not to speak of having been almost run over by a sweary Graves on his forklift, the very, very lacklustre book-keeping and broken-down coolers. He gives them a week- and they actually work to improve things for one day, before the enthusiasm fizzes out and everybody returns to quietly disliking one another. The day of the inspection, they pass, but barely. More significantly however, Arnold in an effort to get revenge for the tomato-incident, accuses André of having stolen goods and directly phones the regional manager, who overrides Howe's decision to keep André, who is being let go without even a reasonable inquest.

Everybody is enraged- and since the police have been involved as well and André is now facing charges, everyone for the first time truly bands together to help.

Around the same time, a young woman starts shopping there who catches the cashier's eye. The two get talking and Mary reveals she is taking online classes in order to find a better job to be financially able to get away from her abusive husband.

After a few lessons, Mary turns out to be a natural in all things computer-related to the point she has made her first forays into hacking, which she has tested by erasing all late fees from the local library's system. Impressed, her new friend Clinton asks her to gain access to the security camera footage of the inspection which has been kept under wraps. She succeeds and thus proves André's innocence while also revealing the real thief: Arnold.

The footage, alongside a flimsy explanation regarding its origin, is turned over to the police, and André cleared of any wrongdoing.

Rather than leaving Arnold to the authorities to deal with however, a personal revenge plot reminiscent of Home Alone is plotted and set into motion, which involves luring Arnold back to the store, and eventually netting him in one of these cylindrical manual Christmas tree balers. He is then hauled onto Graves' beat-up pick-up truck and never seen again.

All's well that ends well; Howe returns to the UK, where he gets onto talkshows after writing a book about his harrowing experiences in retail; Simcoe and André make enough money to go on their trip together; Burgoyne, after a clip of him dancing to ABBA's Dancing Queen secretly filmed by Simcoe and André goes viral on TikTok, is being offered to host a morning show on a small local TV channel; Clinton and Mary get together sometime after her husband has been declared missing. Nobody knows where he has gone, but Graves accidentally confesses to having lent the Christmas tree baler to Clinton. Over time, Mary becomes a sought-after professional for internet security, enabling Clinton to follow his true calling and become a stay-at-home dad. Graves, alongside his nephews, vanishes over night. A couple of months later, curious about his whereabouts, Howe googles him and finds a newspaper article from the south of England, with a picture of Graves in a suit and tie next to an elegant woman claimed to be his wife, whom he supports in a local election. She's running against one Mrs. Gage.

The store is forced to close, the crumbling building a mere memory for those who have once worked in it.

The last scene is set in a cold, inclement wasteland; all is cold and snowy, the wind sings as it combs through dry, dead grass; some might say it sounds like the Northwest Passage. Arnold stumbles as he makes his way across the barren landscape. He calls out if someone is there, but of course, there is no response. He trudges on, yet one can tell by his route in relation to the sun that he's heading ever further north...

[mongoose232323]

Simply Amazing

This Article Is From 9:28 PM EST,

Fri January 08, 2021.

From The Article

This Was Posted On 8kun

"Trump or war. Today. That simple."

"If you don't know how to shoot:

You need to learn. NOW."

"We will storm the government buildings, kill cops,

kill security guards, kill federal employees and

agents, and demand a recount."

.

In the weeks, days and hours ahead of Wednesday's siege on the Capitol by President Donald Trump's zealous supporters, the warning signs were clear: online posts from hate groups and right-wing provocateurs agitating for civil war, the deaths of top lawmakers and attacks on law enforcement.

And now, as the dust settles and the country struggles to make sense of the violence that left five dead -- including an officer with the US Capitol Police -- experts warn that the calls for violence have only intensified ahead of Inauguration Day, when President-elect Joe Biden will be sworn in as commander in chief.

"We are seeing ... chatter from these white supremacists, from these far-right extremists -- they feel emboldened in this moment," said Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks and counters hate. "We fully expect that this violence could actually get worse before it gets better."

Wednesday's chaos -- which erupted during a protest to dissuade Congress from certifying the results of Biden's unambiguous win -- showed a loss of control and sudden breaking of the bond that for four years had held Trump, his supporters and the Republican leadership together in lockstep.

