#perpetrator: julia

[episodes-without-incident]

4/23/2024:

0 episodes since Drawfee last referenced Cats (2019)

21 episodes since Drawfee last referenced Everytime We Touch (2005) (new record!)

[butchniqabi]

mainstream anti-violence movements will always lose me not only for being cozied up with the carceral state, but for the beliefs they perpetuate about abuse and abusers. theres this belief by and large that victims and abusers are two different breeds of people and that the labels never overlap whatsoever which is crazy to me considering how many people in prison for violent crimes right now are themselves victims of some sort of violence. this is obviously not to say that survivors are destined to become abusers Or that abusive behaviour can be excused away, but damn if it doesnt feel weird and frustrating to have conversations with people who not only have this victim/abuser mindset but also (as julia serano says) the prey/predator mindset. where does victimhood end? where does perpetrator begin? where do we abandon hope of change? why do we believe carceral violence is the only protection? and finally, who benefits from all these beliefs?

[ivycopper]

So, a third survivor has come forward, and she took great care choosing the outlet, it seems. I really liked this episode (only one I've listened to from the podcast so far), bc it really centres her, not him.

Claire's amazing. The way she's making sure to mention that autistic ppl are more likely to experience SA than to become a perpetrator - she didn't have to do that, it's not her responsibility. She seems really sweet and strong. And the host seems to be a really lovely person as well, and they give her plenty of time to choose her words and just really...talk.

EDIT: In the meantime, an additional two women, Caroline and Julia, have come forward and talked to Tortoise Media, the original outlet that broke the stories of Scarlett and K.

[recoord]

More thoughts on supporting GO S3

I will always be grateful to GO for giving me comfort in troubling times, but now I find it difficult to support a new season of the series that mainly benefits an alleged perpetrator.

Five credible sexual assault allegations against Neil Gaiman and he's still capable of successfuly releasing another project under his name. Season 3 being released helps him to keep his status as a lucrative creator in the entertainment industry and this helps him to conserve the power that has allowed him to get away with it for so long. His PR team has been making a great work burying the news about the allegations and sadly people hyping Good Omens season 3, without mentioning the allegations, inadvertendly helped on this as well.

However, my opinion will not determine the future of the season. We could assume that Amazon has already invested a lot in the production to just abandon it, so the second best thing would be to ask Amazon to fire Gaiman, he could secretly keep working on the series and the scripts were mainly written by him (the actors and everyone involved will voice Gaiman's words, ugh), and the series will be promoted undeniably mentioning him as one of the creators (I'm sorry for the victims having to hear people praising his name everywhere once again :c), but luckily the news about the allegations would also spread further, more people would come to know about the dangers of Gaiman's predatory behaviour and he would see some consequences.

I still think that cancelling the season would be the best case scenario, but firing him resoundingly and making the reasons for his dismissal heard far and wide might be a reasonable middle ground.

This is just my opinion, but I understand that at the end of the day it's an individual decision whether or not to support the third season.

I'm just going to ask everyone to please reflect on the power Gaiman gains from the projects that are released under his name (not just financially).

Thanks to everyone who has spoken up about the SA accusations even if it hurt to learn that someone who helped create such beloved stories ended up doing so much damage as well.

Here there is a great post that presents actions that fans can take in support of firing Gaiman, still having Season 3, and not ignoring that the allegations exist.

(Petitions, extra steps, etc.)

Thanks a lot to the creator of the card!

Update:

It has been confirmed that both Gaiman and his own production company are out of the project, thanks to everyone who supported his dismissal! [Erratum below]

The changes made for the GO final serve as a message to the creators and everyone abusing of their power:

If you harm people, it will not be without consequences for you and the things you profit from financially and professionally.

Power to the victims. They were brave enough to share their stories. You will never be forgotten.

Scarlett, K, Claire, Caroline, Julia, Courtnee...

Still sceptical about supporting the victims? I recommend reading:

Staying neutral until Neil Gaiman is convicted by the courts?

Falling Safes (I very much recommend reading this one)

Here there is a great summary of the available sources (Podcasts links, transcripts, etc.): Credits for the round up to Muccamukk.

