#video marketing in 2019 | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

ohgaylor · 9 months

Text

In 2006, the year Taylor Swift released her first single, a closeted country singer named Chely Wright, then 35, held a 9-millimeter pistol to her mouth. Queer identity was still taboo enough in mainstream America that speaking about her love for another woman would have spelled the end of a country music career. But in suppressing her identity, Ms. Wright had risked her life.

In 2010, she came out to the public, releasing a confessional memoir, “Like Me,” in which she wrote that country music was characterized by culturally enforced closeting, where queer stars would be seen as unworthy of investment unless they lied about their lives. “Country music,” she wrote, “is like the military — don’t ask, don’t tell.”

The culture in which Ms. Wright picked up that gun — the same one in which Ms. Swift first became a star — was stunningly different from today’s. It’s dizzying to think about the strides that have been made in Americans’ acceptance of the L.G.B.T.Q. community over the past decade: marriage equality, queer themes dominating teen entertainment, anti-discrimination laws in housing and, for now, in the workplace. But in recent years, a steady drip of now-out stars — Cara Delevingne, Colton Haynes, Elliot Page, Kristen Stewart, Raven-Symoné and Sam Smith among them — have disclosed that they had been encouraged to suppress their queerness in order to market projects or remain bankable.

The culture of country music hasn’t changed so much that homophobia is gone. Just this past summer, Adam Mac, an openly gay country artist, was shamed out of playing at a festival in his hometown because of his sexual orientation. In September, the singer Maren Morris stepped away from country music; she said she did so in part because of the industry’s lingering anti-queerness. If country music hasn’t changed enough, what’s to say that the larger entertainment industry — and, by extension, our broader culture — has?

Periodically, I return to a video, recorded by a shaky hand more than a decade ago, of Ms. Wright answering questions at a Borders bookstore about her coming out. She likens closeted stardom to a blender, an “insane” and “inhumane” heteronormative machine in which queer artists are chewed to bits.

“It’s going to keep going,” Ms. Wright says, “until someone who has something to lose stands up and just says ‘I’m gay.’ Somebody big.” She continues: “We need our heroes.”

What if someone had already tried, at least once, to change the culture by becoming such a hero? What if, because our culture had yet to come to terms with homophobia, it wasn’t ready for her?

What if that hero’s name was Taylor Alison Swift?

In the world of Taylor Swift, the start of a new “era” means the release of new art (an album and the paratexts — music videos, promotional ephemera, narratives — that supplement it) and a wholesale remaking of the aesthetics that will accompany its promotion, release and memorializing. In recent years, Ms. Swift has dominated pop culture to such a degree that these transformations often end up altering American culture in the process.

In 2019, she was set to release a new album, “Lover,” the first since she left Big Machine Records, her old Nashville-based label, which she has since said limited her creative freedom. The aesthetic of what would be known as the “Lover Era” emerged as rainbows, butterflies and pastel shades of blue, purple and pink, colors that subtly evoke the bisexual pride flag.

On April 26, Lesbian Visibility Day, Ms. Swift released the album’s lead single, “ME!,” in which she sings about self-love and self-acceptance. She co-directed a campy music video to accompany it, which she would later describe as depicting “everything that makes me, me.” It features Ms. Swift dancing at a pride parade, dripping in rainbow paint and turning down a man’s marriage proposal in exchange for a … pussy cat.

At the end of June, the L.G.B.T.Q. community would celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots. On June 14, Ms. Swift released the video for her attempt at a pride anthem, “You Need to Calm Down,” in which she and an army of queer celebrities from across generations — the “Queer Eye” hosts, Ellen DeGeneres, Billy Porter, Hayley Kiyoko, to name a few — resist homophobia by living openly. Ms. Swift sings that outrage against queer visibility is a waste of time and energy: “Why are you mad, when you could be GLAAD?”

The video ends with a plea: “Let’s show our pride by demanding that, on a national level, our laws truly treat all of our citizens equally.” Many, in the press and otherwise, saw the video as, at best, a misguided attempt at allyship and, at worst, a straight woman co-opting queer aesthetics and narratives to promote a commercial product.

Then, Ms. Swift performed “Shake It Off” as a surprise for patrons at the Stonewall Inn. Rumors — that were, perhaps, little more than fantasies — swirled in the queerer corners of her fandom, stoked by a suggestive post by the fashion designer Christian Siriano. Would Ms. Swift attend New York City’s WorldPride march on June 30? Would she wear a dress spun from a rainbow? Would she give a speech? If she did, what would she declare about herself?

The Sunday of the march, those fantasies stopped. She announced that the music executive Scooter Braun, who she described as an “incessant, manipulative” bully, had purchased her masters, the lucrative original recordings of her work.

Ms. Swift’s “Lover” was the first record that she created with nearly unchecked creative freedom. Lacking her old label’s constraints, she specifically chose to feature activism for and the aesthetics of the L.G.B.T.Q. community in her confessional, self-expressive art. Even before the sale of her masters, she appeared to be stepping into a new identity — not just an aesthetic — that was distinct from that associated with her past six albums.

When looking back on the artifacts of the months before that album’s release, any close reader of Ms. Swift has a choice. We can consider the album’s aesthetics and activism as performative allyship, as they were largely considered to be at the time. Or we can ask a question, knowing full well that we may never learn the answer: What if the “Lover Era” was merely Ms. Swift’s attempt to douse her work — and herself — in rainbows, as so many baby queers feel compelled to do as they come out to the world?

There’s no way of knowing what could have happened if Ms. Swift’s masters hadn’t been sold. All we know is what happened next. In early August, Ms. Swift posted a rainbow-glazed photo of a series of friendship bracelets, one of which says “PROUD” with beads in the color of the bisexual pride flag. Queer people recognize that this word, deployed this way, typically means that someone is proud of their own identity. But the public did not widely view this as Ms. Swift’s coming out.

Then, Vogue released an interview with Ms. Swift that had been conducted in early June. When discussing her motivations for releasing “You Need to Calm Down,” Ms. Swift said, “Rights are being stripped from basically everyone who isn’t a straight white cisgender male.” She continued: “I didn’t realize until recently that I could advocate for a community that I’m not a part of.” That statement suggests that Ms. Swift did not, in early June, consider herself part of the L.G.B.T.Q. community; it does not illuminate whether that is because she was a straight, cis ally or because she was stuck in the shadowy, solitary recesses of the closet.

On Aug. 22, Ms. Swift publicly committed herself to the as-of-then-unproven project of rerecording and rereleasing her first six albums. The next day, she finally released “Lover,” which raises more questions than it answers. Why does she have to keep secrets just to keep her muse, as all her fans still sing-scream on “Cruel Summer”? About what are the “hundred thrown-out speeches I almost said to you,” in her chronicle of self-doubt, “The Archer,” if not her identity? And what could the album’s closing words, which come at the conclusion of “Daylight,” a song about stepping out of a 20-year darkness and choosing to “let it go,” possibly signal?

I want to be defined by the things that I love,

Not the things I hate,

Not the things that I’m afraid of, I’m afraid of,

Not the things that haunt me in the middle of the night,

I just think that,

You are what you love.

The first time I viewed “Lover” through the prism of queerness, I felt delirious, almost insane. I kept wondering whether what I was perceiving in her work was truly there or if it was merely a mirage, born of earnest projection.

My longtime reading of Ms. Swift’s celebrity — like that of a majority of her fan base — had been stuck in the lingering assumptions left by a period that began more than a decade and a half ago, when a girl with an overexaggerated twang, Shirley Temple curls and Georgia stars in her eyes became famous. Then, she presented as all that was to be expected of a young starlet: attractive yet virginal, knowing yet naïve, not talented enough to be formidable, not commanding enough to be threatening, confessional, eager to please. Her songs earnestly depicted the fantasies of a girl raised in a traditional culture: high school crushes and backwoods drives, princelings and wedding rings, declarations of love that climax only in a kiss — ideally in the pouring rain.

When Ms. Swift was trying to sell albums in that late-2000s media environment, her songwriting didn’t match the image of a sex object, the usual role reserved for female celebrities in our culture. Instead, the story the public told about her was that she laundered her affection to a litter of promising grown men, in exchange for songwriting inspiration. A young Ms. Swift contributed to this narrative by hiding easy-to-decode clues in liner notes that suggested a certain someone was her songs’ inspiration (“SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM SAM,” “ADAM,” “TAY”) or calling out an ex-boyfriend on the “Ellen” show and “Saturday Night Live.” Despite the expansive storytelling in Ms. Swift’s early records, her public image often cast a man’s interest as her greatest ambition.

As Ms. Swift’s career progressed, she began to remake that image: changing her style and presentation, leaving country music for pop and moving from Nashville to New York. By 2019, her celebrity no longer reflected traditional culture; it had instead become a girlboss-y mirror for another dominant culture — that of white, cosmopolitan, neoliberal America.

But in every incarnation, the public has largely seen those songs — especially those for which she doesn’t directly state her inspiration — as cantos about her most recent heterosexual love, whether that idea is substantiated by evidence or not. A large portion of her base still relishes debating what might have happened with the gentleman caller who supposedly inspired her latest album. Feverish discussions of her escapades with the latest yassified London Boy or mustachioed Mr. Americana fuel the tabloid press — and, embarrassingly, much of traditional media — that courts fan engagement by relentlessly, unquestioningly chronicling Ms. Swift’s love life.

Even in 2023, public discussion about the romantic entanglements of Ms. Swift, 34, presumes that the right man will “finally” mean the end of her persistent husbandlessness and childlessness. Whatever you make of Ms. Swift’s extracurricular activities involving a certain football star (romance for the ages? strategic brand partnership? performance art for entertainment’s sake?), the public’s obsession with the relationship has been attention-grabbing, if not lucrative, for all parties, while reinforcing a story that America has long loved to tell about Ms. Swift, and by extension, itself.

Because Ms. Swift hasn’t undeniably subverted our culture’s traditional expectations, she has managed, in an increasingly fractured cultural environment, to simultaneously capture two dominant cultures — traditional and cosmopolitan. To maintain the stranglehold she has on pop culture, Ms. Swift must continue to tell a story that those audiences expect to consume; she falls in love with a man or she gets revenge. As a result, her confessional songs languish in a place of presumed stasis; even as their meaning has grown deeper and their craft more intricate, a substantial portion of her audience’s understanding of them remains wedded to the same old narratives.