After rioters charged through a barricade, assaulted police officers, shattered windows and stormed into the hallowed building that was torched by the invading British military in 1814, Trump made a tepid plea for them to go home -- although he repeated the falsehood that the election had been stolen. Republican leaders that night -- including Vice President Mike Pence and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell -- condemned the rioters in the strongest terms.

But it all appeared to have little effect on the radicalized right.

"Trump WILL be sworn in for a second term on January 20th!!," said a commenter on thedonald.win, a pro-Trump online forum, on Thursday, the day after the siege. "We must not let the communists win. Even if we have to burn DC to the ground. Tomorrow we take back DC and take back our country!!"

Security concerns ahead of Biden's inauguration

John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher at the Citizen Lab -- a group at the University of Toronto that monitors cybersecurity -- said he is "terribly concerned" about the inauguration.

"While the broader public was aghast at what happened (Wednesday) at the Capitol, in certain corners of the sort of right wing conversation, what happened ... is viewed as a success," he told CNN.

In the days and weeks before the attack on the Capitol, signs that the protest could spiral into violence were in abundance.

Advance Democracy, Inc., a nonpartisan governance watchdog, highlighted red flags on social media. In the six days leading up to the event, for instance, there were 1,480 posts from QAnon-related accounts that referenced the event and contained terms of violence. On Parler, the report said, multiple posts referenced war, including statements like "the war begins today."

Ali Alexander, a political activist who has organized pro-Trump rallies, including one of the demonstrations that converged on the Capitol lawn Wednesday, accused the left of "trying to push us to war." In late December, Alexander told followers on Periscope that he and three GOP congressman -- Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs of Arizona and Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama -- were planning something big.

"It was to build momentum and pressure and then on the day change hearts and minds of Congress peoples who weren't yet decided or who saw everyone outside and said, 'I can't be on the other side of that mob,'" Ali said, though he did not call for violence.

CNN reached out to the offices of all three congressman, but only Biggs responded, with a statement from a spokesperson denying that he worked in any way with Alexander or any protestors.

"Congressman Biggs is not aware of hearing of or meeting Mr. Alexander at any point -- let alone working with him to organize some part of a planned protest," the spokesperson said. "He did not have any contact with protestors or rioters, nor did he ever encourage or foster the rally or protests. He was focused on his research and arguments to work within the confines of the law and established precedent to restore integrity to our elections, and to ensure that all Americans -- regardless of party affiliation -- can again have complete trust in our elections systems."

Watchdogs issued warnings ahead of Capitol siege

Several organizations that monitor extremism online issued warnings beforehand.

On January 4, the ADL published a lengthy blog post detailing threats of violence pertaining to the upcoming rally.

"In response to a user who wondered what happens if Congress ignores 'evidence' that President Trump won the election, a user wrote, 'Storm the capitol,'" the ADL's blog post says.

The post went on to say while it wasn't aware of any credible threats violence planned for January 6, "if the past is any indication, the combination of an extremist presence at the rallies and the heated nature of the rhetoric suggests that violence is a possibility."

Also on January 4, a risk analysis by the security firm G4S stated that "current rhetoric suggests that there will be attendees who have violent intent, including armed militia groups" between January 6 and Inauguration Day.

** Very Long Article, Click On Link To Read Rest **

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/01/08/us/online-extremism-inauguration-capitol-invs/index.html

[unicornprincessinthetardis]

My (often relatively reasonable) dad: ...so Enoch Powell was right, what he said has happened.

Me: and you don't think maybe he could've said it without inciting racial hatred and literally saying that in time the rivers might run with the blood of 'native' British people because of immigration, do you?

My dad: no, you're being ridiculous, it had to be said, and there really are areas of cities that are majority black or Muslim now so he was right in his predictions, and it didn't change how things were anyway

Me: *goes away to calm down and read up on the 'Rivers of Blood' speech*

[I already knew some of this but here's a précis for those unfamiliar: in April 1968, in Wolverhampton, UK, a Conservative MP, Enoch Powell, made a speech, about the proposed 'Race Relations Bill' (which subsequently made it illegal to refuse housing/ employment/public services to people on the grounds of race/colour/ ethnic & national origins).