Thank you to all those who continue to speak out about the allegations and do not let the voices of the victims fall into oblivion.

Update 2:

Erratum

The situation about the current business relationship between Gaiman and Amazon has more specific and complex details better detailed in the image below (credits and thanks to the author of the post).

Source

[molsno]

As I chronicle in Sexed Up, there is a tendency—especially in people who are already apprehensive about sex and sexuality—to view heavily stigmatized groups as "sexually corrupting" and thus constituting a "sexual threat," particularly to those deemed most "vulnerable"—specifically, women and children. But not just any women and children; only those of the dominant/majority group, who are imagined to be "pure" and "untainted." This explains why fears of "transgender sexual predators" in women's restrooms are so pervasive despite numerous studies showing that trans people and trans-inclusion policies pose no such threat, and why accusations of trans people "grooming" and "sexualizing" children resonate with many people despite the fact that child sexual abuse is overwhelmingly perpetrated by cis-hetero men who are family members or close acquaintances of the child in question.

—Julia Serano, Whipping Girl (3rd Edition), p 383

[faxxmachine]

This is not a book review of A Little Life

So I read A Little Life and while I was gripped, I did not love it and the further away I get from reading, the more annoyed I about a few narrative choices. Some of them are what everyone else feels pissed off about but I have two that I keep coming back to that just seem so fucking unlikely to me: spoilers ahead.

Annoyed by the lack of women characters that were anything other than accessories, even Julia who was just kinda there. Not because I think Jude would be saved by women's inherent trauma-healing abilities or something, but because it's just really fucking unlikely? Also unlikely that no one he knew was also a survivor of some form of abuse and might have had a flicker of recognition, might have said something to him or to his friends?

Harold's narrative at the end in which he lists off the litany of people who died. Really pissed about Andy and Richard especially. Felt very cheap.

The embolism was so dumb. Just straight stupid. Difficult and unreliable besides being absurd.

I'm not annoyed as much as some about the insane wealth aspect. Jude worked really hard on his isolation and for this story to work he had to have the means to shape his life into a kind of bespoke safe space so he very rarely had to do things he did not want to do including Talk About It (until not talking about it got in the way of keeping Willem and even then it was not to help himself but to manipulate).

Ok, so. The two things: hearing survivor stories and the law.

Everyone was trying so hard to get Jude to talk to a therapist. Did anyone think that maybe what he needed was to listen to someone else? Is the point supposed to be that Willem is such a dunce that he did not consider doing some reading and maybe sharing what he's read? Did neither of them ever consume media of any kind because CSA and its effects on survivors is, while not exactly everywhere, it is very much out there and kind of difficult to avoid in the west. Fairly sure Willem might have done a film or a play? A NYT bestselling book everyone read? Representations on this theme in art shows? In music? In the news and in documentaries? There's no way Jude's bubble was that airtight. There's no way Andy was not talking to his own therapist about Jude, about his refusal to talk, or about how to get through to a stubborn self-destroyer such as he.

Jude did not Talk About It in a therapeutic sense at any point and that's emphasised as a thing that he regrets, that he feels he should have done so with Ana or around then, and that he thinks it is too late now. But I find it very difficult to believe he could have gone 50 years of his life without hearing, even incidentally, from other survivors of CSA. The sense that he was singular in his experience, that he was somehow meant for the abuse, that the cause of it was some inherent thing about his own person is common among survivors. It is also horseshit and easy to disprove with examples. It's also something I felt I wanted to confront him with myself when he was defending his refusals: do you think other children who have suffered similar also deserved it? Do you think they were not told they were made for it? Do you think CSA is that rare? Do you have a theory of mind for the perpetrators and a notion that they chose to hurt a child, and that it is wrong to do so (yes, even you)?

Also, he studied law. He did not specialise in criminal law (or seem remotely interested in it) but can someone studying law actually avoid learning about laws surrounding CSA almost completely? No triggers for him there? No thoughts on justice regarding other children? No pause in his self-flagellation to consider for one moment that maybe he is not to blame but the perpetrators? No? Just never came up anywhere?

????????

Anyway, it was beautifully written in places and I enjoyed the tender odes to love, life, family and friendship.