But if interpretations of Ms. Swift’s art often languish in stasis, so do the millions upon millions of people who love to play with the dollhouse she has constructed for them. Her dominance in pop culture and the success of her business have given her the rare ability to influence not only her industry but also the worldview of a substantial portion of America. How might her industry, our culture and we, ourselves, change if we made space for Ms. Swift to burn that dollhouse to the ground?

Anyone considering the whole of Ms. Swift’s artistry — the way that her brilliantly calculated celebrity mixes with her soul-baring art — can find discrepancies between the story that underpins her celebrity and the one captured by her songs. One such gap can be found in her “Lover” era. Others appear alongside “dropped hairpins,” or the covert ways someone can signal queer identity to those in the know while leaving others comfortable in their ignorance. Ms. Swift dropped hairpins before “Lover” and has continued to do so since.

Sometimes, Ms. Swift communicates through explicit sartorial choices — hair the colors of the bisexual pride flag or a recurring motif of rainbow dresses. She frequently depicts herself as trapped in glass closets or, well, in regular closets. She drops hairpins on tour as well, paying tribute to the Serpentine Dance of the lesbian artist Loie Fuller during the Reputation Tour or referencing “The Ladder,” one of the earliest lesbian publications in the United States, in her Eras Tour visuals.

During the Eras Tour, Ms. Swift traps her past selves — including those from her “Lover” era — in glass closets.

Dropped hairpins also appear in Ms. Swift’s songwriting. Sometimes, the description of a muse — the subject of her song, or to whom she sings — seems to fit only a woman, as it does in “It’s Nice to Have a Friend,” “Maroon” or “Hits Different.” Sometimes she suggests a female muse through unfulfilled rhyme schemes, as she does in “The Very First Night,” when she sings “didn’t read the note on the Polaroid picture / they don’t know how much I miss you” (“her,” instead of that pesky little “you,” would rhyme). Her songwriting also noticeably alludes to poets whose muses the historical record incorrectly cast as men — Emily Dickinson chief among them — as if to suggest the same fate awaits her art. Stunningly, she even explicitly refers to dropping hairpins, not once, but twice, on two separate albums.

In isolation, a single dropped hairpin is perhaps meaningless or accidental, but considered together, they’re the unfurling of a ballerina bun after a long performance. Those dropped hairpins began to appear in Ms. Swift’s artistry long before queer identity was undeniably marketable to mainstream America. They suggest to queer people that she is one of us. They also suggest that her art may be far more complex than the eclipsing nature of her celebrity may allow, even now.

Since at least her “Lover” era, Ms. Swift has explicitly encouraged her fans to read into the coded messages (which she calls “Easter eggs”) she leaves in music videos, social media posts and interviews with traditional media outlets, but a majority of those fans largely ignore or discount the dropped hairpins that might hint at queer identity. For them, acknowledging even the possibility that Ms. Swift could be queer would irrevocably alter the way they connect with her celebrity, the true product they’re consuming.

There is such public devotion to the traditional narrative Ms. Swift embodies because American culture enshrines male power. In her sweeping essay, “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence,” the lesbian feminist poet Adrienne Rich identified the way that male power cramps, hinders or devalues women’s creativity. All of the sexist undertones with which Ms. Swift’s work can be discussed (often, even, by fans) flow from compulsory heterosexuality, or the way patriarchy draws power from the presumption that women naturally desire men. She must write about men she surely loves or be unbankable; she must marry and bear children or remain a child herself; she must look like, in her words, a “sexy baby” or be undesirable, “a monster on the hill.”

A woman who loves women is most certainly a monster to a society that prizes male power. She can fulfill none of the functions that a traditional culture imagines — wife, mother, maid, mistress, whore — so she has few places in the historical record. The Sapphic possibility of her work is ignored, censored or lost to time. If there is queerness earnestly implied in Ms. Swift’s work, then it’s no wonder that it, like that of so many other artists before her, is so often rendered invisible in the public imagination.

While Ms. Swift’s songs, largely written from her own perspective, cannot always conform to the idea of a woman our culture expects, her celebrity can. That separation, between Swift the songwriter and Swift the star, allows Ms. Swift to press against the golden birdcage in which she has found herself. She can write about women’s complexity in her confessional songs, but if ever she chooses not to publicly comply with the dominant culture’s fantasy, she will remain uncategorizable, and therefore, unsellable.

Her star — as bright as it is now — would surely dim.

Whether she is conscious of it or not, Ms. Swift signals to queer people — in the language we use to communicate with one another — that she has some affinity for queer identity. There are some queer people who would say that through this sort of signaling, she has already come out, at least to us. But what about coming out in a language the rest of the public will understand?

The difference between any person coming out and a celebrity doing so is the difference between a toy mallet and a sledgehammer. It’s reasonable for celebrities to be reticent; by coming out, they potentially invite death threats, a dogged tabloid press that will track their lovers instead of their beards, the excavation of their past lives, a torrent of public criticism and the implosion of their careers. In a culture of compulsory heterosexuality, to stop lying — by omission or otherwise — is to risk everything.

American culture still expects that stars are cis and straight until they confess themselves guilty. So, when our culture imagines a celebrity’s coming out, it expects an Ellen-style announcement that will submerge the past life in phoenix fire and rebirth the celebrity in a new image. In an ideal culture, wearing a bracelet that says “PROUD,” waving a pride flag onstage, placing a rainbow in album artwork or suggestively answering fan questions on Instagram would be enough. But our current reality expects a supernova.

Because of that expectation, stars end up trapped behind glass, which is reinforced by the tabloid press’s subtle social control. That press shapes the public’s expectations of others’ identities, even when those identities are chasms away from reality. Celebrities who master this press environment — Ms. Swift included — can bolster their business, but in doing so, they reinforce a heteronormative culture that obsesses over pregnancy, women’s bodies and their relationships with men.

That environment is at odds with the American movement for L.G.B.T.Q. equality, which still has fights to win — most pressingly, enshrining trans rights and squashing nonsensical culture wars. But lately I’ve heard many of my young queer contemporaries — and the occasional star — wonder whether the movement has come far enough to dispense with the often messy, often uncomfortable process of coming out, over and over again.

That questioning speaks to an earnest conundrum that queer people confront regularly: Do we live in this world, or the world to which we ought to aspire?

Living in aspiration means ignoring the convention of coming out in favor of just … existing. This is easier for those who can pass as cis and straight if need be, those who are so wealthy or white that the burden of hiding falls to others and those who live in accepting urban enclaves. This is a queer life without friction; coming out in a way straight people can see is no longer a prerequisite for acceptance, fulfillment and equality.

This aspiration is tremendous, but in our current culture, it is available only to a privileged few. Should such an inequality of access to aspiration become the accepted state of affairs, it would leave those who can’t hide to face society’s cruelest actors without the backing of a vocal, activated community. So every queer person who takes issue with the idea that we must come out ought to ask a simple question — what do we owe one another?

If coming out is primarily supposed to be an act of self-actualization, to form our own identities, then we owe one another nothing. This posture recognizes that the act of coming out implicitly reinforces straight and cis identities as default, which is not worth the rewards of outness.

But if coming out is supposed to be a radical act of resistance that seeks to change the way our society imagines people to be, then undeniable visibility is essential to make space for those without power. In this posture, queer people who can live in aspiration owe those who cannot a real world in which our expansive views of love and gender aren’t merely tolerated but celebrated. We have no choice but to actively, vocally press against the world we’re in, until no one is stuck in it.

And so just for a little while longer, we need our heroes.

But if queer people spend all of our time holding out for a guiding light, we might forgo a more pressing question that if answered, just might inch all of us a bit closer to aspiration. The next time heroes appear, are we ready to receive them?

It takes neither a genius nor a radical to see queerness implied by Ms. Swift’s work. But figuring out how to talk about it before the star labels herself is another matter. Right now, those who do so must inject our perceptions with caveats and doubt or pretend we cannot see it (a lie!) — implicitly acquiescing to convention’s constraints in the name of solidarity.

Lying is familiar to queer people; we teach ourselves to do it from an early age, shrouding our identities from others, and ourselves. It’s not without good reason. To maintain the safety (and sometimes the comfort) of the closet, we lie to others, and, most crucially, we allow others to believe lies about us, seeing us as something other than ourselves. Lying is doubly familiar to those of us who are women. To reduce friction, so many of us still shrink life to its barest version in the name of honor or safety, rendering our lives incomplete, our minds lobotomized and our identities unexplored.

By maintaining a culture of lying about what we, uniquely, have the knowledge and experience to see, we commit ourselves to a vow of silence. That vow may protect someone’s safety, but when it is applied to works of culture, it stymies our ability to receive art that has the potential to change or disrupt us. As those with queer identity amass the power of commonplaceness, it’s worth questioning whether the purpose of one of the last great taboos that constrains us befits its cost.

In every case, is the best form of solidarity still silence?

I know that discussing the potential of a star’s queerness before a formal declaration of identity feels, to some, too salacious and gossip-fueled to be worthy of discussion. They might point to the viciousness of the discourse around “queerbaiting” (in which I have participated); to the harm caused by the tabloid press’s dalliances with outing; and, most crucially, to the real material sacrifices that queer stars make to come out, again and again, as reasons to stay silent.

I share many of these reservations. But the stories that dominate our collective imagination shape what our culture permits artists and their audiences to say and be. Every time an artist signals queerness and that transmission falls on deaf ears, that signal dies. Recognizing the possibility of queerness — while being conscious of the difference between possibility and certainty — keeps that signal alive.

So, whatever you make of Ms. Swift’s sexual orientation or gender identity (something that is knowable, perhaps, only to her) or the exact identity of her muses (something better left a mystery), choosing to acknowledge the Sapphic possibility of her work has the potential to cut an audience that is too often constrained by history, expectation and capital loose from the burdens of our culture.

To start, consider what Ms. Swift wrote in the liner notes of her 2017 album, “reputation”: “When this album comes out, gossip blogs will scour the lyrics for the men they can attribute to each song, as if the inspiration for music is as simple and basic as a paternity test.”

