#all your claims are alleged and without proof anyway | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

daydadahlias · 22 days

Note

hi i was wondering if you knew why people are mad at ashton - something about atl but i don’t know what that means - i keep seeing it on my timeline but no one explains shit and i figured since your ashton’s #1 fan you would know 😭

oh dear, lots of panicked ash stans in my inbox today <3 yall need to take some deep breaths, ok? things will be ok <3

anyway, it's me, Jess, ur elected representative for ash stans and I will be glad to inform you a little bit more of The Current Situation.

I have also already posted an official Press Release about it if you would like to check that out too <3

now lock in for a jessay.

so here's the situation: our lovely Hippie Himbo has yet again dropped himself into hot water because he DJed an emo nite (because who doesn't love a side quest) and, at that emo nite, Ashton made the worst mistake there is and admitted to playing All Time Low.

(im being a little sarcastic if you cant tell)

now, why is this an issue? I'll try to give you an abridged version as to why everyone (and when i say everyone i mean performative social justice warriors on twitter who have never had a real human interaction a day in their life) is so upset.

in 2021, All Time Low's guitarist Jack Barakat was accused of sexually harassing an underage girl. now, the actual details of the accusation are very blurry (as all allegations that surface anonymously on twitter are) and came with no actual factual evidence, but did that stop twitter from taking it as fact? no it sure didn't because one thing about twitter is that you are guilty until proven innocent. this also then created the dog-pile spread of misinformation that twitter is so famous for producing in which a bunch of other allegations came out about them. One user claimed she had found "97 allegations" against the band. I'm also going to point out that when she was asked where she got the number from, she admitted she made it up and deleted her account. additionally, the account that started the accusations also deleted its account not long after. so then it was just an echochamber on twitter of "oh i heard this" "oh i heard that" without any actual proof. and, listen, as an advocate for survivors, I'm definitely not saying we shouldn't believe victims but I am saying that, maybe, we should also think a little more critically about where accusations are coming from.

Following this barrage of information, ATL then posted a very (fucking piss poor) statement about the whole thing (which, as a PR minor, is not a smart move, I'm just going to say that). which went as follows:

and this really bad statement just made the whole thing a lot worse. but, then, ATL said they were going to pursue legal action against the originator of "these false claims" and sue for defamation (which, yeah, smart legal move but also looks really bad to the public eye). of course, this never actually came to fruition because... the twitter account had already deleted itself and was untraceable. so, at that point, the damage had been done, there was no proof to say they did or did not do these things, and that's just... how things go! so it's almost entirely up to the individual fan to decide if they want to believe the allegations or not. which is... a tough spot to be in. now, if we get into my personal perception of the situation, i think that All Time Low are creeps who acted creepy towards teenage girls during the early 2000s but... to be honest yall?? that's kind of how the 2000s were... and i don't want to excuse the behavior but I also don't think it's reflective of who ATL is now. And, additionally, these accusations didn't actually... affect their career at all in the long run? like, if you go look at their fucking Instagram, they're doing Fine lmfao. which makes it potentially even funnier that ashton is receiving death threats for supporting them.

that brings us to The Issue At Hand. which is that, because Ashton played All Time Low (an incredibly famous pop punk band with whom 5sos was friends with in their ~youth~ and who... all the other members of 5sos are literally still fucking friends with) at a DJ event, he's being "called out" and "cancelled" for supporting "rapists and pedophiles."

I'm now going to take this time to say that, whether or not the actual allegations against ATL are true, it does not make them pedophiles OR rapists because the allegations were over sexual HARASSMENT not actual rape. does that make the harassment okay? obviously not. but it doesn't make them PEDOPHILES????? and it is fucking batshit INSANE to me that twitter doesn't actually know the definition of that word and throws it around with such literal reckless abandon.

the real truth of the matter is that twitter is upset because it wants to be not because there is an actual reason to be. and all of the twitter users claiming they're so upset with ashton because they're trying to stand with victims of sexual abuse, do not fucking understand 1) what sexual abuse even IS and 2) what actually helps sexual abuse survivors and 3) have never fucking helped an actual survivor in real fucking life a day in their goddamn lives.

and that's the situation <3

#pigeon #anon #i love getting to yell about things!!#ok !!#i hope u r now <3 more informed <3 about the situation <3

3 notes · View notes

cantstayawaycani · 11 months

Note

So what's the difference between Tenoch and Jonothan Majors? Do you believe he's innocent too? Or do you believe his victim?

It took me a minute to answer this, because I needed to get my facts straight, since my memory alone isn't sufficient.

Jonathan Majors was arrested, held in prison, and charged with assault -- not simply accused on social media.