[djuvlipen]

Wanna learn about women history and WWII? Here is a non-exhaustive list to get you started

German women and the Nazi regime

Mothers in the Fatherland: Women, the Family and Nazi Politics, Claudia Koonz

Female SS Guards and Workaday Violence: The Majdanek Concentration Camp, 1942-1944, Elissa Mailänder

Zwangssterilisation im Nationalsozialismus: Studien zur Rassenpolitik und Frauenpolitik, Gisela Bock

Hitler's Furies: German Women in the Nazi Killing Fields, Wendy Lower

"Backlash against Prostitutes' Rights: Origins and Dynamics of Nazi Prostitution Policies," in Journal of the History of Sexuality Julia Roos

"German Women and the Holocaust in the Nazi East," Wendy Lower, in Women and Genocide, Elissa Bemporad & Joyce W. Warren

Frausein im Dritten Reich, Rita Thalmann

Women as victims or perpetrators of the Holocaust (general)

"Women and the Holocaust: A Reconsideration of Research," in Signs, Joan Ringelheim

Women in the Holocaust, Dalia Ofer & Lenore J. Weitzman

Das KZ-Bordell: Sexuelle Zwangsarbeit in nationalsozialistischen Konzentrationslagern, Robert Sommer

SS-Bordelle und Oral History. Problematische Quellen und die Existenz von Bordellen für die SS in Konzentrationslagern, Christa Paul & Robert Sommer

Sexual Violence during the Holocaust—The Case of Forced Prostitution in the Warsaw Ghetto, in Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, Katarzyna Person

"Gender: A Crucial Tool in Holocaust Research," Marion Kaplan, in Women and Genocide, Elissa Bemporad & Joyce W. Warren

Different Voices: Women and the Holocaust, Carol Rittner & John K. Roth

Resilience and Courage: Women, Men, and the Holocaust, Nechema Tec

« Reframing Sexual Violence as a Weapon and Strategy of War: The Case of the German Wehrmacht during the War and Genocide in the Soviet Union, 1941–1944 », in Journal of the History of Sexuality, Regina Mühlhäuser

Sex and the Nazi soldier. Violent, commercial and consensual encounters during the war in the Soviet Union, 1941-45, Regina Mülhäuser

Romani women during the Holocaust

« Krieg im Frieden im Krieg: Reading the Romani Holocaust in terms of race, gender and colonialism », Eve Rosenhaft

« Hidden Lives : Sinti and Roma Women », Sybil Milton

« Romani women and the Holocaust Testimonies of Sexual Violence in Transnistria », Michelle Kelso

"No Shelter to Cry In: Romani Girls and Responsibility during the Holocaust," Michelle Kelso, in Women and Genocide, Elissa Bemporad & Joyce W. Warren

Jewish women during the Holocaust

Jewish women's sexual behaviour and sexualized abuse during the Nazi era, in The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, Beverley Chalmers

Sexual Violence against Jewish Women During the Holocaust, Sonja M. Hedgepeth & Rochelle G. Saidel

Persecution of lesbians by the Nazis

Days of Masquerade: Life Stories of Lesbians during the Third Reich, Claudia Schoppmann

Nationalsozialistische Sexualpolitik und weibliche Homosexualität, Claudia Schoppmann

“This Kind of Love”: Descriptions of Lesbian Behaviour in Nazi Concentration Camps, from Nationalsozialistische Sexualpolitik und weibliche Homosexualität, Claudia Schoppmann

Queer in Europe during the Second World War, Regis Schlagdenhauffen

Ravensbrück

Ravensbrück. Everyday Life in a Woman’s Concentration Camp 1939-45, Jack G. Morrison

Ravensbruck: Life and Death in Hitler's Concentration Camp for Women, Sarah Helm

Women and the Memory of WWII

Women, Genocide, and Memory: The Ethics of Feminist Ethnography in Holocaust Research, in Gender & Society, Janet Jacobs

Lessons Learned from Gentle Heroism: Women's Holocaust Narratives, in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Myrna Goldenberg

« An Austrian Roma Family Remembers: Trauma and Gender in Autobiographies by Ceija, Karl, and Mongo Stojka », Lorely French