Listen to her. At the very least, resist the urge to assume that when Ms. Swift calls the object of her affection “you” in a song, she’s talking about a man with whom she’s been photographed. Just that simple choice opens up a world of Swiftian wordplay. She often plays with pronouns, trading “you” and “him” so that only someone looking for a distinction between two characters might find one. Turns of phrase often contain double or even triple meanings. Her work is a feast laid specifically for the close listener.

Choosing to read closely can also train the mind to resist the image of an unmarried woman that compulsory heterosexuality expects. And even if it is only her audience who points at rainbows, reading Ms. Swift’s work as queer is still worthwhile, for it undermines the assumption that queer identity impedes pop superstardom, paving the way for an out artist to have the success Ms. Swift has.

After all, would it truly be better to wait to talk about any of this for 50, 60, 70 years, until Ms. Swift whispers her life story to a biographer? Or for a century or more, when Ms. Swift’s grandniece donates her diaries to some academic library, for scholars to pore over? To ensure that mea culpas come only when Ms. Swift’s bones have turned to dust and fragments of her songs float away on memory’s summer breeze?

I think not. And so, I must say, as loudly as I can, “I can see you,” even if I risk foolishness for doing so.

I remember the first time I knew I had seen Taylor Alison Swift break free from the trap of stardom. I wasn’t sitting in a crowded stadium in the pouring rain or cuddled up in a movie theater with a bag of popcorn. I was watching a grainy, crackling livestream of the Eras Tour, captured on a fan’s phone.

It’s late at night, the beginning of her acoustic set of surprise songs, this time performed in a yellow dress. She begins playing “Hits Different.” It’s a new song, full of puns, double entendres and wordplay, that toys with the glittering identities in which Ms. Swift indulges.

She’s rushing, as if stopping, even for a second, will cause her to lose her nerve. She stumbles at the bridge, pauses and starts again; the queen of bridges will not mess this up, not tonight.

There it is, at the bridge’s end: “Bet I could still melt your world; argumentative, antithetical dream girl.” An undeniable declaration of love to a woman. As soon as those words leave her lips, she lets out a whoop, pacing around the stage with a grin that cannot be contained.

For a moment, Ms. Swift was out of the woods she had created for herself as a teenager, floating above the trees. The future was within reach; she would, and will, soon take back the rest of her words, her reputation, her name. Maybe the world would see her, maybe it wouldn’t.

But on that stage, she found herself. I was there. Through a fuzzy fancam, I saw it.

And somehow, that was everything.

#ooooh my word this was BREATHTAKING and so well-said #because coming out is in fact a very delicate thing #full article here for the tumblr crowd!#taylor swift #articles #new york times #gaylor swift #gaylor #lover #chely wright

239 notes · View notes

evilbeepthemeep · 10 months

Text

You know after watching James Somerton's dog shit Killing Stalking vid, I don't know how people didn't notice the racism.

He literally just analysed it from a western culture lens and divorced it from the culture it did come from.

As well as refusing to do any research into why it's classed as a romance. Pretending that straight women and the publishers were behind the categorisation of it as a romance. When it was marketed as a Boy's Love manhwa in its native country of South Korea. Meaning the whole point was you are meant to ship the characters together. Plus Boy's Love is a genre for a majority female audience. Who are mostly queer in some way.

He also complained about the sex scenes. Like the sex is there for people to get off to. Because even porn can have artistic merit and be a horror story. Sex and horror go hand in hand after all.

The most egregious thing was him bringing up an interview Koogi did in 2018 while KS was still being serialised to prove it wasn't a love story. Completely ignoring a different interview she did in 2019 once the story was over to confirm Sangwoo loved Bum.

Throughout that god-forsaken video he kept mispronouncing the characters names. Like he kept calling Bum things like bomb and balm while also always calling him Yoonbum, when Yoon is actually his family name and Bum is given name. And forever saying Sangwo instead of Sangwoo unless I'm wrong about that but I doubt it.

His anti Asian racism is so fucking blatant the only reason people didn't fucking say anything because it was hating on a comic that they disliked for being queer in the wrong way.

So if you did like James Somerton and didn't notice the racism, please check your biases. Talk to those of us who are into BL as a genre and actually listen to us when we say it's not straight girls fetishising gay men. It's usually queer people who enjoy our media to be different from what the West has to offer. Most of us aren't white either.

And if you liked the Untamed, I'm sad to break it to you but that was also a BL novel written by a woman who wrote kinky gay sex.

#james somerton #hbomberguy #killing stalking

180 notes · View notes

ineffable-detective-agency · 8 months

Text

Was Good Omens season 2 set during 2019? Who can say? Maybe Neil Gaiman, but probably not the Amazon Prime marketing department... (?!)

From Aziraphale & Crowley's Timeline of Interconnectedness - released yesterday by Prime Video's YouTube channel.

They're also rather vague about some of the other dates, and scenes from the present day of seasons 1 and 2 are mixed together. I assume this is just weird marketing. Unless it's a Clue? 😅

Edit: Neil says "First time I've seen it and it seems to think Season 1 and Season 2 all happen in 2019, doesn't it?"

I'm going to file this under the "wibbly wobbly timey wimey" category of Good Omens shenanigans...

With thanks to members of the @ineffable-detective-agency for pointing this out!

#ineffable mystery #wibbly wobbly timey wimey #good omens #good omens season 2 #good omens analysis #good omens meta #good omens timeline #ineffable husbands #crowley #aziraphale #amazon prime #neil gaiman #good omens clues #good omens fandom

138 notes · View notes

puckgoss · 6 months

Text

okay everyone… the deep dive you’ve all been very patiently waiting for… i recommend putting on the “the departed” “the godfather” or “goodfellas” soundtracks while reading this!

thanks to the anons who sent in info about all of this. huge thanks to the anon who was able to reveal some personal information about the family (from the same town).

when i got an ask saying sway’s gf’s family is (ex)-mafia i went looking for proof, and that sent me down a huge rabbit hole…

IMPORTANT NOTE: this is currently under editing/review as i add/clarify further info

Links to Alessandra’s IG & Alessandra’s VSCO

Alessandra’s Background

Alessandra is 21 years old, turning 22 at some point this year (2002 birth year). She graduated high school in 2020 (source).

Alessandra’s family is from Leominster, Massachusetts. They lived there for many generations. Alessandra grew up in a home described as a “chateau” with horses and a dog. A picture of the house can be found below, up to you to decide whether it looks like a chateau or not. The town rumor is that they are ~7th Generation Italian Royalty. They used to vacation to their home on the coast of Puerto Rico during February vacation every year. They still go there often, as you can see on her social media accounts.

She now lives and works in the Northend of Boston. Her and her sister (Anina) are in the same big friend group and have both been described as nice, fun, private, and quiet. Her sister works as a “marketing intern” according to LinkedIn. Alessandra’s job is unknown. They and some of the Bruins players frequent Lincoln in Southie in Boston.

Alessandra has been dating Bruins goaltender Jeremy Swayman since ~Fall 2023. Apparently Alessandra and Jeremy are very cute together in public.

Salvatelli Family Background (Maternal Side)

Here is a family tree to help you visualize this:

Alessandra’s mother (Monique) and aunt (Toni) operate Paisano’s Pizza and Spirits, which they have done since 2019, although the business has been in the family for many years.

In 2007, the restaurant had their liquor license suspended for two days after finding its owner (Toni) hindered a police investigation. Here is an excerpt from the article, the link is here but it’s paywalled.

If you guys want to learn how to bypass hard paywalls on Google Chrome, let me know!

Essentially, Toni’s boyfriend got in a bar fight, and Toni (one of the owners) rushed him out the back door then did not comply with a police officer’s request later that night to give him the security video.

In 2023, the restaurant posted on their Instagram account congratulating Alessandra on running the Boston Marathon.

The restaurant is located in a hole in the wall strip mall and has mediocre reviews.

The article linked above mentions that Toni (and Monique) are the daughters of John Salvatelli, a former City Councillor. He and his brother Robert Salvatelli were both city councillors in Leominster for many years - Robert since at least 1999 and John since around the same time. In early 2005 Robert was voted in as City Council president, supported by his brother John.

Robert Salvatelli retired from this role in 2015. John was a City Councillor for 10 years. Previously, Robert was a teacher and principal at one of the town’s elementary schools.

Iacaboni Family Background (Paternal Side)

Note 1: Their surname is sometimes spelled Iacaboni, and sometimes spelled Iacoboni. I found articles using both spellings referring to the same people.

Note 2: David was Frank Sr.'s stepson. His mother is unknown.

1980s & 1990s

source

Frank Iacaboni Sr. was convicted of being a major player in a multimillion-dollar bookmaking ring.

He "has been paying tribute to the Mafia for years", according to law enforcement sources.

In the mid-1980s, Frank Iacaboni Sr. complained that convicted Boston mobsters Robert Carrozza and Dennis (Champagne) LePore ransacked his home and made off with an estimated $250,000, according to sources.

Police say Burton (Chico) Krantz, the region's preeminent bookmaker, mediated the dispute, in which Iacaboni agreed to pay his tribute without complaint, and the Boston Mafiosi agreed not to kill him.

1993

Sources say David Iacaboni, who was adopted by his stepfather, always resented his father's failure to acknowledge him. But they say, the Iacabonis apparently made some form of reconciliation several years ago when David Iacaboni returned from a brief stay in Florida. That rapprochement ended, however, when David Iacaboni and his wife, Lori, were indicted in 1993 for marijuana trafficking.

Sources say Frank Iacaboni tried to file criminal charges against David for allegedly selling a Corvette he had given to Frank. The elder Iacaboni had also blamed his son for a December 1993 fire at his home. No charges were ever filed, however. After David Iacaboni and his wife were sentenced to 10 years in prison last January, David Iacaboni approached US Attorney Donald K. Stern, offering to lead authorities to the body of Richard Tuttle Jr. in exchange for his wife being released. Stern agreed to the deal.

September 1995

A suspected prowler was killed and a police officer was seriously wounded outside of Frank (Alessandra’s grandfather’s) Iacaboni's house.