The speech was strongly anti-immigrant, calling for 'voluntary re-emigration' and for moves to be made to stem the tide of immigration, else Britain would be 'overrun' and sooner or later white British people would find themselves fully second-class citizens, and that in some ways they already were. He also talked about a "tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic", which I take to mean immigration in the USA to the similar end of white people no longer being in charge - which in 1968 was so far from the truth, and just horrible baseless fear-mongering, playing on people’s xenophobia and racist prejudice - and compared pro-immigration/anti-discrimination newspapers to the ones that had denied and hid the rise of fascism and threat of war in the 1930s. Plus, he talked about a constituent of his, a woman who lived on a street that had become occupied by mostly black people, who lost her white lodgers and complained to the council for a tax rate reduction because she wouldn't take black tenants, and instead basically got told not to be racist, and presented it as a bad thing that she'd been treated like that.

The speech's common name comes from a phrase he quoted from the Aenid (because he was also a Cambridge-educated classics scholar), 'I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood"', although he just called it 'the Birmingham speech' and seemed to be surprised by the uproar he caused.]

Me (to self): So it didn't change things did it? How do you explain the attacks against nonwhite people where the attackers literally shouted his name and repeated his rhetoric? Oh, they would definitely have happened if he hadn't made that speech, wouldn't they? And the British people of foreign descent who were so afraid they might be removed from their lives just for not being white they always had cases packed to go? And the fact that experts says he set back progress in 'race relations' by about ten years and legitimised being racist/anti-immigrant in the same way UKIP and some pro-Brexit types have done within the last few years here (fun fact: immediately after the Brexit vote, people were being racially and physically abusive to visibly Muslim and/or South Asian people, telling them to leave because of Brexit, which was of course extreme nonsense because their presence would be nothing to do with the EU, and more likely the British Empire and the Commonwealth, but they were doing it because it seemed suddenly okay to be openly racist, because Nigel Farage and his ilk, and a legally non-binding vote surrounded in lies, said so) and others have done elsewhere, in the US and Europe and Brazil and so many other places.

Powell was interviewed about the speech in 1977 and stood by his views, said that because the immigration figures were higher than those he had been 'laughed at' about in his speech, he was right and now governments didn't want to deal with the "problem", were passing it off to future generations and it would go on until there was a civil war!

He also said he wasn't a 'racialist' (racist) because he believed a "'racialist' is a person who believes in the inherent inferiority of one race of mankind to another, and who acts and speaks in that belief" so he was in fact "a racialist in reverse" as he regarded "many of the peoples in India as being superior in many respects—intellectually, for example, and in other respects—to Europeans." (I mean, I know I can't hold him to our standards but a) that's still racism and b) he did think that mankind was divided into very distinct, probably biologically so, races, which, yes, normal for the time, but the whole 'each with different qualities and ways in which they were better than others' is iffy)

Me: *goes back to Dad to make my point and definitely not get upset* So here are some things that literally happened as a consequence of the 'Rivers of Blood' speech...

So even if he was correct to say what he did (I mean, he wasn't but you have to tiptoe around Dad and I had points to make), he shouldn't have said it the way he did

My dad: so you think the truth should be suppressed? You're only looking at this from one perspective (he thinks he knows better because he was alive at the time and my brother and I weren't despite the fact that we're both into politics and history and, y'know, not into scapegoating, behaving oddly, and laying blame because people are different to us - he and mum also have issues with trans people and we're trying so hard to change their views/behaviours but I'm not sure it's working & that's a whole different story) and there are these areas that really are Muslim-only (because informal lending and wanting to keep the community together is such a crime, right?) and they don't integrate and want to impose Sharia law (only he couldn't remember what it was called right then) and you don't know what it's like (he is an engineer surveyor and travels all over to inspect boilers and cooling systems and all sorts of stuff, and this includes into majority-Black or -Asian (Muslim and otherwise) areas in Birmingham - which is not a no-go area for non-Muslims, I'm a deeply agnostic white woman, it's my nearest big city and I wish I went there more often but it's tricky as I don't drive, public transport is bad/inconvenient, and I have no friends to go with except depression and anxiety [which are worse 'friends' than the ones that I found out only liked me in high school because I always had sweets and snacks at lunch so when I got braces and my mouth hurt too much to eat much of anything which meant I certainly didn't have snacks, they dropped me pretty quickly] so apparently he's the expert on all such matters)

What I wish I'd said: *staying very calm* well, and that's your opinion, I'm going, I've got sewing to finish *leaves*

What actually happened:

Me: have you considered that they are able to buy up areas like that because white people leave because of their prejudice against the 'influx'?