Beyond Survival: Navigating Women's Personal Narratives of Sexual Violence in the Holocaust, Roy Schwartzman

Comfort Women and imperial Japan

Comfort Women: Sexual Slavery in the Japanese Military During World War II, Yoshimi Yoshiaki

The Comfort Women: Japan’s Brutal Regime of Enforced Prostitution in the Second World War, George Hicks

The Japanese Comfort Women and Sexual Slavery During the China and Pacific Wars, Caroline Norma

Lola's House: Filipino Women Living With War, Evelina Galang

Soviet Women during WWII

« “Girls” and “Women”. Love, Sex, Duty and Sexual Harassment in the Ranks of the Red Army 1941-1945 », in The Journal of Power Institutions in Post-Soviet Societies, Brandon M. Schechter

Soviet Women on the Frontline in the Second World War, Roger D. Markwick & Euridice Charon Cardona

Soviet Women in Combat. A History of Violence on the Eastern Front, Anna Krylova

[machine-saint]

In the years since Whipping Girl was published, the term “trans-misogyny” has taken on a life of its own, and people now use it in ways that I never intended. Specifically, I used the term to describe how the existence of societal misogyny/traditional sexism greatly informs how people perceive, interpret, or treat gender-variant people who seemingly “want to be female” or “want to be feminine” (regardless of their actual identity). However, many people nowadays use the word “trans-misogyny” in an identity-based manner to refer to any and all forms of discrimination targeting trans women. According to this latter usage, some would argue that people who identify as men, or male crossdressers, or drag queens, cannot possibly experience trans-misogyny—a close reading of Whipping Girl will reveal that I very much disagree with this premise. (See Chapter 48 of this book for a detailed explanation regarding why identity-based views of marginalization tend to be inaccurate and exclusive.)

--Julia Serano (emphasis mine)

this doesn't mean that Serano thinks that TME/TMA are bad terms (she doesn't use them herself but finds that there is a core justifiable thought there)

compare also her essay on cissexism (a term that sadly seems to have fallen out of vocabulary) and the difference between "decentering the dominant group" and "reverse discourse":

In other words, cissexism is part of an overarching system that (along with other forms of sexism) works to keep all people in their place. Thus, any person can face cissexism.

Take, for instance, an otherwise cisgender man who never had a gender-variant thought in his life. If he were to suddenly, on a whim, decide to wear a dress to work, he would very likely face cissexist ridicule and harassment on his way to his job, and possibly even get fired from his job as a result. If an otherwise cisgender woman who never had a gender-variant thought in her life decided that she was tired of plucking all the hairs on her chin and upper lip (which a considerable number of women experience), she would surely face cissexist reactions and comments once her facial hair grows out. In fact, cissexism (or at least the threat of it) is the force behind both the low level gender anxiety faced by cisgender people who worry that they will be perceived as insufficiently feminine or masculine if they do “the wrong thing,” as well as the more severe forms of gender policing and punishment experienced by those of us who more regularly or blatantly transgress gender norms.

By no means does this decentering the binary perspective suggest that all people are equally hurt by societal cissexism. Clearly, some of us grapple with cissexism on a routine basis, while other people experience it infrequently and/or far less severely. But the decentering approach does encourage us to challenge all expressions of cissexism, regardless of who the perpetrator or target is.

and so I don't think we have to throw away the terms TMA/TME entirely, but we do need to use the terms in a way that doesn't suggest that only people with certain identities can be TMA; i think a cis man who wears dresses and skirts as his usual attire could very well be TMA depending on the reaction of the society he's in!