His victim was interviewed by police, she gave a statement, and physical evidence was collected.

Though his victim did recant her statement, allegedly, he was charged anyway and is now awaiting trial.

Majors' lawyer released what they believed to be exculpatory evidence in the form of text messages from his victim absolving him of wrongdoing -- but that actually read to many as an abused woman doing damage control with her abuser.

However you interpret this, or the evidence his team subsequently released of her out drinking after the alleged assault took place, the point is there is both physical and digital evidence of their interactions and dynamic with one another to be used in a court of law.

No such evidence has been presented (publicly, that we are aware of) in the case of Tenoch and Elena.

Since his arrest, many people began tweeting about Jonathan's bad character and pattern of abuse -- but that is of no consequence. It's hearsay and accusations without proof. What is of consequence? Several women and former colleagues have formally come forward to the authorities to submit statements to be potentially used in the case against Majors. So, the people who claimed to be harmed by him are formally on record with the police and the prosecution.

No such witness or victim testimony has been made with authorities, on record, against Tenoch (that we are aware of).

Majors is still, in the eyes of the law "innocent" until proven guilty, but I would argue there is recorded evidence, albiet circumstantial, against him. There will be a trial. We'll see what happens.

Now, with Tenoch -- the legal system is different. Some would say more corrupt, although you can certainly say that the police and the legal system here in America is just as corrupt, racist, and misogynist. But I am not a Mexican citizen, or a woman who has had to live under the oppression of that legal system, so I cannot offer an opinion there.

Maybe his alleged victims, including Elena, don't want to go to the police or have no evidence to give.

All I can say is, if not, I personally can't do much more than hope they find peace in what way they can.

If there is no evidence and no trial -- here is what I personally would say: once a predator, always a predator. If he truly is a terrible, abusive man, who has done harm, justice and the truth will come for him. Someone will be willing and able to go on record and successfully press charges against him.

Otherwise, it's conviction on hearsay, and I'm not comfortable with that.

Hope that answers your question?

#asks #anonymous #tenoch huerta #jonathan majors

19 notes · View notes

thebluelemontree · 2 years

Note

Any chance a victorious post-Blackwater Stannis Baratheon would let Tyrion Lannister, if he was captured during the battle and requested it, join the Nights Watch, in your opinion?

I highly doubt it. Stannis has no problem with honest men fighting for Joffrey wrongfully believing him to be their true king. He can even grudgingly eke out forgiveness and pardons for the lords who supported Renly because he needs their swords, but he will not forget they knowingly bent their knees to a usurper first. Tyrion is in neither of those camps. For the Lannisters, there would be no such mercy. Fifteen years ago, Stannis would have thought the Wall appropriate for Jaime Lannister, who received a full pardon from Robert for killing King Aerys. But in the present day? No way. Not after the pile of corruption, murder, incest, and treason has built up sky-high. Stannis is not fucking around anymore and swears to take out all the trash:

"I am king. Wants do not enter into it. I have a duty to my daughter. To the realm. Even to Robert. He loved me but little, I know, yet he was my brother. The Lannister woman gave him horns and made a motley fool of him. She may have murdered him as well, as she murdered Jon Arryn and Ned Stark. For such crimes there must be justice. Starting with Cersei and her abominations. But only starting. I mean to scour that court clean. As Robert should have done, after the Trident. Ser Barristan once told me that the rot in King Aerys's reign began with Varys. The eunuch should never have been pardoned. No more than the Kingslayer. At the least, Robert should have stripped the white cloak from Jaime and sent him to the Wall, as Lord Stark urged. He listened to Jon Arryn instead. I was still at Storm's End, under siege and unconsulted." Cersei, Jaime, and the kids are going to be executed without question. Tyrion is never mentioned by name as committing a particular crime in Stannis's eyes, but I can't imagine a reason why his sentence would be different than his siblings. Other than being a dwarf which means he's doubly screwed anyway, the main strike against him is that he was the architect of defending a usurping abomination's stolen crown at the Blackwater. Looking back to the conversation between Catelyn and Stannis about Jon Arryn's murder, does it sound like Stannis really cares if Tyrion gets lumped in by default with Cersei's alleged crimes either?

Catelyn was remembering, fitting pieces together. "My sister Lysa accused the queen of killing her husband in a letter she sent me at Winterfell," she admitted. "Later, in the Eyrie, she laid the murder at the feet of the queen's brother Tyrion."

Stannis snorted. "If you step in a nest of snakes, does it matter which one bites you first?" -- Catelyn III, ACOK.