Frank’s son, David, who I believe is Alessandra’s paternal uncle, was convicted in the murder of a man in July 1995.

(source)

January 1996: (source)

FBI agents raided the home of convicted bookmaker Frank E. Iacaboni, shortly after the start of the Super Bowl. No arrests were made, but FBI agents, assisted by state and local police, confiscated some cash.

"It was a sad day for gamblers in Leominster," said one source, who asked not to be identified.

Iacaboni's ranch-style home at 640 Union St. was the scene of a bloody shootout in September after a man opened fire on two police officers who were investigating a complaint of a prowler.

Police sources have said the man may have been trying to steal gambling money from Iacaboni. The shooting is still under investigation by state police.

FBI spokesman Pete S. Ginieres said he could neither confirm nor deny Sunday's raid.

However, Leominster Police Capt. Thomas J. Bisol said local police helped FBI agents execute a search warrant at Iacaboni's house.

Bisol said other homes in the city were also searched. Bisol declined to provide any more details.

"This is an FBI matter," he said.

On Sept. 15 1995, two police officers were called to Iacaboni's house to respond to a call of a prowler outside the home.

Officers Dwayne Flowers and Thomas R. Kent found John J. MacNeil in the garage of the house. MacNeil, 47, charged at the two officers, firing from two hand guns.

MacNeil was killed by police after exchanging more than 26 rounds of gunfire. Kent, 32, who was shot in the chest by MacNeil, is still recovering from his injury.

Police sources at the time said they were investigating the possibility that MacNeil was sent to the house by Iacaboni's estranged son, David M. Iacaboni.

MacNeil was a cellmate of the younger Iacaboni at the Plymouth County Correctional Facility. Police sources said they were looking to see if David Iacaboni sent MacNeil to his father's house to steal gambling receipts, or to kill his father, or to do both.

The police sources said Frank Iacaboni was known to keep large amounts of cash in a safe inside his house.

Frank E. Iacaboni was one of 18 people arrested in 1983 on gaming charges as a result of a state police investigation into illegal gambling. He pleaded guilty to 21 counts of using a telephone for gaming and 13 counts of conspiracy to register bets. He was fined $4,250.

Wednesday, Jan 24 1996:

David Iacaboni was sentenced to 18 to 20 years in prison for killing Richard A. Tuttle Jr. of Lancaster in November 1989.

The younger Iacaboni pleaded guilty to manslaughter in Middlesex Superior Court in Cambridge. He told authorities he killed Tuttle during an argument about a drug sale.

2002-2008: Charges laid, legal documents, case notes

In March 2002, Frank Iacaboni pleaded guilty to charges arising out of his operation of an illegal gambling business.

From 1995 through March 1998, Iacaboni conducted an illegal sports gambling operation in and around Leominster, Massachusetts. Iacaboni's business included a few different "offices" headed by individuals hired to take bets from gamblers over the telephone. Iacaboni also ran a "football ticket" business; bettors paid between $1 and $10 per "ticket," a card on which they checked off four or more predictions in dozens of upcoming games.

Aug 13, 2002 - U.S. v. Iacaboni

Oct 21, 2002 - U.S. v. Iacoboni

Mar 30, 2004 - U.S. v. Iacaboni, other source

April 2005: Indictment handed down on charges of racketeering against 12 men

October 2008: Outline of the criminal case below

March 2009: (source) (source)

In March 2009, Arthur Gianelli, Dennis Albertelli and his wife Giselle, and Frank Iacaboni of Leominster (Alessandra's grandfather) were on trial in federal court for numerous crimes.

Mary Ann Gianelli pleaded guilty to 19 counts of racketeering, money laundering, filing false tax returns, and illegal structuring of cash transactions. Under a plea agreement, the federal government dropped an additional 141 money laundering counts against her.

Her husband was Mafia associate Arthur Gianelli. She helped him run his illegal gambling business after he was indicted on federal racketeering charges in 2005 and placed under house arrest.

Mary Ann Gianelli's sister, Elizabeth, is married to John J. Connolly. Connolly is a former FBI agent who was convicted of federal racketeering charges for protecting long-time informants James "Whitey" Bulger and Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi from prosecution. He was also convicted of murder in Florida in November 2008 for plotting with the two gangsters to orchestrate the 1982 slaying of a Boston businessman.

Arthur headed a sprawling criminal enterprise whose members were involved in gambling, money laundering, loan sharking, arson, and extortion. Him and his three co-defendents listed above, including Alessandra’s paternal grandfather Frank Iacaboni, committed hundreds of crimes between 1999 and 2005.

Millions of dollars flowed through the organization's gambling operation, which took bets on football games and later shifted its operation from Massachusetts to an Internet operation in Costa Rica. The organization also created phony companies to hide profits. Gianelli had ties to the Mafia, making weekly payments to reputed New England underboss Carmen "Cheese Man" DiNunzio.

Note: for more info on the Patriarca crime family (Carmen is now the boss), there are links at the end of the post under Appendix A.

One of the victim’s of this organized crime crew was Boston Bruins Hall of Fame goaltender Gerry Cheevers. He was threatened by a leg breaker for not repaying a loan.

Gianelli, Dennis Albertelli, and Frank Iacoboni were also charged with arson for allegedly plotting to burn down the Big Dog Sports Grille in North Reading in 2003 in an attempt to intimidate the owners into selling them another bar that they were poised to open in Lynnfield.

November 9, 2009: (source)

Frank Iacaboni was sentenced to 15 years and 3 months in federal prison and fined $10,000 for his role in a gambling and extortion ring.

He was sentenced in U.S. District Court on charges of racketeering conspiracy, extortion, use of fire to commit extortion, attempted arson of the Big Dog Sports Grille in Reading Nov. 13, 2003, and operating illegal sports and football card gambling businesses.

The Judge noted that he received 29 letters on Mr. Iacaboni’s behalf, including those from a state representative and a city councilor. Those two letters were from state Rep. Dennis A. Rosa and Ward 4 City Councilor Robert A. Salvatelli, both of Leominster. (Alessandra’s maternal great uncle!).

Summary of Findings

Alessandra’s maternal family is extremely powerful and well-connected in Leominster. They have held/still hold positions of power in schools, government, and local business. Her maternal great uncle vouched for her paternal grandfather when he was charged by the federal government for multiple crimes in association with the Mafia. Her paternal uncle was convicted for murdering a man in 1995.

Her maternal family owns the Paisano’s pizza "restaurant", but this is only the tip of the iceberg. It is very likely that their businesses are all fronts for money laundering, illegal gambling, tax evasion, and more. At the very least, her maternal family has been involved in trying to lessen the charges for her paternal family.

Hope you all enjoyed this deep dive ☕️

Appendix A

Patriarca / La Cosa Nostra Crime Family

The bosses of the Boston Mafia

Alleged Underboss of the New England Family of La Cosa Nostra Sentenced to Six Years in Prison

New England mafia underboss Carmen DiNunzio back on the streets

Old Patriarca Famiglia: The Cheeseman Cometh?

VIDEO: How The Mafia CONQUERED Boston | The Patriarca Family Part 1

VIDEO: How The Mafia CONQUERED Boston | The Patriarca Family Part 2

VIDEO: Current State of the Patriarca Crime Family

#a. iacaboni #pls let me know if any corrections need to be made!#this was a labor of love lol #j. swayman #deep dive

84 notes · View notes

shitpostingperidot · 8 months

Text

How old is Carol Danvers???

(Inspired by a post by @blindluck which was in turn inspired by a post by me and @marvelsassbutts )

So I just found out the official Captain Marvel wiki places Carol Danvers’s birth date in 1965. At first I thought “that’s ridiculous” for reasons that will become clear through this long ass post. But then I saw they cited drawings by the assistant art director on Captain Marvel, found on her portfolio! That’s pretty official!

Wait what’s that at the bottom…

1984???? For Carol’s USAFA basic training???? This is impossible, the movie is wrong, and here’s why.

(Excerpt from my future video essay incoming)

There are no dates in Higher, Further, Faster; the marketing text on Amazon, Liza Palmer’s website, etc just says “80s.” So, we need to do some detective work.

We know that the 2019 film Captain Marvel takes place in 1995. Since it takes place in Southern California and Louisiana, the warm weather doesn’t tell us much about the time of year. Personally, I believe it takes place on March 8, 1995, because that’s the exact day I was born, and my birthday is the day the movie was released on to coincide with International Women’s Day. Regardless, Monica Rambeau is eleven years old in the film, putting her birth in 1983 or 1984. So, Maria’s pregnancy must have begun in 1982 or 1983.

Here’s a “fun” fact about US military academies: until less than one year ago (summer 2023, a full three years after Captain Marvel came out), cadets at USAFA who became pregnant were required to either drop out, have an abortion, or relinquish their parental rights to their child.

Dropping out also means reimbursing the government for your tuition for all classes you’ve taken up to this point, and giving up your ability to be commissioned as a second lieutenant in the Air Force upon graduation. Definitely not an option someone as driven as Maria wants to consider. In fact, we know this isn’t what happened, because this news article Carol hung up in her spaceship in The Marvels says that Maria Rambeau is a USAFA graduate.

We also know that Maria didn’t have an abortion, because, well, Monica Rambeau herself is tangible evidence. Theoretically, it is possible for Maria to have given up parental rights and adopted back her own child after graduation. Before the policy change in 2023 that allowed cadets to be parents, many found this to be their best option (see the article I screenshotted above). However, this process is really expensive and takes a lot of work with a lawyer over a period of months or years. From the little we know of Carol and Maria’s life pre-crash, (it was busy, they lived in an expensive area, and Maria only had Carol for support), I think we can assume that it’s less likely that Maria was forced to adopt her own daughter than that Maria graduated USAFA before becoming pregnant in 1982 or 83.

That still doesn’t answer the question of when this book takes place, though. The exact year is important, as the military had some major differences under the Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan administrations of the 70s and 80s, and one of the things I want to assess this book on is accuracy.

Oh wait, what’s that? Another discriminatory policy that helps us date this book? That’s right, USAFA didn’t enroll women as cadets until Public Law 94-106 went into effect in 1976.