[saimotass]

unfortunately i do like the coffin of andy and leyley. however! i'm not one of those weirdos that ships andrew and ashley together, and you shouldn't be either! anyway more thoughts on my stance below the cut

i'm not a fan of the fact that the incest is there - i understand why, as another way that ashley can manipulate andrew's emotions and affections, and it's supported as an interpretation in the text. but their relationship could still be just as toxic and codependent as it is in-game without that being a canonized route. the overtones and subtext will be there regardless, and i do view it as part of andrew's character that he has a subconscious attraction to ashley, but there are other ways for their dynamic to change other than canonizing and romanticizing the romantic undertones of their relationship.

i understand that it's fictional and that it's also not the only morally reprehensible thing that the graves siblings do in the game. however, the incestuous dynamic between them only manifests on the route where they're both still alive and both coming to more of an understanding with one another. while, yes, neither route is a particularly good one for either of them, the questionable route being an offshoot of the burial route (the route where ashley continues to get everything she wants out of andrew) inherently paints the dynamic as a better solution than ashley and andrew getting their comeuppance for their crimes.

i am aware that not every story needs a moral backbone - some of the best stories have reprehensible things happen in them and their perpetrators never see retribution. however, when people outside of those stories read them, they affect reality and their perception of it. all good stories do. no matter what, fiction does affect reality and the way we interact with it, because fiction is inherently based in reality - even sci-fi, fantasy, speculative fiction.

people actively shipping and glorifying the incestuous dynamic between andrew and ashley affects the perception of incestuous dynamics in the real world for those people. ignoring the manipulative tactics that led to that route leads to more tolerance of those manipulative tactics. even when people claim that they know better, it still affects their perception, even the slightest bit. and people who aren't aware of the context seeing their incestuous relationship being glorified will assume the context makes the situation more palatable than it actually is.

ashley's been really good at manipulation thus far, it stands to reason that she could probably figure out a way to keep andrew along without resorting to incest. he's already pretty clearly devoted to her as an older brother, she could keep using their familial relationship as a means of manipulating him, or hell, eventually if andrew ends up fighting back there could be a route where she kills him and ends up using another person later, this time with romantic and/or sexual motivations. i've seen suggestions that it could even end up being julia, which would both make sense and add to the fucked up nature of ashley's motivations and manipulation.

andrew's underlying attraction to his sister could be refuted more openly and clearly. his reactions to other people noticing their dynamic could be more overtly against the idea. he could start trying to distance himself from her as a means of putting a boundary. he could be more forceful with setting up that boundary with her when she teases him about it. all of the reactions in-game lead people to assume that andrew wants this, potentially even more than ashley, and that because of that, it's okay because they're "consenting" to it.

there is no consent in this relationship - ashley has been manipulating him since they were kids, their power dynamic is uneven and leads to ashley taking advantage of his emotions, and ashley's been essentially grooming him into seeing her as the only woman in his life for years at this point. not saying andrew is without fault here, but putting myself in that position, if i had a younger sister who threatened me for a murder i was an unwilling accomplice to, all because she was jealous that i was starting to have a life of my own with people that aren't her, i would have felt similarly helpless.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Julia Serano at Switch Hitter:

Back in 2021, I penned the essay Transgender People, Bathrooms, and Sexual Predators: What the Data Say. It is a response to claims that we supposedly pose a threat to women and girls in sex-segregated spaces, and it also tackles the related anti-trans talking point that we are supposedly “grooming” or “sexualizing” children. The first part of the essay reviews numerous studies that together show that trans people are victims (not perpetrators) of harassment and abuse in public restrooms. The rest of the piece delves into the long history of the “sexual predator” stereotype and how it has been wielded against other marginalized groups (including LGB people during Anita Bryant’s infamous “Save Our Children” campaign of the 1970s). Last November, when it seemed clear that the GOP was likely to introduce a federal trans bathroom ban, I thought it would be useful to adapt that essay into a YouTube video so that it could reach even more people. That video just came out! You can watch it below—please share widely!

Julia Serano expertly debunks the transphobic “bathroom predator” myth which falsely insinuates that trans women/girls are a “threat” to women’s/girl’s spaces.

YouTube video:

[walker-extended-universe]

Walker Episode Bracket

"Blinded by the Light" took "Cry Uncle" by a landslide! But how will it fare against 3x11, "Past is Prologue"?