Stannis was working with Jon Arryn on gathering proof to reveal the incest to Robert, but Jon winds up dead. Silencing Jon Arryn (and later Ned Stark) critically hampered Stannis's claim as Robert's lawful heir. If Stannis needed more of an excuse, he can always say Tyrion's name was dropped by Jon Arryn's widow in connection with that crime. That's probably enough to condemn him. Just kill 'em all and let R'hllor sort 'em out.

#valyrianscrolls #tyrion lannister #stannis baratheon #asoiaf speculation

21 notes · View notes

generalchelseamayhem · 2 years

Note

what do you think of the proposition of women spreading false rape claims serving jailtime?

in the future that is. when the definition of rape includes men [hopefully]

My understanding of the law is limited and my brain has only just woken up for the day, so I hope you'll forgive this answer.

I'm trying off the top of my head to think of another crime where false accusations happen - insurance fraud doesn't really cut it, because a faceless insurance broker is not a victim in the same way that an individual man falsely accused of rape is. Rape is a very toxic crime to be associated with even spuriously, but it's hard for a victim to falsely accuse someone of murder, perhaps the only crime with which the association is worse.

Thing is, false accusations can go on for any length of time before the story breaks down, but ideally, yes I would want false accusers to serve jail time, and I think it would make the most sense to treat it as seriously as we do perjury. Many false accusers may end up lying in court. Some will not, but I would argue that treating it as seriously as perjury is necessary anyway in a world where the court of public opinion has the first and loudest say on crimes like these.

It's important to point out that "not finding enough evidence to convict/bring to trail" is not the same thing as "proving it was made up." Real victims of rape still need to come forward and the law should make allowances for it. The standard of evidence for proving falsehood must be high.

I know that doesn't make a lot of logical sense, because rape either does or does not happen, but if the burden of proof is on the accuser to prove what is in practice a very difficult-to-prove crime (rape), then failing to do so counts for very little; the burden of proof should ALSO be on the accuser for the crime of Making It Up.

I mean things like the taxi driver, proving with his dashboard camera that the ladies he was transporting said words to the effect of "we'll accuse you of raping us if you don't do what we want". That's a slam dunk, right? People like Alice Sebold are a bit more complicated - we can say confidently she wasn't raped by the one particular guy she accused, but does that mean she wasn't raped at all? It's very hard to say now, and unless we have her on record saying "yeah I made it up, I guess I just hate black people that much, lol", it's very hard to prove her intent.

I recognize that these things are exploitable by abusive people, but that's the thing we always have to try and correct for. No law is without exploitability. Current rape law in many countries is abusable because accusation alone is enough to start treating the accused party as guilty by the court of public opinion, and very hard to defend against if the alleged victim provides a harrowing enough account. Which is something that manipulative people can easily just pretend to do. Also, women are very rarely accused of it. We would like to correct one of those things, at least, by altering the incentives - now there is a potential punishment for just making it up - but you've gotta balance it so that it's not just "Oh, you can't prove your rape accusation 100% with timestamps and eyewitnesses and voice recordings? Off to jail with you!"

It is tough to get that kind of nuance these days though.

#ask #rant #false rape accusations

3 notes · View notes

jayflrt · 2 years

Note

omg yea hyuck and ryujin 💀 i think also recently they started to come up again bc of the similarity of their pets' names too but its such a stretch everytime they claim that everything they do is obvious proof of them dating like... mind your own business 😭

anyways i think i ok on my test but it was a lot harder (and longer 🧍 it was almost like an exam 😭) than i expected but im just hoping for the best now

ALSO I HOPE IM NOT TOO LATE BUT CONGRATS ON YOUR INTERN !! that's super exciting and im super proud of you 💓

- 🌻

god yeah i saw that post of their dating rumor resurfacing 😭😭 everything surrounding their “dating” allegations is such a reach tbh HAHAH i hope they can both be left alone like they can’t breathe the same air without being looked at as a couple 😵‍💫 i think all kpop idols in general try to avoid a lot of contact now to avoid rumors like these ;(

omg nooo i feel you tho like it’s so stressful when the test turns out to be way harder than you expected 😣 but i’m glad you’re done with it !! 💕🥰 do you have plans now that you’re free from exams? :o

NO DWW YOURE NOT LATE AND THANK YOU !!! 🥰🥰🌷🌷that means so much to me omg 😭😭💖💖💖 i was so hyped for this so you sharing this wave of excitement im riding is everything to me 🫶

#💌 : love notes #🌻 anon

1 note · View note

obviouslygenuinely · 3 years

Text

Babygate Analysis/Conclusions: A Non-Larry Perspective

(Image Credit: Hollywood Life)

I'm prefacing this post with a few disclaimers:

After some consideration, I chose to write this without factoring in Larry whatsoever. No Larry-related points, proof, or speculation in any way. This is solely analyzing babygate from an unbiased perspective.