Dad: they buy up great areas because they buy in groups (I think this refers to a sort of community lending thing to be compliant with various parts of Islam? [Please correct me if I'm wrong] which is effectively what building societies/credit unions were, at least to begin with, and he doesn't take issue with those) and want to stay together. Why do they do that? Sikhs don't do that, they buy big houses and aren't bothered about being close together.

Me: different religious ethoses? I don't know... But you do know that they people who want the UK to be a caliphate ruled by Sharia law are just a minority, and that most Muslims would not want that at all, just like you?

Dad: but they still do want it, and it could happen, if there was a charismatic leader,

Me: *incredulous* you know it's about as likely for that to actually happen as for strictly Orthodox Jewish people to be able to make this country into another Israel, right? Besides, there are the police, and the armed forces, and intelligence agencies, not to mention the Government and civil service (thought I'd got a win there, he hates the unchanging upper-class-public-school-Oxbridge nature of the people who effectively really run the government, constant no matter the leaning of the elected party, but no) who have a vested interest in preserving themselves in their current state so would be able to stop anything like that

Dad: yes, but the cutting of funding to police and public services means they might not be able to stop it (I realise now that he's oddly economically left-wing but also really quite socially conservative in some ways)

Me: *getting angry* but it's still an absolute minority, most Muslims would be horrified if it really did happen, and have you ever considered that maybe they wouldn't be so ill-disposed to us and to integration if we didn't demand it of them the moment that they arrive, demand that they assimilate or go away (he often uses the phrase "yes, but they're in somebody else's country, they should make an effort") and maybe young people wouldn't be so easily radicalised and people generally mistrust the people who don't try to understand them, you know, want them to change everything about themselves (for instance, Dad is violently opposed to the burqa etc and not really a fan of the hijab - still doesn't get that it's a choice and people can do what they want because apparently 'anyone could be wearing one of those things' - burqas/niqabs, I presume - and that it must all be forced because who would possibly choose to dress like that - I have half a mind to show him those sites about Christian modest dressing (one was a shop and a lot of their range was pretty cute!) that I once found, just to see if that'll prove to him it is a choice thing) *tries to leave*

Dad: *angry* You stay there and listen to me! You're just looking at it from one perspective and that's not the truth, you're so biased and closed-minded, you only look at things your way!

Me: *furious* Really? Really? Am I? *Scoffs/incredulous exhalation* I'm closed-minded, am I?... *Storms out, shouts as I go* I'm not the one who said Enoch Powell was right!!

This is all heavily paraphrased, because I've been writing this for literal hours now and I was angry and don't remember well at the best of times, it may have been worse than how I'm writing it

Also, going to be tricky to patch up but right now I stand by what I said, because I know my perspective is limited, but at least I actually admit that and try to find out what people different to me think, rather than basing all my opinions and things on my own experiences which can't be universal, as he seems to

Other bs my dad said during the two conversations: "don't get so upset about it, it's only history" (which is bold, considering it was the 50th anniversary this year and he was literally 11 years old when it happened so probably saw/heard news coverage)... "Yes of course far right groups use 'Enoch was right' as a slogan, it doesn't mean anything"... Reiterating the 'nothing changed' thing multiple times... Dismissing the fact that Powell said there'd be a civil war because apparently just because the British/Europeans were aggressive conquerors anyone else who came in numbers anywhere would eventually have that aim and how ridiculous that view actually is... Dismissing the fact that Powell basically incited racial hatred and violence with the inclusion of an irrelevant Classical phrase which spread fear on all sides...