In this episode, Cordell lets Cassie in on what he and Julia discovered in the last episode. Cassie is miffed that he's trusting Julia so wholeheartedly and suggests checking in on some of the odd deaths first. This leads to him confronting the widow of one of his old Marine buddies and experiencing some painful flashbacks. After mostly confirming Julia's theory true, they decide to go check in on the last remaining Marine, Tommy, to make sure he hasn't been taken in by Grey Flag as well. Unfortunately, they get there too late and Tommy is nearly dead at the hands of a Grey Flag assailant. Cassie goes chasing after the perpetrator while Cordell stays by his Marine brother's side. Cassie's chase, unfortunately, ends in the death of the man who killed Tommy, but it does yield evidence that forces them to call James and let him in on what they know.

In the meantime, it looks like Trey has found a new job opportunity with some shady individuals that give him an odd "test" to confirm if he's right for the job. Just when we fear that he's going to the dark side, we learn that this whole mess was actually a setup for him to go on an undercover mission.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Stella and Liam are working on setting up the horse rescue. Bonham isn't exactly pleased that his son is leaving the family business but, after some thought and talking with Abby, he's mostly just happy to see his son so passionate about something again, even if it wasn't the path he would've chosen for Liam.

taglist: @ihavepointysticks

[episodes-without-incident]

10/5/2023:

0 episodes since Drawfee last referenced Cats (2019)

1 episode since Drawfee last referenced Everytime We Touch (2005)

[whileiamdying]

A Movie Confronts Germany’s Other Genocide

“Measures of Men” tells the story of the systematic massacre of Herero and Nama people in what is now Namibia. Its maker hopes the film will bring a debate about Germany’s colonial guilt into the center of society.

Leonard Scheicher, left, and Girley Jazama in “Measures of Men,” which tells the story of the Herero and Nama genocide in what now Namibia through the eyes of a German anthropologist.Credit...Julia Terjung/Studiocanal GmbH

By Thomas Rogers Reporting from Berlin March 31, 2023

Germany is often praised for its willingness to confront the darkest moments of its history, but in recent years, activists have pointed to a blank spot in the country’s culture of remembrance. Decades before the Holocaust, Germany perpetrated the 20th century’s first genocide: From 1904 to 1908, German colonial officials systematically killed tens of thousands of Herero and Nama people in what is now Namibia. This atrocity is little known outside academic circles, and there are few memorials or pop cultural depictions of those events.

Now, a new movie, “Measures of Men,” aims to change that and bring a debate about Germany’s colonial guilt into the center of society. The glossy film, directed by the German filmmaker Lars Kraume, tells the story of the killings through the eyes of a German anthropologist. Aside from playing in movie theaters, where it opened last week, “Measures of Men” had a special screening for lawmakers in Germany’s Parliament, and was the focal point for a series of events at the Humboldt Forum, a central Berlin museum housing ethnological items. Its distributor, Studiocanal, said in a statement that it was planning to show the film in school and educational contexts.

“Measures of Men” has also prompted a new discussion in the German media about what many see as Germany’s sluggish attempts to come to terms with its colonial past. In recent years, the country has moved to return numerous artworks acquired during the colonial period, but the process of ratifying a reconciliation agreement between Namibia and Germany has stalled, and thousands of African human remains, transported to Germany from its colonies, remain in institutional collections.

In an interview in Berlin, Kraume, 50, explained that his movie was partly inspired by the 1978 NBC mini-series “Holocaust,” an early fictionalized TV depiction of the Shoah, which played a key role in spreading awareness of German guilt after it was broadcast here. “You have the possibility through cinematic storytelling to reach an audience that doesn’t engage so much with history books,” he said, adding that he hoped his film would be the first of many, much in the way “Holocaust” paved the way for films like “Schindler’s List.”

Lars Kraume, who directed “Measures of Men,” said, “You have the possibility through cinematic storytelling to reach an audience that doesn’t engage so much with history books.”Credit...Gordon Welters for The New York Times

“Measures of Men,” which was filmed in Berlin and Namibia, focuses on an ambitious German ethnologist (Leonard Scheicher) who develops a fascination with a Herero woman (Girley Jazama) after measuring her cranial features as part of his research. His fixation leads him to travel to German South West Africa (now Namibia), where he witnesses and eventually become complicit in the colonial slaughter.

“It’s not just a film about the genocide,” Kraume said, “but also about ethnologists who want to explore foreign cultures, but destroy them.”