What’s more, Carol and Maria cannot have been part of this first group of women cadets, because in the book, there is an upperclassman character who is a woman. Officer Cadet Chen is one of the leaders of Basic Training for Carol and Maria’s flight, a position cadets aren’t allowed to hold until their third or fourth year at the Academy.

So, Carol and Maria must enter USAFA no earlier than 1978 to be two or more years younger than Chen, and must graduate no later than 1983 for Monica to exist. To comply with the marketing blurb’s declaration that this book takes place “in the 80s”, let’s say that Carol and Maria’s first year is the 1979-1980 school year.

(End excerpt)

In conclusion, Maria and Carol were born in 1960 or 1961 (with pretty equal likelihood of which birthday makes them 18 at the start of the book, since USAFA basic happens the summer before the school year), not 1965. It would be impossible for them to have done basic training in 1984 as in the production drawing, because they would have to have already graduated and be well on their way to test pilot school which is a whole other policy can of worms before Monica’s birth in 1983 or 1984.

In conclusion conclusion, Carol is ~34 in Captain Marvel and ~64 in The Marvels, and the MCU should hire fans to fact check for them.

#thank u blindluck for bringing my attention to this wiki I had such a fun time on this rabbit hole #the marvels #captain marvel #carol danvers #maria rambeau #higher further faster book #carolmaria #danbeau #monica rambeau

84 notes · View notes

firadessa · 1 year

Text

✨Fairies Finds✨: New Early Artwork and Promotional Video from 2005 Disney Fairies Japan Website with Gail Carson Levine- Author of Fairy Dust Trilogy

Fly with you everyone and happy Friday the 13th! I have been looking into Disney Fairies pre-release stuff ever since some early stuff was posted into Art of Disney Fairies. I have also been interested in media preservation since late 2017 when I found Web Back Then. Truthfully, despite having this interest when trying to find the old Disney Fairies games from my childhood- I never really shared much with the world. I feel like I should remedy that! (this find is relatively recent though I found it yesterday!)

This is a video I found on the Internet Archive from disneyfairies.jp, a promotional page on the Disney Japan website that seems disconnected from the main Disney Fairies page which was a clone of the original website. See here

Through some research the gist of the video is this:

The video starts with an introduction to the original Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie, which is interjected with clips from Disney's Peter Pan. Then we see more artwork of Disney Fairies- including unfamilar designs including early Vidia, Rani, Fira etc. According to Part of the Magic, Disney Fairies started development in early 2001- the series was launched fully in 2005. Then Gail (dubbed of course) begins to describe the plot of Fairy Dust and the Quest for the Egg whilst we see several pictures of this early Disney Fairies art. Interesting pictures as we get to see the very early designs of Disney Fairies characters that I have never seen before.

Interestingly, this video was never embedded on the page, you had to download it and play it through a video player such as Windows Media Player or Real Player, it was 2005 after all.

Here is the screen you'd see when you'd want to watch this promotional video. I recognize the leaves used in early flash games such as Lightball Challenge, Dragonfly Race etc.

A page on the website that I found with my decomplier, i couldn't view it normally!

I tried looking for this video in English to no avail, or any version on the internet. It must have only been accessible through this website.

Interestingly, I found this other page whilst doing my page digging thing again and found this, suggesting this was also a Japan exclusive and not for the American market ... and there is more early promotional stuff to be found in relation to Disney Fairies!

I also looked into one the main book artists on the creative team, Judith Holmes Clarke. She had a website I found on her IMDB page, that was live around 2017-2019. I saw this and wanted to add it as it had one of the stills in this video. It also has a sketch of Rosetta and Tink. This is what I found:

It is probably a scan of this magazine, Disney Newsreel, mentioned on her IMDB.

Overall, I'm super happy with this find and I'm so happy to share it with you all!! I will be happy to share more now that I'm publicly outing myself not just as this fan of children's fairy media- an archivist. gasp...

Also probably making a website/blog which I will share later and will be in the About Me link with my other socials.

And believe me, this is just the beginning

162 notes · View notes

tremendouskoalachild · 1 month

Text

what we know: The Acolyte was pitched sometime in early 2020. The Rise of Skywalker had just ended the movie saga. The Mandalorian, which kicked off disney+, had just finished its first season with great audience response. Lucasfilm was reorienting itself to streaming. Rayne Roberts loved the pitch, got Kathleen Kennedy who also loved it, and the show was greenlit.

the show premiered in summer 2024, after a generous marketing campaign (including a clip shown with The Phantom Menace rerelease, an original Victoria Monét song, and plenty of trailers and tv spots). multiple pieces of tie-in media were announced both before and during the show's airing (an Acolyte comic issue, a Kelnacca comic issue, a visual guide, an art reference book, two novels featurig show characters).

the high republic multimedia project (THR), in advanced development when the show was pitched and published continuously from early 2021, greatly influenced the show's development. the costuming is largely based on the look of THR, the show makes plenty of lore references, and includes a main character from the books in its main cast. THR material coming out in summer 2024 has "a century before The Acolyte" prominently on the cover, the upcoming show tie-ins are largely written by THR authors, and often feature other THR characters.

the show was expensive, with a long production period and a great focus on the technical aspects - building large elaborate sets, filming on location in Madeira, detailed stunt sequences with a lot of actor involvement, plenty of attention given to costumes, make-up and creature design. the cast included many high-profile actors. everything suggests the show had full confidence of lucasfilm.

what i'm gonna speculate: lucasfilm was playing the long game with this show, or hoping to. cancelling the show this early was unexpected.

in 2019 star wars was quite literally centered on the original trilogy. the seven decades or so around the OT contained all currently canon star wars media, even as the franchise was spoken of as one with 25,000 years of history. the following years would plug up even more empty spots on the timeline, with the projects often overlapping. this gave the writers much less creative freedom, which was the whole point of decanonizing all pre-2014 media aside from films and shows. over time, fans started clamoring for onscreen content set outside of the known eras, and there were more and more voices in and outside of the fandom exhausted with fanservice (the glup shitto phenomenon).

The Acolyte was set in a whole new era, as far as onscreen content goes, and its only legacy character was from children's and YA books most viewers wouldn't be familiar with. it was specifically introduced as a show you wouldn't need any homework for. it had actors prominent in entirely different contexts (Matrix. sitcom. Squid Game. YA. superhero movies. independent films. relationship dramas.) and the cast was pretty international.

the show had a lot specifically for established fans - you could say it was the most wide-reaching in its star wars references, incorporating elements from every trilogy, the animated shows, canon books, oldschool legends lore, video games. but i believe it was mostly meant to attract people who were not previously fans, and especially target demographics that were underrepresented in the fandom. draw in international audiences, young people who were around for other star wars properties but they never caught their interest, women who either weren't in the fandom or felt pushed away by the reaction to The Last Jedi.

lucasfilm execs definitely weren't planning for viewing numbers comparable to Obi-Wan Kenobi, or even Ahsoka, since those are characters people are already invested in. i think lucasfilm expected the show's audience to grow over a longer period, since plenty of people might check it out because it seems cool and they like an actor in it, and hopefully stick around to watch other star wars and become new fans of the franchise. the audience would get a chance to establish itself through new viewers watching it outside the couple weeks when it aired originally - it's a streaming platform, after all - and the show would have a solid fandom for its second season (which they were clearly planning to make).

these new fans would keep disney+ in order to check out other star wars shows and film, and keep buying star wars stuff over the hiatus. even if they were only into The Acolyte and their interest never expanded beyond that, there were many merchandising products and tie-in materials coming out. the comics and books would have connections to THR, hopefully getting an influx of readers before the initiative finishes next year and boosting sales of already published works. the THR readers who weren't interested in the show originally would see all their favorite authors writing stuff for it and check it out, too.

but then someone higher up decided to cancel it a month after airing so no i guess

#the acolyte #the acolyte discourse

31 notes · View notes

carlando · 1 year

Text

crazy to say it but if you watch the fearlessly forward video from 2019 on mclaren’s channel compared to the here we go again video from 2020, the first video lando is running alone, swimming and all ready for the season and in the second, he and carlos are doing it again but together, running in the same place, waking up at the same time, living together (???) and it’s filled with angst but why? this is meant to be a marketing video brother!!!

like, henrik was so dedicated that he filmed carlos naked and in the shower and lando waking up in bed. what. then heavy symbolism on brazil with the trophy, with the two embracing each other, then running deeper into the forest together. it’s so weird i really have to give props to henrik for making the og official ship edit of the two drivers he works with and knows personally. crazy.

#f1 #lando norris #carlos sainz jr #carlando #henrik ringner #ivana’s comments

219 notes · View notes

pandorasword · 1 year

Text

Chaeri as the 8th and youngest member of BTS

CHAERI'S MASTERLIST

CHAERI'S LOVE LIFE IN A TIMELINE

Love interests - 2015 to present

A summary of dating, rejections and any romantic interaction between Chaeri and others

The night market - april 2013

In which Chaeri and Jungkook sneak out of the dorms during the trainee period

Chaeri and Jungkook as babysitters - march 2017

In which a little girl is asked to keep Chaeri and Jungkook's biggest secret

Isn't it wrong so good? - April 2017

In which Chaeri and Jungkook need some time alone

A love letter - summer 2017

In which Chaeri and Jungkook have a sneaky little date

Red gardenias - october 2018

In which a bouquet of flowers can be worth more than a thousand words

Chaeri's Bodyguard Betrayal - early 2019

In which we learn why Chaeri's bodyguard betrayed her

Silver lips 1/2 | Silver lips 2/2 - november 22, 2021, American Music Awards

In which Chaeri has an incredible urge to be the first to kiss her ex-boyfriend, Jungkook, who has just had his lip pierced

2 a.m. decisions - december 2021

In which a kiss leads Chaeri to a forced hiatus and, when she returns to Korea for New Year's Eve, Jungkook decides to visit her

A look through Chaeri and Hoongjoong's relationship - 2022 to present

Chaeri and Hongjoong first times - january/february 2022 to june 2022

Hongjoong and Chaeri caught in intimate moments - june 2022

In which Chaeri and Hongjoong end up on the front pages of local gossip papers

Fire mouth - june 2022

In which Hongjoong finds himself addicted to something he dislikes, only because he tastes it from Chaeri's lips (+ a video about them parenting Ateez)