I could go on but I'm so tired and don't want to make myself more upset

I love my parents but I really don't like them very much lately but I don't know if I just put up with it or leave sooner or later and if I do leave I don't know where I'd go because no friends

Basically I'm so sorry for my parents' prejudices which I'm still trying to unlearn myself - I apologise wholeheartedly to all Muslim and Jewish people and honestly pretty much everyone they're prejudiced against

[ofprincessesandqueens]

What bothers me about the issue there is that other people who are not Spanish, talk like they know it all. Even usual people and famous people too. Police brutality was really uncalled for and terrifying, but don't act like you know everything when you are not Spanish, I am sure that even some Spanish citizens and Catalans are not very sure of what's going on. I mean if all cities could declare independence so easily, then imagine the world would be a chaos.

TBH, it’s actually funny because it’s not like this police behaviour is unheard of in the other countries in the EU (have you seen how the german police treats the anticapitalist rallies?). It’s not like Police were acting without a Court order. So it’s not like it was uncalled of. (Also, I find it funnyy that most of the foreign outrage came from the UK, as their Brexit campaign wasn’t disgusting af).

Personally, I think it shouldn’t have happened. And maybe, it wouldn’t have happened IF ONLY the Mossos had done their job, which was, closing all the “electoral colleges” before the voting started.

But it also wouldn’t have happened if Rajoy and Puigdemont had been responsible political leaders. They tensed this situation to the end for votes. This kind of polititans are dangerous for us all. Puigdemont sent the most rabid independentists to the lions dent for a picture and Rajoy did this demonstration of force because it sounds good for his base. He had the choice to pay the price for a referendum-performance that nobody but the most rabid secesionists would accept and the “we are opressed” narrative and he chose both. 

They let no space for the rest of us (I want to think we are the majority). Citizens who know this is illegal, but think violence will not solve a thing. TBH, neither Rajoy or Puigdemont should leed the talks to negotiate and if they had some shame they should resign. What they did was disgusting. The Generalitat using kids to get pictures and the Goverment puting the Police and Guardia Civil (who were doing their job) in a dangerous position.

It also annoys me, because (while not all people are like this) this catalan nationalism is xenophobic, classist and breeds such a superiority complex. They don’t know that before the crisis the independent movement was at 24%. It started rising when the Generalitat started to excuse their cuts in education and the health system by saying that it was Spain who was stealing their money. “España nos roba”. Sounds familiar? That was what the UKIP told the british for the Brexit. Nobody remembers the “Adopta a un niño extremeño” campaign? Or the whole “la España subsidiaria vive de Cataluña”? Nobody sees it problematic now? The CCAAs work under a principle of solidarity. But fuck the poorer regions, I guess. It’s not like the Generalitat and their corrupt Goverment are a fault and their cuts were their responsability. 

Also, saying that Spain is a fascist country just because the Constitution does not allow this kind or referendum is ridiculous. Germany, France, Italy, Norway, Bulgaria, Estonia, USA, etc… All these countries preach that their nation is indivisible. None of them would have allowed this referendum. Are they fascists now too?

The UK allowed the referendum in Scotland because their Constitution does not say that this country is indivisible. Same with Canada with Quebec. It’s as basic as that.

It’s not like Catalonia does not have other choice, so people can stop pretending now that they were forced to do this. They can change the Constitution. You know how many times they asked for that change? Zero. ERC asked ONCE, formally, for a pacted referendum, but it can’t be held without changing the Constitution and there isn’t enough majority to do that. Accepting you are going to lose, it’s also part of the democracy. 

The polls say the secesionist movement is bellow 50%. A minority can’t keep forcing themselves and threatening a majority. The fact that people in Catalonia are afraid to say out loud that they are not pro-independence is disgusting. That’s it.

Sorry, I ranted.

[unsolicited-opinions]

This article is baffling to me.

It didn't say much about what Zoe Rogers and the others were charged with. Here's what Reuters says:

Seven people, aged between 20 and 51, are charged with criminal damage and aggravated burglary over an incident at the Elbit premises near Bristol in southwest England on Aug. 6.

Six of the seven have also been charged with violent disorder over the action in which, prosecutors say, a repurposed prison van was used to smash through fencing before some of the group damaged items in the warehouse with sledgehammers.