Many of the scenes were based on real events of the genocide, which took place during a conflict between Germans and Africans known as the Herero and Nama War. After thousands of Herero men, women and children fled into the Omaheke Desert in 1904 to escape the fighting, German troops sealed off its edges and occupied the territory’s water holes, leading many to die of thirst. Lothar von Trotha, the governor of the colony, then issued a proclamation calling for all remaining Herero to be killed.

After the Nama joined the fight against the German colonizers, they were also targeted, and colonial officials set up concentration camps, ostensibly to provide labor for German-owned businesses, in which hundreds of prisoners died. The film depicts real facilities in one such camp in which the decapitated heads of Herero and Nama were boiled and cleaned for export to German ethnological institutions. Thousands of skulls of unclear origin remain in German collections to this day.

Kraume long wrestled with how to tell the story as a European filmmaker, and said he had decided to depict it from a German perspective for fear that centering it on African protagonists would represent a form of “cultural appropriation.” At one point in the development, he hoped to structure it similarly to Hollywood films about the Vietnam War, such as “Platoon” and “Apocalypse Now,” that center their plots on conflicts between “good” and “bad” American soldiers. “But there were actually no good Germans,” Kraume said.

Girley Jazama, who plays the movie’s female lead, discovered that her great-grandmother has been born in a German-run concentration camp while researching to play the role.Credit...Gordon Welters for The New York Times

Jazama, an acclaimed Namibian actress who plays Kezia Kambazembi, the film’s lead female role, learned German to play her part. In preparation for the role, she spoke to relatives about her family’s connection to the genocide and discovered that her great-grandmother had been conceived in a German-run concentration camp. “My ancestors need to be at peace,” she said in an interview. “That’s why I became a part of this story.”

Jazama said that, though the film had largely been made to spur discussion in Germany, it had also been a talking point in Namibia, where the events of the genocide had often been passed down via family members. “A lot of people are grateful,” she said, recalling that one audience member had shared appreciation that “now there is a visual representation of what happened, versus just it being told orally.”

The reaction in Germany has been more mixed. Writing in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper, the critic Bert Rebhandl wrote that the film focused too much on “German self-understanding” while pushing African perspectives to its edges. A writer in the Süddeutsche Zeitung argued that the film depicts too little of the genocide to transmit the scope of the killing and it does not do “justice to the horror.”

Henning Melber, a political scientist who has written extensively about German colonialism, said that criticism of the film shouldn’t distract from its potential role in remedying what he described as Germany’s “colonial amnesia.” He said that the film “triggers a debate in a wider German public in a way that none of us academics can achieve.”

Kraume emphasized that, although “Measures of Men” was meant to appeal to a mass audience, it was an explicitly “political film,” and that its rollout was partly engineered to spur a discussion. He hoped the screening for lawmakers would drive politicians to work harder at compensating the Herero and Nama, he added.

A scene from “Measures of Men.” In 1904, thousands of Herero people fled from German soldiers into the Omaheke Desert, where many died of thirst.Credit...Willem Vrey/Studiocanal GmbH

Although Namibian and German authorities agreed in 2021 on the terms of a reconciliation agreement, including around $1.1 billion in aid that Germany would pay over the next 30 years, the process has since come under fire from groups representing victims’ descendants, who argue that amount is too low, and say they were unfairly left out of the negotiation process. The Namibian government has since backtracked on plans to ratify the agreement, and the German authorities have resisted calls by the Namibians to reopen talks.

Kraume said Germany’s president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, should travel to Namibia and officially apologize for the genocide, and that all human remains still held in Germany should be returned. “Europe has done far too little to reconcile with victims,” he said. “I think cinema allows us to awaken emotions, and implant images that can let you see events differently,” he said. “But this is only the beginning of the discussion.”

[charlotte-of-wales]

Oh Eugenie has a podcast

Princess Eugenie has launched the second series of her podcast Floodlight, which aims to raise awareness around issues of modern slavery and human trafficking.

The podcast is presented by The Anti-Slavery Collective, the nonprofit organisation that Eugenie co-founded with her friend Julia de Boinville in 2017 after a visit to a safehouse for trafficked women in India.