The Price of Love in the Public Eye - july 2022

In which Hongjoong experiences being in a public relationship as a kpop idol

How Hongjoong and Chaeri's relationship broke all the logics of the KPOP industry - second half of 2022

In which Hongjoong and Chaeri break all the logic of KPOP by being overly public with their relationship

When night comes - July/August 2022

In which Chaeri stays overnight at Hongjoong's for the first time

If by Chance - august 2022

Snippets of Jungkook's perspective on the relationship between Hongjoong and Chaeri

Checkered Flag for Love - september/october, 2022

In which Chaeri takes Hongjoong to a GP

Trip Vlog - Stockholm - october 2022

In which Chaeri and Hongjoong go to Stockholm for a vacation

Jungkook's 03.03.2023 live - live moments recalling January/February 2023

In which fans, during the live, notice obvious references of Chaeri and Jungkook during January and February 2023

Jungkook's 14.03.2023 live - live moments recalling January/February 2023

In which Jk's live on 14.03.23 is nothing more than a summary of his time with Chaeri at the beginning of the year

Eden's wedding - late january, 2023

In which Hongjoong cannot help but notice the way Jungkook looks at Chaeri

Calvin Klein 1/3 | Calvin Klein 2/3 | Calvin Klein 3/3 - march 2023

In which posing for Calvin Klein turns out to be a more challenging job than she'd ever thought it would be

Seoul Love On tour 1/2 | Seoul Love On Tour 2/2 (Two Ghosts) - march 20, 2023

In which Harry Styles' post-concert doesn't go as planned for Chaeri, as Jungkook has something to tell her

Calvin Klein Event - may 10, 2023

In which fans receive informations about Chaeri and Jungkook's argument

A Break-up? Speculation and theories - june, 2023

In which medias speculate about a possible breakup between Chaeri and Hongjoong

K-talk: More speculations about a possible Break-up - july 2023

In which a podcast talks about a possible breakup between Chaeri and Hongjoong

Seven - july, 2023

In which Chaeri is the guest star in Jungkook's new MV

You came - december 11, 2023

The night before Jungkook's enlistment

#bts 8th member #bts x reader #jungkook x reader #hongjoong x reader #jungkook #hongjoong

250 notes · View notes

someone-will-remember-us · 5 months

Text

Adults-only website OnlyFans has made aspiring porn stars rich and celebrities richer. But a Reuters investigation found a darker side: More than 120 people have complained to U.S. police agencies that they were featured in the site’s sexually explicit content without their consent – including a woman who alleged a video of her rape was sold on OnlyFans. Laws often protect web giants while victims struggle for justice.

SAMMY remembers nearly every detail of the night in April 2022 when she says two men raped her.

The Miami apartment, stark and empty, where it happened. The loud music as she screamed and told them to stop. The fear and the pain, the overwhelming sense of powerlessness.

Sammy, recalling the night in an interview, also remembers seeing a phone perched on a dresser and thinking: Am I being filmed?

Two months later, on June 30, an edited recording of Sammy’s alleged assault was posted on OnlyFans, a website where people can create porn and charge for it. The video was marketed by one of her alleged assailants as “train” sex, jargon for multiple men having sex with one woman, according to screenshots obtained by Reuters.

“The full train video is here guys,” he said on OnlyFans. “Who wants it?”

OnlyFans is an adults-only website where anyone – celebrities, porn stars, cash-strapped moms and aspiring influencers – can sell sexually explicit videos of themselves. Top earners make millions of dollars a year. Created in 2016, OnlyFans now boasts almost 240 million users and has achieved mainstream fame. Beyoncé namechecked it in a song lyric. Rapper Iggy Azalea said it had brought her a small fortune.

But other people have reaped pain, not profit. They describe lives upended after sexually explicit content featuring them was posted and sold on OnlyFans without their consent. Some videos, like Sammy’s, involve alleged sexual assault. Law enforcement has struggled to monitor such nonconsensual pornography on the website, while victims often have limited legal recourse.

OnlyFans says it is building “the safest social media platform in the world.” But a Reuters investigation identified 128 cases in which women and men complained to U.S. law enforcement agencies that sexual content featuring them ended up on OnlyFans without their permission – and was often sold for profit – between January 2019 and November 2023.

Under public records laws, Reuters sought documents on cases involving OnlyFans from more than 250 of the largest law enforcement agencies in the United States – the platform’s biggest market. Fifty-six of them produced records in which people complained of explicit, nonconsensual posts on OnlyFans. Reuters also interviewed police officers, prosecutors, legal experts and nine people who said their sexual images appeared without their consent.

Most of the 128 police complaints were lodged by women against men who were former sex partners. They often said the content was produced consensually but was posted without their permission – or even their knowledge. In about 40% of the complaints, the videos also appeared on other popular social media sites, usually as snippets to promote lengthier and more explicit material for sale on OnlyFans.

The cases highlight how technology has transformed modern relationships and the porn industry. Today, anyone with a cellphone and an internet connection can make and distribute sexual videos and images. Filming and sharing these is now an accepted part of many intimate encounters – so long as it’s a lovers’ secret. Posting those videos online, however, can feel like a major betrayal. It can also be illegal.

Some women said their unwanted appearance on OnlyFans had nearly destroyed their lives.

“A whole company has made money off of my biggest trauma,” said Sammy, 21, in her first public comments on the case. She requested that her full name be withheld.

In Texas, a woman described being forced to install a home security system after being harassed by stalkers who saw an OnlyFans video of her that went viral. A Nebraska woman said she struggled to go out in public, terrified that people might recognize her from a sex video her ex-boyfriend was selling on OnlyFans for $15. An Illinois woman said she learned that naked images of herself were circulating from her teenage daughter, who saw them online.

In response to a detailed account of Reuters’ findings, an OnlyFans spokesperson said that “in the few examples where bad actors have misused our platform,” OnlyFans “removed the content swiftly, banned the user and actively supported investigations and prosecutions.”

The spokesperson said OnlyFans had reviewed the cases of Sammy and others described in this report and found that those accounts were deleted either by OnlyFans moderators or the creators themselves. Those deletions sometimes occurred a year or longer after women complained to police, a Reuters review of police records and account information from OnlyFans found.

The spokesperson didn’t elaborate on the cases but said OnlyFans tightened its consent verification procedures in late 2022. The company requires “proof of identification and consent from all individuals featured in any explicit content uploaded to our platform, and we moderate all uploaded content,” she said.

She declined to respond to questions about how explicit content of non-consenting adults could have ended up on the site when OnlyFans says it moderates everything.

Combining social media glamor and the business of sex, OnlyFans casts itself as a new breed of adult website. Most big porn sites offer content for free and make money mainly from advertising. At OnlyFans, revenue is generated by its 3.2 million creators, most of them amateurs. They sell content to their subscribers, or “fans,” usually for a monthly fee of between $4.99 and $50. One-off sales of videos and images through the site’s direct-messaging function can be even more lucrative.

The terms are attractive for OnlyFans creators: They keep 80% of their fans’ payments. For OnlyFans, which takes the rest, it’s a goldmine. According to the most recent filing by its British parent company, Fenix International, OnlyFans’ pre-tax profit in 2022 reached $525 million – almost a hundred-fold increase in just three years. Revenue expanded at least twenty-fold to more than $1 billion.

OnlyFans doesn’t know how many of its creators are making “adult content,” the spokesperson has said. The platform says it also features sports, music and other non-explicit material.

Beyond the United States, OnlyFans has also seen explosive growth – along with allegations of abuse against celebrities and other content creators.

In Australia, a Queensland man faces trial after being accused of filming himself raping his unconscious girlfriend in 2021 and uploading the video to OnlyFans, according to court records. The man hasn’t entered a plea, a court official said. In Thailand, a married couple was arrested in October on suspicion of drugging and raping four women and a 17-year-old girl, then selling videos of the acts on OnlyFans, Thai police said. The couple hasn’t entered a plea but denied the rape charges, police said.

In Romania, former kickboxer Andrew Tate is awaiting trial on rape and sex-trafficking charges connected to running an operation that allegedly forced women to create porn for OnlyFans, said Romanian prosecutors. Tate denies the charges.

In Britain, Stephen Bear, a former reality show contestant, was sentenced in March 2022 to 21 months in jail after posting a sex video of his ex-girlfriend on OnlyFans without her permission. Bear, who denied all charges, was released in January after serving half his sentence. He didn’t respond to a request for comment. Reuters documented another 17 cases in Britain in which people had complained to UK authorities of nonconsensual porn appearing on OnlyFans, according to public records obtained from the country’s police forces.

Despite the attention generated by high-profile cases, law enforcement officials say the sheer size of OnlyFans and the paywalls surrounding its individual creators have made it nearly impossible to monitor systematically. OnlyFans is largely a black box to outsiders, much less accessible than social media sites like Instagram, X and Facebook.

The paywall “absolutely, unequivocally adds a barrier,” said Joseph Scaramucci, a deputy sheriff in Texas who formerly worked on a U.S. Department of Homeland Security anti-human trafficking task force. Some law enforcement agencies won’t subscribe to OnlyFans accounts due to budgetary constraints, he said.

There are other reasons perpetrators of nonconsensual porn aren’t held to account, Reuters found. Some people were reluctant to press charges against former lovers. Police often lack expertise in gathering technical evidence of cyber-crimes or view the cases as low-priority misdemeanors. Women can be hesitant to share explicit images with male police and prosecutors.

No federal law specifically criminalizes nonconsensual porn. It has been prosecuted under federal anti-trafficking statutes in at least three cases – none of which involved OnlyFans. Complaints typically are handled by local authorities enforcing a patchwork of state laws, and they usually focus on individuals who post abusive content, not on the sites that host it.

OnlyFans CEO Keily Blair has said that “100 percent” of content is reviewed by human moderators aided by artificial intelligence. But the cases documented by Reuters, including the video of Sammy’s alleged rape, point to significant gaps in this system.

“The victim is clearly saying no” in the video, said Todd Falzone, a lawyer for Sammy. “So if they were really moderating that video, they would have seen and heard that.”