One of the group – Samuel Corner, 22 – has additionally been charged with grievous bodily harm for allegedly hitting a police officer with a sledgehammer and two charges of assault causing actual bodily harm.

Said Zoe's mom, Clare Rogers:

"Someone who believes so passionately in justice, is lamenting the deaths of innocent civilians and children. To be called a terrorist That really disgusts me. It makes me very angry and it worries me about the future of activists in this country, and the expression of free speech."

Clare, Zoe's mom, thinks that politically motivated breaking and entering, burglary, and destruction of property are somehow 'free speech?' How about hitting the cop with a sledgehammer? Was that free speech too, Clare? If Zoe 'believes so passionately in justice..." maybe she should study criminal law- because prosecuting crimes is sorta' necessary for justice.

"She is someone who is very loving and very shy," Clare says of her daughter.

...not in this instance, Clare.

And it turns out these dipshits targeted a facilty which doesn't support the IDF on any way. It supports the UK military - and that's in this same article:

Elbit Systems UK told the BBC: "We are proud to provide critical support and advanced technology to the British armed forces from our sites in Bristol, and this work has continued uninterrupted today.

"Any claims that these facilities supply the Israeli military or Israeli Ministry of Defence are completely false.”

The BBC puff piece continues:

Some UK human rights organisations are concerned the legal definition of terrorism is too wide and is increasingly being used to crack down on legitimate protest and free speech.

Hang the fuck on. None of the charges, B&E, burglary, destruction of property...none of these are covered by legal protections for free speech or protest. Where the fuck do you get off trying to pretend this is a free speech issue?

Clare Rogers continues whining about the Finding Out part of her daughter Zoe's Fucking Around:

"She should be at university now. She'd got a place to start this autumn, her first year at university," said Clare of her daughter, who has been diagnosed as autistic.

I'm autistic. Many members of my family are autistic. How is this relevant to the story?

"She worked so hard for that place. She had to do an extra year of sixth form because of Covid; she didn't get the A-levels she needed for her chosen university.

"She did another year of study, got the place, and now she can't start. She can't even start next year, because she will be standing trial. That has been devastating for her."

Yes, Clare. When one commits crimes, being held accountable for them can really get in the way of one's plans. Do you know what would have kept her goals on track? Not commiting crimes.

I don't know anything about UK criminal law or UK national security law, but the privilege coming from Clare Rogers and the enabling of the BBC is extraordinary to me.

If a US 20-year-old broke into a facility of a US military contractor and started smashing things and got caught...and their mom whined about the consequences for that criminal act, the next news cycle would be broad condemnation of that parent.

Saw an article

*girl performs an act of terrorism* "she should be in college right now."

Yeah, but funny thing when you break the law, you go to jail.

Here is the article I read about it. It's a puff piece tbh but, you do the crime, you do the time.

[brainrotallthewaydown1312]

I feel like if I'm going to contribute I should also add to the recommendations going around right now because like I said, this is my circle.

first, I'm going to double down on all of hbomb's recs. I haven't seen stuff from all of them, but I intend to correct that in the coming days. I can personally endorse Matt Baume and Alex Avila though as I've been watching them for years and they are channels that would be on this rec list even if they hadn't been in the video. as starting points, I'd recommend Matt's Why Do Gay Men Love the Golden Girls?

and Alex's Why Can't Celebrities Queerbait?

Kaz Rowe does videos mostly about history. it is often queer specific but not always. they have done biographic examinations of queer historical celebrities like James Dean and Maude Adams, and historical breakdowns of things like queer nuns and gay cowboys, to examinations of court jesters or the chaotic production of the wizard of Oz. I recommend Exploring the Wild Gay History of the YMCA as a starting point.