I don't claim to know the entire truth. It is impossible for any of us to know. What I conclude is based on direct evidence, circumstantial evidence, research, and analysis.

I am willing to discuss opposing views. I’m happy to talk about the topic in a civil, kind, and mature matter. I will dismiss any discourse that is aggressive, immature, and so on.

I did not include every single opinion/conclusion/piece of evidence I found. I condensed my thoughts as much as possible (and this is still a novel-length post). There are so many more points I can think of. However, babygate masterposts cover all of that; I’ll link to some of those at the end.

The conclusion points aren't in a very specific order. I aimed to list related points one after another. Aside from that, it's not in order of "hardest to weakest" evidence.

Please read “Author’s Notes” for additional clarity/input. They interject thoughts/etc. that I feel are necessary to include.

Lastly, I included links to every source I cited in this post. However, I did not tag the Tumblr users. I’m not sure if they are comfortable with having Babygate questions/comments directed to their blogs. If you are a linked source and want to be tagged, please let me know!

My Initial Reaction To Babygate

In February of 2020, I received several messages on LateToLarry requesting that I analyze something called “babygate”. I had no idea what babygate meant at the time.

I learned what it meant, and prior to any research I felt the theory was so absurd. I also felt uncomfortable analyzing it because I believed I’d feel bias as a single mom. The idea of discussing a random child in depth initially bothered me, too. I declined to analyze it last year.

However, I did a LOT of research over time. My opinion has changed significantly. Below, I’ve shared my main conclusions and analysis about babygate. Thank you for reading and I hope you enjoy my post!

1. No Paternity Test Was Performed Prior To The Pregnancy Announcement

Louis was/is a prominent celebrity and has a current net worth of $70 million. From legal, financial, and practical standpoints, it makes no sense for him to choose not to get a test.

It’s unheard of in Hollywood and the entertainment industry. Any sensible team -lawyers, PR reps, managers, advisors, etc. - would not just go along with it. They are employed to protect his career and image.

The Opposing Views

A. “Briana/Louis didn’t want to risk miscarriage with prenatal testing.”

Non-invasive testing is completely safe for fetuses and pregnant women, so there’s no medical reason for the lack of testing.

B. “Louis chose not to get the test done because he wanted to be a father and was invested in the pregnancy/parenting.”

Time has shown that this is not true. Louis does not have custody; there was a brief custody case in 2016 that led nowhere. He does not have a consistent or prominent role in the child’s life.

Conclusion

There is no logical reason for the lack of paternity testing prior to the announcement unless Louis knew he was not the father and all parties knew this to be true.

2. There Was No Confirmation Of A Paternity Test After The Birth

I’ll keep this section fairly short. A quick Google search returns dozens of conflicting reports. Many of them state that Louis demanded a paternity test shortly after birth. Other reports state that he has never pursued a paternity test.

Here are a few examples:

“Louis Tomlinson not interested in paternity test” - Business Standard

“EXCLUSIVE: Louis Tomlinson Demanded a DNA Test “As Soon as the Baby Was Born”” - InTouch Weekly

“Louis Tomlinson: No DNA Test Needed ... Positive Freddie's His Son” -TMZ

“Louis Tomlinson & Briana Jungwirth: WhyHe Had DNA Test Done on His Newborn Son” - Hollywood Life

This Twitter thread discusses TMZ reports that - as of 2020 - no DNA test was done.

Conclusion

There is no reliable confirmation that Louis pursued a paternity test. The media cannot come to a general/factual consensus.

Again, there is no reasonable explanation for the lack of paternity testing unless Louis knows he is not the father of the child.

3. The Conception-To-Birth Timeline Is Inconsistent/Unreliable

Pregnancy and conception as a whole can be rather confusing; timelines from conception to birth are unique to each person. Having said that, Briana’s timeline is full of glaring inconsistencies that don’t add up.

I’ll begin with this timeline based on bulletprooflarry’s post and my own research. Dates I’ve added myself include linked sources:

May 5th, 2015 - Louis and Briana were first seen together in public.

May 6th to May 31st, 2015 - Briana and her mom followed baby-related social medial accounts.

May 12th, 2015 - Louis and Briana were pictured together in public.

July 3rd, 2015 - Louis is seen with Briana’s brother in Hollywood.

July 14th, 2015 - The first pregnancy report is published.

August 4th, 2015 - Louis confirms pregnancy on GMA.

January 21st, 2016 - The child is reportedly born.