Her alleged assailants, Michelson Romelus and Bendjy Charles, face charges of sexual battery and distributing obscene material. They have pleaded not guilty.

Separately, in federal court in Florida, Sammy is suing the two men – and OnlyFans. Her lawsuit is the first to take on the platform itself under a federal sex-trafficking law that prohibits companies from financially benefiting from commercial sex abuses, according to a Reuters review of court filings and interviews with legal experts.

Sammy’s sex-trafficking claim is part of a growing number of lawsuits by people who accuse social media sites of profiting from abusive sexual content. The suits could signal a reckoning for OnlyFans and others in the industry, said five lawyers who specialize in porn and sex-trafficking cases.

“The legal landscape has shifted,” said Julie Dahlstrom, a human trafficking expert at Boston University School of Law. “You’ve seen judges interpreting trafficking laws more expansively,” and “lawyers and survivors understanding that they can bring those cases.”

NO FACE, NO CASE

For some people, the shock of seeing their naked images on OnlyFans was followed by a futile fight for justice.

Amanda Dicrosta’s battle began in Florida in February 2022, when she walked into the Tampa Police Department to file a sexual cyber-harassment complaint against her ex-boyfriend, Mike McFarland, a former player for the National Football League’s Indianapolis Colts. “I was just hoping that they would take me seriously,” she said.

The two had dated for about a year and then split up. McFarland afterward posted videos of them having sex on his OnlyFans and Twitter accounts without her permission, she told police.

Dicrosta, 28, told police that McFarland recorded some of the sex videos without her knowledge or consent. She knew other videos existed but said the couple had an understanding that those were private.

When Dicrosta first learned in June 2020 that McFarland, 32, had posted the videos on OnlyFans, she confronted him, and he initially took down the videos, she wrote in a sworn police statement. But in August 2021, when she revisited McFarland’s OnlyFans account, she discovered not just those videos but also new ones recorded without her knowledge, she told police.

When she saw videos of her advertised on OnlyFans for $5 each, she felt sick. McFarland had “exposed my entire body for $5,” Dicrosta told Reuters. “I can’t even buy a full meal at McDonald’s for $5.”

Dicrosta said she contacted McFarland again. This time, he refused to take down the videos, she told police.

On Twitter, McFarland posted snippets of the videos with links to his OnlyFans account, according to screenshots Dicrosta provided to Reuters and police. Another ex-boyfriend recognized her body in the videos and shared them with friends, some of whom assumed she was now in the business of “doing porn,” she said.

McFarland told police that Dicrosta knew the recordings would be posted on OnlyFans and Twitter. “It was with her consent,” he told Reuters. “I have nothing to lie about.”

X, as Twitter has been renamed, declined to comment on Dicrosta’s case but said it works to limit sensitive adult content from being shared.

After consulting with the state attorney’s office, police told Dicrosta the case couldn’t be prosecuted. The videos showed her private parts, underwear and a bathing suit – but not her face. For the case to proceed in court, the police report said, the videos had to include information that more specifically identified her.

Police closed Discrosta’s case in July 2022 and told her they’d reopen it if she located any such videos.

“I felt hopeless,” she said. “Do I just need to strip naked and show you my naked body for you to believe me? What am I supposed to do? How am I supposed to prove to you that this is me?”

To violate Florida law, explicit images shared nonconsensually must contain “personal identification information,” such as unique physical attributes.

Mary Anne Franks, a professor at the George Washington University Law School in Washington D.C., studies the issue of nonconsensual porn and is familiar with Florida’s law. After reviewing Dicrosta’s case at Reuters’ request, she said the case could have been prosecuted because there was enough context of Dicrosta in the video to allow someone – in this case, a former boyfriend – to recognize her.

The case speaks to a broader problem, Franks said: Not all police departments are familiar with the nuances of laws on nonconsensual porn, especially as some laws are relatively new.

A Tampa police spokesperson said that detectives “dedicated over five months to the investigation,” but the evidence did “not meet the criteria to establish a criminal violation.”

Dicrosta felt angry and let down. She thought about the “personal identification information” demanded by Florida law and came up with another way to protect herself in case a sexual partner secretly filmed her in the future.

She walked into a tattoo parlor and had the words “not yours” etched on her backside.

BARRIERS TO PROSECUTION

Dicrosta’s experience illustrates the long odds of holding people who post nonconsensual porn to account.

Of the 128 U.S. cases Reuters documented, only 28 ended in an arrest and eight resulted in any sort of criminal conviction. Three people went to jail – two for 48 hours each.

Police closed 90 of the cases, including nine for lack of evidence, 12 because investigative leads were exhausted, and 10 because the accusers decided not to pursue charges. The other 38 remained open, including 15 cases marked as “inactive.”

Police documented some cases for “informational purposes only” when the accusers didn’t want to pursue charges but wanted a record of the incident.

Forty-eight states, Washington D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico have criminalized nonconsensual porn in the past two decades. But many laws have loopholes or are weakly enforced, according to lawyers, academics and victim advocates. Repeated efforts by the U.S. Congress to pass federal laws that criminalize nonconsensual porn have failed, largely due to objections by free-speech advocates.

Thirty-eight states classify the sharing of nonconsensual porn as misdemeanors, a low-priority crime for some police departments. Some investigators blame the victims for allowing themselves to be filmed, said Franks, the law professor. “There’s not much sympathy for victims to begin with,” she said.

Many of the state laws now used to fight nonconsensual porn are designed to combat “revenge porn,” in which someone posts explicit images to retaliate against a former partner. But in the OnlyFans cases documented by Reuters, the motive often isn’t just retribution. It’s money.

That’s a barrier to prosecutions in some jurisdictions.

In Florida’s Okaloosa County, a man contacted the sheriff’s office in September 2022 after discovering his ex-girlfriend posted a sex video of them on OnlyFans without his permission. Under Florida law, however, the video must be published with intent to cause “substantial emotional distress.”

“Although the victim expressed emotional distress, the intent of the suspect was financial gain, and therefore the elements of this crime have not been met,” the investigating detective said in the case report, which redacted the man’s name.

Police dropped the case.

‘IT NEVER ENDS’

Many OnlyFans creators rely on other social media to promote their content to potential subscribers. Some videos on OnlyFans are published or leaked on other porn sites. And some are disseminated so widely that victims are powerless to stop them.

Adreiona Prater said she was caught in a viral nightmare.

Prater was 18 when a sex video of her appeared on OnlyFans and other websites. She was attending junior college, studying criminal justice, in Tyler, Texas, in July 2019, when she met and briefly dated Anthony Reshon Scott, then 20.

Prater said she reluctantly allowed Scott to record them having sex but afterward asked him to delete the video. Scott assured her he did, she told police.

In February 2020, Prater discovered the video on Pornhub, another big porn site, and contacted Tyler police. She said she dropped the case after Scott promised to take the video down, but later discovered it on OnlyFans. She watched helplessly as it took off on social media.

On Oct. 6, 2020, a clip appeared on Scott’s Twitter account, revealing her face and naked body, police records show. The caption read, “Check out my onlyfans with over 200+ girls,” and provided a link to Scott’s OnlyFans page. An eight-minute version was also posted to Reddit by an anonymous user, watermarked with the address of Scott’s OnlyFans account.

In comments under the Reddit post, someone identified Prater by posting her social media information, according to screenshots she shared with police. On Instagram, one person asked her: “That was you in that onlyfans vid?”

After being harassed by online stalkers, Prater said she installed a home security system, changed her phone number and called police again, this time in Arlington, Texas, where she’d recently moved.

“I just felt so scared,” she said.

An Arlington police detective investigating Prater’s report ran into a problem: the OnlyFans paywall. It required a $5 monthly subscription fee. “So I was unable to view the contents,” Detective Jacklyn Donalson wrote in a case report. Donalson told Reuters she knew from experience that it would be tough to convince her superiors to pay for a porn subscription, especially when there was no guarantee it would provide usable evidence.

“Like all government agencies, our resources are finite,” said Tim Ciesco, spokesperson for the Arlington Police Department. “We have to be strategic about the way we disperse them.”

The case might have stalled there. Without a subscription, there’s almost no public information on OnlyFans accounts available to investigators. Some seek subpoenas to force OnlyFans to disclose account information, but that involves persuading a court that it’s relevant to an investigation.

In Prater’s case, however, Donalson said she ultimately was able to document enough evidence of a crime without Scott’s OnlyFans information because the video appeared on other platforms, including Twitter.

Spokespeople for Reddit and X didn’t comment on Prater’s case but said their platforms strictly prohibit nonconsensual porn. Pornhub operator Aylo said it “expeditiously” removed the video when it learned about it.

In August 2021, a Tarrant County grand jury indicted Scott for violating Texas’ “revenge porn” law, a felony. The jury cited his Twitter post that advertised his OnlyFans page.

In a conversation that Prater recorded and submitted to police, Scott told her he would pay her to drop the charges, according to the recording, which Reuters reviewed. This time, Prater refused.

Scott pleaded guilty in June 2022 to publishing intimate visual material without Prater’s consent, and received three years of community supervision, akin to probation. “I didn’t do anything wrong,” Scott said in an interview. “I want to leave it at that.”

As police investigated her case, Prater wrote to OnlyFans on Feb. 23, 2021, to complain about the video and give them the name of Scott’s OnlyFans account. The company replied the next day, saying the video would be removed if confirmed to be nonconsensual, according to a screenshot of the message that Prater shared with Reuters.

“We take all reports of this nature extremely seriously,” a help desk representative wrote to her.

Prater said she never heard from OnlyFans again.

According to OnlyFans, the complaint contained “no actionable information.” The company did not elaborate but told Reuters its moderators deactivated the account in April 2022 – more than a year after Prater’s takedown request.

Versions of the sex video remain online, the OnlyFans watermark still visible.

“I still get harassed about it to this day,” Prater said. “It never ends.”

’MY HEART DROPPED. IT WAS ME’

The surge of pornography unleashed by OnlyFans and other websites in the smartphone era is reminiscent of the “Golden Age of Porn,” a period in the 1970s and 1980s when another technological advance – home video players – brought porn to a much wider audience.