Jessie Gender does very well researched discussions of queer history/politics and of media with a heavy focus on star trek. her videos are often on the longer side, but the work she puts into them is evident. I personally loved her 3 part takedown of Matt Walsh, and her beginners guide to star trek, but i recommend How Hollywood Corrupts Trans Women as a starting point for her channel

Tumblr's own Strange Æons has a slightly more eclectic channel. she has icebergs about Tumblr history and quick videos with her cats, but also has long deep dives about fandom history and scandals that have happened, as well as some more general queer history. I love her reading of My Immortal and the related videos, and her breakdowns of Ms.Scribe and the Snape wives, but I recommend her recent Halloween special How Slender Man Became Real to start

Lily Simpson does breakdowns and reviews of trans representation in the media. I am the newest to her channel of everyone on this list, but her videos have quickly folded themselves into my regular watching. I love her trans episode of series where she watches episodes of shows centered around a trans character, gender bending, or a gender false and examines the representation and writing of the topic. I recommend The Trans Fairly Odd Parents Episode as a starting point

Philosophy Tube is what it says on the tin. she does videos about philosophy and social issues with the goal of sharing her philosophy degree with people and making the subject more accessible. I love her videos about philanthropy, policing, and censorship, but if you have the time for a long one I'd strongly recommend her hour and a half video I Emailed my Doctor 133 Times: The Crisis in the British Healthcare System

Crow Caller mostly does long breakdowns and reviews of books. they seem to have some of good books, but I know them for their "I read it so you don't have to" breakdowns of bad books. their videos about maximum ride, perfected, and save the pearls are my favorites but for a shorter mor digestable start i recommend You all lied to me: Tender is the Flesh is BAD, actually

Mike's Mic does long plot breakdowns of shows as well as shorter movie reviews and pop culture videos. i wouldn't call his stuff video essays per say, but i love his stuff. i listen to his breakdowns of pretty little liars and glee regularly because there is just something about them that I love. I highly recommend those, but for a shorter starting point, I recommend Scooby Doo (2002) is even better than you remember

Fundie Fridays does videos talking about politics, current events, and pop culture history relating to Christian fundamentalists and queer stuff. it is all very well researched and as someone who has family that is lost in that web and who is constantly living with the effects of the politicians Jen and James discuss on the channel, it is useful and interesting to keep up with and Fundie Fridays is one of the only sources for that I've found that I can stomach. they are well researched, coming from a critical but constructive angle, and are clearly and actively supporting the causes their subjects are against. I get this one not being for everyone but for fellow queer deconstructionists with residual interest in what the hell is going on with all of that, I highly recommend them. because of the channel focus, a lot of it is fairly heavy but for a nice easy intro to the channel I recommend Phil Vischer & Veggie Tales

Jessica Kellgren-Fozard does videos about queer history, disability advocacy, vintage clothing, and parenting. her videos are very well researched and I always find her delivery calming. she is very good at telling stories and explaining complex things in simple ways. I recommend The Bisexual Anti-Fascist // Marlene Dietrich as a starting point

i hit the link limit, so look in the notes for that last link.

I watch all of these guys regularly and think they should all have larger audiences. i have many more recs where these came from but I'll leave it at these for now

I've been seeing a lot going around about the James Somerton thing, and i have a lot of my own... complicated feelings, but i want to throw my two cents at the conversation I'm seeing. I'm putting it under a cut because 1) this is longer than I meant it to be and 2) I don't like drama and this is about as close to drama posting I'll (hopefully) ever get.

I'm going to say up front, i never watched his stuff. video essays, especially about queer history and media representation, are my bread and butter. i listen to them actively all the time, but i put them on to do chores, or art, or go to sleep pretty much every day. but I never got into James Somerton. I've heard of him and seen his videos come up in my searches and recommend. and he's come on autoplay a few times. I've always skipped him though. I narrowly avoided the hole of misinformation I see so many of you crawling out of right now. and there is a part of me that wants to puff up my chest and gloat and do the "I knew all along" dance that so many people my age do with situations like this.

but first of all, that would be a lie. yes, I did avoid his videos, but he isn't the only essayist that has just not passed my personal vibe check. it would be satisfying to be able to say shit like 'i noticed his lies/theft long ago' or 'i just had a gut feeling' 'he seemed like a hack' but that just isn't it. I never gave him enough attention for any of that to be true because I just didn't vibe with him. maybe it was his delivery or his voice or the production of it, I don't know. but he is far from the only one who makes content in that category who I skip over for failed vibe checks. and while some of them might have something going on, I'm sure some of them are lovely intelligent people with their own insights who are 'unproblematic' to whatever definition we're supposed to be using. and I'm not ever going to be the one to figure out which is which on that list, because just like James I am not giving them the chance for me to figure it out. not vibing with everyone is a natural thing. and there doesn't always have to be some big reason or gut feeling behind it.