Based on the dates above, these are the possible dates/milestones for her pregnancy:

Scenario A - If conception occurred on May 5th, Briana was 37 weeks and 2 days pregnant on January 21st, 2016. This is considered an early-term birth and about 26% of births occur at 37 weeks.

Scenario B - If conception occurred on May 12th, Briana was 36 weeks and 2 days pregnant on January 21st. This is considered a late-term or late premature birth and about 10% of births occur at 36 weeks.

These dates matter because Briana’s alleged hospital stay was not consistent with a premature or early-term birth. She was pictured in public - healthy and holding a baby carrier - within one week of giving birth.

(Image Credit: Daily Mail)

(Image Credit: larrysbbrbb28)

If she gave birth based on the dates above, it’s extremely unlikely that she or the baby would be out in public so soon.

Below are screenshots of an additional timeline from an archived Tumblr post. It provides excellent points about more timeline inconsistencies:

The main inconsistencies and red flags are bolded in the post. It supports the unreliable conception timeline, and it also mentions my next point - the official pregnancy announcement.

The post above mentions that the Jungwirth family followed baby-related accounts before Briana could possibly know she was pregnant. Here’s one screenshot from skepticallarrie proving it:

I’ve also seen several posts that show inconsistencies with the size of Briana’s baby bump. Unfortunately, the most reliable post no longer exists. You can view a web archive of Briana’s pregnancy photos, but most of the image links are broke.

The only post I have saved is a web archive of a long babygate post. The beginning of the post contains photos showing discrepancies in the size of Briana’s baby bump.

The Opposing Views

“Pregnancy looks different on everybody, everyone recovers differently, etc.”

Yes, this is true and a valid point! As a woman who has gone through multiple pregnancies and two live births, I truly understand this argument.

However, the sheer amount of inconsistencies are what make this a red flag. There are too many unreliable and contradicting points to brush this off. It goes beyond the point of “well, each person has a different experience”.

Conclusion

There are a few conclusions/scenarios I believe you can draw from the information above:

Briana was pregnant prior to meeting Louis.

Briana was never pregnant in the first place.

Both are valid to consider, but I personally believe she was never pregnant.

(Author’s note: My calculation for dates are based on the date of alleged conception. Most due date calculators, by default, use the date of a woman’s last mentrual period - LMP - to provide estimations.

I also used Date Duration Calendar for my calculations. Accessible due date calculators only allowed me to input dates from 2019/2020. Depending on the tools and dates you use, your mileage may vary.)

4. The Announcement Itself Was Highly Unusual

This point ties into the first and third points. I don’t consider it a major piece of evidence, but it’s noteworthy due to the other points.

So, there are a few reasons why the Good Morning America announcement stands out.

A. If Briana got pregnant on May 5th, then she was approximately 10 weeks pregnant when the first pregnancy report was published. This also means she was approximately 13 weeks pregnant at the time of the GMA announcement.

If Briana got pregnant on May 12th, she was approximately nine weeks pregnant at the time of the first report and approximately 12 weeks pregnant at the time of the GMA announcement.

B. The public announcement on Good Morning America raises a lot of questions. I’ve had multiple issues embedding the video; the bolded link takes you to the GMA announcement on YouTube.

Anyways, these questions/thoughts - disregarding any Larry theories - come to mind when watching the video:

This is a segment for promoting/discussing their album/music.

The baby announcement is the sole non-album/music related topic that is mentioned during the segment.

The announcement is not organically worked into the segment as a natural talking point.

Louis’ reactions - such as bringing the microphone to his lips and not talking - is very unlike his standard interview demeanor.

The male interviewer and the band members have noticeable facial expressions and body language that suggest discomfort, stress, or awkwardness.

A post by skepticalarrie draws similar conclusions. Her post is much more detailed than mine, and I highly recommend reading/viewing it.

(Author’s Note: I’ve touched upon this on LateToLarry and will make a post here eventually, but body language and facial expressions are valid. They’re valid to the point that they are used in court cases.)

Conclusion

My conclusions here are twofold. One is that:

Announcing a pregnancy - especially a celebrity-related pregnancy - this early is extremely uncommon and unlikely.

The announcement itself seems out of place and very forced.

This particular point, to me, is not extremely strong evidence. I still think it’s worth keeping in mind and is relevant to other points here. So, I’ve included it either way.

5. Briana Posted Stolen Pregnancy/Baby Photos On Social Media

(EDIT: I wrote this piece before the recent release of Briana’s alleged ultrasound and don’t have time to add it. It’s pretty strong proof and can easily be found in recent babygate posts.)

Babygate posts often point out that Briana and the Jungwirth family used stolen/fake pregnancy and baby photos on social media. It’s a well-known topic that’s often discussed.