As the porn market expands, turbo-charged by social media, so does the challenge of verifying consent.

OnlyFans’ terms of service say creators must have documents to prove the age, identity and consent of other people who appear in their content, unless OnlyFans has already vetted those people as creators too. But multiple creators said in interviews that they have uploaded porn featuring others without providing that proof.

The OnlyFans spokesperson said the company strengthened procedures in late 2022 to require proof of consent before creators could post content on the platform. Yet Reuters found more than a dozen cases filed with U.S. law enforcement agencies in 2023 in which people alleged that explicit videos or images were posted without their consent.

In addition, of the nine people Reuters interviewed who said they were victims of nonconsensual porn, all said they were never asked for documents.

“Even if you have content moderation rules that are fairly clear against nonconsensual intimate images, those rules are abused regularly,” said Danielle Citron, a University of Virginia School of Law professor who has studied online abuse on porn platforms.

While CEO Keily Blair pledges that OnlyFans monitors 100% of content, the terms of service say the company has no obligation to do so: “We are not responsible for reviewing or moderating Content.”

The company spokesperson didn’t address the apparent inconsistency but said: “We know the legal identity of all our creators and work closely with law enforcement around the world. This approach means OnlyFans is an extremely hostile environment for anyone” seeking to share nonconsensual sexual content, she said.

Some women said they were only able to confirm suspicions or rumors of their appearance on OnlyFans by buying access to images or videos of themselves.

Jennifer Aviles told police she initially heard about the explicit videos of herself from her 15-year-old daughter. The teen discovered Twitter posts by Aviles’ ex-boyfriend, William Lewis, that advertised his OnlyFans account with images of her face and body.

“I got my only fans set up if y’all want to see some really GOOD STUFF,” Lewis tweeted on Oct. 18, 2020.

“I looked at it and my heart dropped. It was me,” Aviles, 40, of Woodstock, Illinois, recalled in an interview.

Aviles knew that explicit images and videos had been taken during their eight-year relationship. “I enjoyed being recorded, then watching afterwards,” she said. “I think it’s why most people consent to do intimate videos.”

But she told police that she had asked Lewis to delete the images after they broke up. “Being vulnerable like that involves a lot of trust. Little did I know years later it would haunt me.”

Wanting to know exactly what Lewis had posted of her on his OnlyFans page, she paid for a $50 monthly subscription to his account, she said. She discovered photos and videos of her naked body and of her engaged in sexual acts with Lewis.

Aviles called the Woodstock Police Department.

On Aug. 29, 2021, a detective brought Lewis, 41, to the police station for questioning. During the videotaped interview, which Reuters reviewed, Lewis initially denied posting explicit material of Aviles on OnlyFans or Twitter. Then he said he couldn’t remember. Then he broke down in tears. “I’m hoping this doesn’t ruin the rest of my life,” he said.

In May 2022, Lewis pleaded guilty to one count of nonconsensual dissemination of a sexual image – a felony. He received 24 months of probation.

“I am remorseful,” Lewis told Reuters. “I do feel bad about putting it out there into the universe.”

OnlyFans confirmed it responded to a police inquiry about Aviles’ case in March 2021 and that the account had been deleted the previous November. X didn’t comment on the case but says it bans non-consensual nudity on the platform.

Far from giving consent, 11 women and five men involved in the cases reviewed by Reuters told police they had no idea that images featured on OnlyFans even existed until after they had been posted. Each said the videos had been recorded without their knowledge.

Taysha Blase, 29, was among them.

The Nebraska woman said she had subscribed to her ex-boyfriend’s OnlyFans account out of curiosity. What she found distressed her. Her ex, Vincent Tran, 31, sent out a notification in July 2021 offering his OnlyFans subscribers a 47-second sex video of a “PAWG,” or Phat Ass White Girl, for $15.

The video showed a distinctive tattoo. Blase said it was hers.

The next morning, Blase contacted the Omaha Police Department. She told Reuters she also submitted an online complaint to OnlyFans about Tran’s account but never received a response. According to OnlyFans, “no actionable information” was provided to the platform at that time.

About a month later, Blase said, she heard from the police that her case would be forwarded to the domestic violence unit. By that time, Tran had taken down the video, but Blase still wanted him charged, fearing the post could resurface, she said.

For months, Blase said, she felt distraught and uncomfortable in public, wondering who might have seen her on OnlyFans. “For all I know,” she said, “that person may now know what the most intimate parts of my body look like, and there’s nothing that I can do about it.”

On Dec. 12, 2023 – more than two years after Blase reported the incident to police, and nearly four months after Reuters first inquired about the case – an arrest warrant was issued for Tran. It alleged he recorded and distributed an intimate video of Blase without her consent – felonies in Nebraska.

Tran remains at large. Reuters reached him by telephone, however, and asked about the case.

“That’s something I don’t want to talk about,” he said.

‘WHEN I HAVE SEX … I ALWAYS FILM IT’

One alleged victim of nonconsensual porn is setting her sights on OnlyFans itself: Sammy, the college student.

Her lawsuit, filed in November 2022 in federal court in southern Florida, isn’t just about her alleged rape, but also about who profited from it.

It’s the first of its kind against OnlyFans and tests whether the website is liable under federal statutes designed to protect people from companies that “knowingly” benefit from sex trafficking – defined as commercial sex produced under “force, fraud, or coercion.”

“Those types of claims require that there be a financial benefit to the platform,” said Carrie Goldberg, a New York lawyer specializing in nonconsensual porn cases. “There’s really no easier platform to prove that for than OnlyFans,” she said, because the website takes a 20% cut of every transaction.

Sammy’s lawsuit cites violations of the same sex-trafficking laws used in a high-profile case against Pornhub. In 2021, its parent company, MindGeek, settled a sex-trafficking lawsuit brought by 50 women who accused the site of hosting nonconsensual porn and sought $100 million in damages.

The parent company – now called Aylo Holdings – said it has comprehensive safety measures to eradicate illegal material.

Sammy’s case, if successful, could bring similar attention to OnlyFans and its effectiveness in policing millions of creators, four legal experts told Reuters. It could also spur more lawsuits, they said.

OnlyFans did not comment on the experts’ assessments.

In a court filing, OnlyFans’ U.S. subsidiary, Fenix Internet, said it will seek to have Sammy’s sex-trafficking case dismissed, citing free-speech protections that shield social media platforms and other websites from liability for content posted by users. If the two men did post the video, they would have violated OnlyFans’ terms of service, the company said.

Sammy’s lawsuit against OnlyFans is on hold pending the outcome of the criminal case against the men, Romelus and Charles.

Reuters couldn’t access the video of Sammy’s alleged rape posted on OnlyFans, which her attorney said lasted about 10 minutes. Instead, reporters viewed screenshots and listened to parts of the recording played by Miami-Dade detectives while questioning Romelus and Charles. They also pieced together Sammy’s story from other law enforcement records and interviews with her.

It was spring break in 2022, when Sammy, a music production student and aspiring singer, met Charles, 24, on a dating app. He invited her to a party at his apartment, she told police and Reuters.

She was excited when Charles picked her up that night with Romelus, 27, in the passenger seat. But when the three arrived at the apartment, no one else was there. After some drinks and dancing, the men grew sexually aggressive, she said.

Their behavior culminated in an attack in the bedroom, where Sammy said she was stripped, slapped, raped and sodomized – all while a phone recorded her from atop a dresser.

“I was disoriented, shocked, scared,” she told Reuters. “I was just overwhelmed with how powerless I felt.”

She gathered her clothes and tried to take refuge in the living room, she said, but was again raped there. She said Romelus stood over her, holding his phone close to his head. At the time, Sammy thought he was on FaceTime, talking to someone, and shielded her face with her hands.

In fact, police said, Romelus was recording.

Afterward, the men took her to the workplace of her friend, Chris Philbert. As he drove her home, she broke down, punching the dashboard and swearing, Sammy and Philbert said in interviews. She opened the car door and tried to hurl herself onto the highway, because it felt “like the moment I’m supposed to die,” Sammy said. Her friend pulled her back in. “It was bad,” Philbert said. “It was just a terrible situation.”

Later, she checked herself into a hospital, where she called police.

Meanwhile, Philbert, after learning from Sammy that she might have been filmed, found Romelus’ OnlyFans page. Using OnlyFans’ messaging function, he said he was interested in buying a video of three people having sex, according to screenshots of his chats with Romelus provided to Reuters by the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s office.

On June 30, Romelus sold Philbert the video for $20, the screenshots showed. “More good videos coming my boy,” he told Philbert.

Philbert shared the video with investigators, and on July 26, 2022, Miami-Dade police arrested Romelus and Charles. They both denied they had raped Sammy. “Nobody forced her,” Romelus said in a video-recorded interview with two detectives, which Reuters reviewed.

The detectives played the OnlyFans video for Romelus on a phone. “In the video she says, ‘No, stop.’ Did you hear her?” Detective Nicole Wells said to Romelus. “She’s pushing you off.”

Romelus said he thought she was protesting because he was penetrating her too deeply. She knew she was being recorded and consented, he added. “When I have sex with somebody I always film it.”

When the detectives played the video for Charles, he said he couldn’t hear Sammy saying no and didn’t know the video had been posted on OnlyFans.

It’s unclear how long OnlyFans hosted the video or how many customers viewed it. Eleven days after it was posted, a lawyer for Sammy emailed police and said she was seeking to have it removed from the site “ASAP,” according to Miami-Dade Police Department records. The video has since been removed.

According to OnlyFans, it deactivated the account on July 29, 2022 - three days after Romelus’ arrest. It didn’t comment further on the case.

The OnlyFans video remains key evidence against the defendants, who are out on bond and due to stand trial later this year. Charles declined to comment, as did the public defender’s office representing Romelus.

The detectives questioned Romelus for an hour on the day of his arrest, then left him alone in the interview room.

A camera in the room continued to record.

He sank his head into his hands and spoke quietly to himself. The man who had filmed Sammy seemed unaware he was now being filmed himself.

“I should have never posted that video,” Romelus said. “I’m so stupid.”

#radblr #radical feminism #gender critical #radfem #radical feminist #terfblr #terf #terf safe #radfem safe

33 notes · View notes