if I had paid him any attention, I also like to think I would have noticed some of the plagiarism. especially the Alex Avila videos he ripped because I've been watching Alex for years and I've seen all his videos but specifically the Merlin one many many times, and it was so deeply transparent in its theft. but I'll never know if I actually would have because if you're not looking for it, even when it's familiar, it isn't always easy to click together why that is. and while I do do due diligence on things before I repeat them or if I plan to use it for research, I'm not sitting and fact checking and source checking when I listen to essays before bed or if I'm crocheting on my couch. it's an easy trap to fall into. I know first hand because I used to watch iilluminatii.

I haven't watched her in a few months, and while I'd like to chalk that up to having spotted the plagiarism, it was when all that interchannel drama hit. I tried to do my normal due diligence. I looked into it to see who seemed to be in the wrong with it. I have a low tolerance for that shit, so it was very tiring and I admittedly didn't do as much as I should have. and some people during that did point out the plagiarism, but they came at it in a way that it didn't seem genuine and it felt like an exaggeration of their distaste for her. it was all said in that condescending 'i already didn't like her and you're dumb for not seeing the problem' voice. partly because I was already fatigued on the drama and partly because I had been watching for so long and she does talk about her sources below, I didn't look into it. that was around when I stopped, and when I did it was more from fatigue on trying to sort the drama and the allegations and all of that out. I just wanted a rest from it. so I just gave up. and I had been a little disillusioned by that but a part of me was still hit by seeing how egregious it was in hbomb's video. because how had I not noticed that?

which brings me back to James. even if I had 'just known,' or been a fan who was already disillusioned, or I had caught the plagiarism, none of that would be a constructive addition to the conversation everyone is having right now. I know that. I've seen it over and over again with various cancellations. and I am just now processing how it effected my ability to follow up on the iilluminatii allegations months ago. I had no excuse to be finding out about that with everyone else, I was recently researching that actively. but I was getting so tripped up in the hipster zoomer discourse that I wasn't able to actually do the research objectively and I just gave up. and I know I am far from the only one to experience this. turning a genuine problem like this into an interpersonal drama issue and gloating about how soon you noticed or how obvious it is or any of that devalues the entire conversation. it drives people away from the discussion and makes them feel worse than they need to.

there are big waves right now. people talking about plagiarism and how to find it. what the penalty should be. how to more accurately define it. there are people grieving the loss of a parasocial support they had. people making recommendations for replacements. people looking for those recommendations. people afraid to because they don't want to be tricked again. these are all important conversations, and many of them are difficult. but there are also people gloating about noticing it sooner. or not having watched him. or having eagle eyes for plagiarism. or whatever else. and that doesn't help anyone. like I said. I get the temptation. it feels good to squeak by without getting hit when someone like this does something big and bad. and it feels good to be ahead of the curve. but it doesn't help the people who are hurting. the people he stole from and the people he lied to are already processing that. they don't need to be talked down to. and it doesn't help the wider conversation that people are having about plagiarism. that conversation is moving forward and you are stuck arguing about what you knew when.

I guess my main point is this: it's a shitty situation all around. it has left so many victims in its wake. most obviously and directly the people he stole from, but also the people who trusted him who he lied to, and the people who his misinformation will affect even if they never heard of him. and there are a lot of people processing and hurting right now. and there are a lot of conversations happening about how this coming to light can help prevent it from continuing to happen at scales like this. and conversations about people making similar stuff themselves that is properly researched where any incorrect information is accidental and likely to be corrected. and if you have to weigh in to those, do so constructively. say what you need to about what he did or about what is being said, but don't turn it into a sleuthing competition or a party trick that you figured it out first. don't post about how heavy handed and egregious it was and how everyone had to have noticed. don't guilt and shame the people who are processing. find something positive to say. find something comforting to say. the situation is shitty enough without unnecessary negativity clogging everything up