I’m condensing this section to a few examples. I encourage additional research if you’d like to see more.

A. This Tumblr post shows stolen baby bump photos that Briana’s cousin Ashley posted on Twitter:

B. This Tumblr post and Twitter post show a stolen baby photo that Briana posted on Instagram:

(Author’s Note: Since I was not active in the fandom at the time, I am relying on information from other blogs and social media posts. I vetted my sources pretty well, but any false information is my own mistake.)

Conclusions

The only word that sums this up is “suspicious”. Using stolen photos of a pregnant woman/baby is not necessary if you are legitimately pregnant. That’s really what it boils down to. It lends to the conclusion that Briana was never pregnant.

6. Photos And Videos Of The Child Are Heavily Altered And Manipulated

It is indisputable that many photos and videos of the child are heavily manipulated to alter his appearance. This goes beyond filters, lighting, and angles.

Several detailed posts show the manipulations; here are some examples:

A web archive of all Photoshop evidence from tellmethisisnotlove

An in-depth post from genuineconspiracy that includes detailed photo evidence.

A video post from freefreddiereign that shows Photoshop evidence based on photos the child.

There is no doubt that his facial features are frequently altered. This is easy to conclude using any free software that detects Photoshop. As a photographer myself, I can easily spot the manipulations.

(Author’s Note: I know that directly discussing the child is controversial. When I first heard of babygate, my initial reaction was discomfort about analyzing a child.

I quickly learned/concluded that his family members are responsible for heavily putting him in the public eye. All content I’ve used for research is based on the family’s posts.

Still, I have personally chosen not post pictures of the child, but the links I am sharing contain photos/videos of him.

Additionally, I used FotoForensics on photos of myself prior to writing this. It was important to me to feel absolutely certain about this point. I’m fine with sharing my own FotoForensics images if anyone is curious.)

The Opposing Views

A. “Freddie looks like Louis in pictures that aren’t Photoshopped.”

Parentage cannot be based on whether or not a child looks like his mother/father. I understand the viewpoint, but it’s simply not evidence. Additionally, thinking the child looks like Louis is a matter of opinion.

There’s also the fact that appearance means nothing overall. Science backs up this statement very well. Examples and references:

“How can children from the same parents look so different?” by HowStuffWorks

“My Baby Looks Nothing Like Me: A Genetic Explanation” by FamilyEducation

Additionally, here is a personal anecdote. I have two sons close to Freddie’s age. One of them looks exactly like his father and nothing like me. The other looks exactly like me and nothing like his father. Despite how they look, they are both of them are our biological children.

Conclusion

There is no reasonable explanation for altering the child’s appearance - particularly to make him look more similar to Louis.

I cannot think of a single argument as to why the Jungwirth family would do this unless they need/want the child to look a specific way.

7. Johannah Deakin’s Official Obituary Does Not Mention The Child

When looking into babygate, I read the argument that the child is legitimately Louis’ son because he is listed as her grandchild in Internet-based obituaries and announcements.

I also read the counter-argument that Louis’ mother’s official newspaper/print obituary does not mention the child. I recall seeing proof, but I did not save it at the time. I did some research and this appears to be true.

The Doncaster Free Press is a local weekly newspaper in Doncaster, and it published an article about the funeral. The article is NOT an obituary itself, but it does list her obituary details. The publication does not list the child among the surviving family members.

If a mistake is made regarding these details, it’s typical for newspapers to post a correction addressing a misprint. Upon further research, the Doncaster Free Press did not issue a correction at any time.

(Author’s Note: I lost my own mother and am personally familiar with how local obituaries are written. Immediate family members - i.e. spouses and adult children - provide information regarding surviving family members.)

Conclusion

The conclusion here is straightforward. Louis and his family chose not to include the child in his mother’s official obituary. This strongly suggests that he is not legitimately related to Louis.

My Opinion-Based Conclusions

Update: After some consideration, I am saving my opinion-based conclusions for a separate post. I originally intended to include them here; transparency is important to me.

Unfortunately, the section became rather long and took away from the main post points. So, I’ll be working on a post that’s just my opinion-based conclusions. In the meantime, feel free to message me with any questions.

Final Thoughts

If you’ve made it this far, thank you for taking the time to read my post! I appreciate the interest expressed for it, and I hope it lives up to expectations.

Again, I want to reiterate this is:

Not an all-inclusive post; I narrowed down my findings to seven points.

Not a masterpost on babygate.

Purposely omitting any potential Larry-related points to remove bias.

I’ve reread this quite a few times, and it’s as error-free as possible. If you spot any mistakes/errors, I’m completely open to making corrections. Just kindly let me know.