The ten-part series sees the pair speaking to a range of guests including survivors, activists and lawmakers, with the first episode featuring former UK Prime Minister Theresa May. Other guests include British NFL player Efe Obada who was trafficked to the UK as a child, and actor Marisol Nichols who works with law enforcement to catch perpetrators.

"Across ten episodes, Julia and I have been lucky enough to speak to some incredible people who are campaigning to end modern slavery in all its forms,” Eugenie said. “Listeners will learn how this is very much a hidden crime; and touches all sectors of society. Together, we can do something about this. Join us as we bring together change-makers and raise awareness in the fight against modern slavery."

https://www.podpod.com/article/1844640/princess-eugenie-launches-second-series-anti-slavery-podcast

I stand corrected.

[recoord]

About the 90-minute episode

The word "deserve" sounds so strange in this context...

It's sad and bizarre to see this situation reduced to:

Satirical poll ofc.

I understand that fans are sad to have a shortened version of the ending, (it's okay to feel sad about unexpected changes), but let's not forget that the fact that Amazon did not ignore the sexual assault allegations against Neil Gaiman and made changes is an important and great decision. There were real lives affected by Gaiman's actions.

It goes beyond the fictional characters. For those who want closure (in the form of a TV adaptation), Aziraphale and Crowley will have one, and all without involving Gaiman's active presence, which would have endangered the people working on the set. That the series was made unchanged would also have benefited an alleged rapist financially (indeed, he will continue to benefit from being one of the creators, but the profits are now significantly reduced) and, of course, would have helped maintain his status in the entertainment industry despite the accusations.

The changes made for the GO final serve as a message to the creators: If you harm people, it will not be without consequences for you and the things you profit from financially and professionally.

Power to the [alleged] victims. They were brave enough to share their stories. You will never be forgotten. You are the ones who deserve better:

Scarlett, K, Claire, Caroline, Julia, Courtnee...

Thanks to the fans who express their sadness, but do not forget and acknowledge the important reasons behind the changes to the final.

Edit: Reading this again, I want to make it clear it wasn't my intention to tell fans how to feel. I feel empathy for fans being upset about these changes as well, I just wanted to throw light on the reasons for such changes and their importance. Fans shouldn't be harassed for expressing their concern around the series they like. However, I keep mentioning the SA allegations because they are also a crucial part of the conversation about the changes to the final season.

[cyclopsboxhead]

Toby Carlisle is so interesting!!! Dude was experimenting with meat as a means of serving the Corruption!!! That’s some A+ cross promotion right there. “Where was he getting all the meat?” I think it was from Tom Haan. Tom is easily the avatar with the most drive to experiment with other entities. He works with the Distortion to torment Father Edwin Burroughs. Plus through process of elimination Jared Hopworth is an expert on bones, Angela’s whole modus operandi is taking pieces away from a living thing. But Tom Haan has been able to get large quantities of meat before, for the attempted ritual detailed in Mag130. I don’t think he’s getting this meat through supernatural means (although it is possible considering the bag of teeth in “Thrown Away,” and the pile of fingers in “Takeaway”). I fully believe the pile of meat that “opens all of its eyes” is a side project specifically requested by Tom Haan, or perhaps a way for him to check on Toby Carlisle’s progress. Either way it’s the part of the statement that is purely of the Flesh. Maybe it’s even the thing that got Toby Carlisle in the end, the line between fear inflictor and fear victim is often blurred in this series, for example the Montauk family has suffered greatly at the hands of the Dark, but the terror Robert and his duaghter Julia inflicted on others is also great. Toby could’ve been a victim for the flesh just as much as he was a perpetrator for the Corruption. Season one and five both share the sentiment; at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter what entity is behind it, it’s still fear.

Toby Carlisle isn’t even the only Corruption related person that tries to become one with the rot, Jane’s attempted portal in the tunnels below the archives could have been to the same effect. Even the way Prentiss’s victims “bloomed” after a while is similar in image to Toby Carlisle’s body resting on the soft and rotting meat and slowly letting them take him. Rot and mold decays but it also grows out of things.

Anyway I probably sound insane, but much to think about. Sad we never got a statement from Tom Haan and never got to meet him in season 5.