This list contains references/research about babygate that I consider the most reliable. It includes Larry and non-Larry related Babygate content.

Tumblr posts tagged with babygate by Tumblr use genuineconspiracy.

A web archive of babygate posts by Tumblr user tellmethisisnotlove (her account was deactivated by staff).

Tumblr posts tagged with babygate by darkrainbowlouis.

Tumblr posts tagged with babygate by skepticalarrie.

Lastly, if there’s interest in an opinion-related post or Larry-related post, I’ll consider writing them. Feel free to let me know as you all did with this post.

Thanks!

Amy (obviouslygenuinely/latetolarry)

#babygate #bg #louis tomlinson #briana jungwirth #freddie Tomlinson #baby tomlinson #end it #larry #larry stylinson #analysis

979 notes · View notes

atheistforhumanity · 3 years

Text

Using Reason To Assess The Condition of Our Election

Our nation is facing a crisis as the incumbent Presidential candidate and others in the Republican party propagate allegations of fraud with no evidence to support their claims. So let’s use reason to get a handle on whether there is a real problem or not.

1. It’s Taking Too Long

This year is different due to the higher number of mail-in ballots. There are a couple facts to keep in mind here. The first is that there are more mail in ballots because people want to avoid crowded lines and polling places during the pandemic. The second is this is a precaution mostly taken by Democrats, while Trump told his followers to vote in person. So most mail-in ballots ended up being by Democrats and in-person voting mostly by Republicans. The third thing to keep in mind is that Most mail in ballots came in first, but could not be counted until after election day.

When you vote in person, in most states, you scan your own ballot into the system. Thousands and thousands of people do this as they day goes on. That is how we have the results for hundreds of thousands or millions within one day. No one is sifting through them scanning them at night. Mail in ballots take longer. They must be opened, verified, and scanned. In the case of Philadelphia, they received around 200,000 by mail. Obviously this will take much longer than usual. So we can see a very obvious reason counting is taking longer. Therefore, we must recognize that waiting longer for results does not point to wrong doing, especially when no evidence is presented.

2. Why Are Ballots Being Counted After Nov. 3rd?

November 3rd is our last day to vote, period. That has not changed. The only difference this year is that some state legislatures decided that because the USPS has been announcing difficulty with keeping up with the volume of mail that they would allow any mail-in ballot postmarked by Nov. 3rd to be counted as long as it arrives by a certain date. In order for it be post-marked on the 3rd, the post office would have to receive it on Tuesday and mark it that day. Anyone who tried to mail-in ballots on Wednesday would not receive the proper post mark and their vote would not be counted.

It is not unfair in anyway for a ballot cast on Nov. 3rd to arrive a couple days later. Everyone had the same opportunity in their respective states. As mentioned above, when you vote in person you likely scanned your own ballot in on election day. Therefore, the only ballots that will be left to count are mail-in ballots. Democrats were mostly concerned about social distancing and sent their ballots by mail. Republicans largely voted in person. That is why a majority of the ballots still being counted are blue votes.

The fact they are counted last is just a matter of procedure and logic. If you scanned your vote in as you voted in person, then obviously yours doesn’t need to be counted again. Therefore the first numbers reported will be by those in person. Furthermore, in those battle ground states, Republican state officials blocked movements to allow election workers to start counting mail-in ballots early to get ahead.

We have a clear and obvious reason why the votes are turning out the way they are. None of this points to any wrong doing, and there is no evidence of such.

3. Are Observers Being Prevented From Watching The Process?

The answer is a hard NO. The actual conflict was over how close observers could stand. Where observers stand is up to each individual county, and this year counties make their own decision on how far that is considering the pandemic. The Trump admin sued to allow observers to get closer and won. A new distance was agreed upon in court. In other cases, Trump claim that windows were covered so that no one could see in, but there were live stream cameras in the room.

Most importantly, the fact that some people were asked to stand 20 feet away from workers does equal fraud. It doesn’t support the allegation of fraud. These allegations still lack any evidence of any kind.

Conclusion

When using reason to assess a claim, examining the claim itself is the first task. If a claim ever comes before any evidence, and completely lacks evidence, then the claim itself is not valid. If a claim does not derive from evidence, then the only other source of the claim can be assumption or speculation.. These are not reasonable foundations for a claim, especially an accusation of crime or misconduct of this magnitude. Any claim of this type is purely fabrication, because it begins in the mind and is created without any proof at all. That’s the definition of making something up.

Just a reminder, that Republicans have been making accusations of fraud for years and years, and to this day have never, NEVER, presented any evidence at all.

#us politics #Election 2020 #reason #voting #ballots #voter fraud

10 notes · View notes

wtffundiefamilies · 4 years

Link

For those of you who missed this, this is the doctor whose genius Trump is praising. As always, bolding is mine for emphasis.

A Houston doctor who praises hydroxychloroquine and says that face masks aren’t necessary to stop transmission of the highly contagious coronavirus has become a star on the right-wing internet, garnering tens of millions of views on Facebook on Monday alone. Donald Trump Jr. declared the video of Stella Immanuel a “must watch,” while Donald Trump himself retweeted the video.

Before Trump and his supporters embrace Immanuel’s medical expertise, though, they should consider other medical claims Immanuel has made—including those about alien DNA and the physical effects of having sex with witches and demons in your dreams.

Immanuel, a pediatrician and a religious minister, has a history of making bizarre claims about medical topics and other issues. She has often claimed that gynecological problems like cysts and endometriosis are in fact caused by people having sex in their dreams with demons and witches.

She alleges alien DNA is currently used in medical treatments, and that scientists are cooking up a vaccine to prevent people from being religious. And, despite appearing in Washington, D.C. to lobby Congress on Monday, she has said that the government is run in part not by humans but by “reptilians” and other aliens.

Immanuel gave her viral speech on the steps of the Supreme Court at the “White Coat Summit,” a gathering of a handful of doctors who call themselves America’s Frontline Doctors and dispute the medical consensus on the novel coronavirus. The event was organized by the right-wing group Tea Party Patriots, which is backed by wealthy Republican donors.

In her speech, Immanuel alleges that she has successfully treated hundreds of patients with hydroxychloroquine, a controversial treatment Trump has promoted and says he has taken himself. Studies have failed to find proof that the drug has any benefit in treating COVID-19, and the Food and Drug Administration in June revoked its emergency authorization to use it to treat the deadly virus, saying it hadn’t demonstrated any effect on patients’ mortality prospects.

“Nobody needs to get sick,” Immanuel said. “This virus has a cure.”

Immanuel said in her speech that the supposed potency of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment means that protective face masks aren’t necessary, claiming that she and her staff had avoided contracting COVID-19 despite wearing medical masks instead of the more secure N95 masks.

“Hello, you don’t need a mask. There is a cure,” Immanuel said.

Toward the end of Immanuel’s speech, the event’s organizer and other participants can be seen trying to get her away from the microphone. But footage of the speech captured by Breitbart was a hit online, becoming a top video on Facebook and amassing roughly 13 million views—significantly more than “Plandemic,” another coronavirus disinformation video that became a viral hit online in May, when it amassed roughly 8 million Facebook views.

“Hydroxychloroquine” trended on Twitter, as Immanuel’s video was embraced by the Trumps, conservative student group Turning Point USA, and pro-Trump personalities like Diamond & Silk. But both Facebook and Twitter eventually deleted videos of Immanuel’s speech from their sites, citing rules against COVID-19 disinformation. The deletions set off yet another round of complaints by conservatives of bias at the social-media platforms.

Immanuel responded in her own way, declaring that Jesus Christ would destroy Facebook’s servers if her videos weren’t restored to the platform.

“Hello Facebook put back my profile page and videos up or your computers with start crashing till you do,” she tweeted. “You are not bigger that God. I promise you. If my page is not back up face book will be down in Jesus name.”

Immanuel is a registered physician in Texas, according to a Texas Medical Board database, and operates a medical clinic out of a strip mall next to her church, Firepower Ministries.

Immanuel was born in Cameroon and received her medical degree in Nigeria. In a GoFundMe legal defense fund, which swelled from just $90 to $1,616 hours after her speech, Immanuel claims without offering any proof that members of a Houston networking group for women physicians are scheming to take her medical license away over her support for hydroxychloroquine.

It’s not clear whether anyone is actually trying to take Immanuel’s license. But many of her earlier medical claims are definitely ludicrous.

In sermons posted on YouTube and articles on her website, Immanuel claims that medical issues like endometriosis, cysts, infertility, and impotence are caused by sex with “spirit husbands” and “spirit wives”—a phenomenon Immanuel describes essentially as witches and demons having sex with people in a dreamworld.

“They are responsible for serious gynecological problems,” Immanuel said. “We call them all kinds of names—endometriosis, we call them molar pregnancies, we call them fibroids, we call them cysts, but most of them are evil deposits from the spirit husband,” Immanuel said of the medical issues in a 2013 sermon. “They are responsible for miscarriages, impotence—men that can’t get it up.”

In her sermon, Immanuel offers a sort of demonology of “nephilim,” the biblical characters she claims exist as demonic spirits and lust after dream sex with humans, causing all matter of real health problems and financial ruin. Immanuel claims real-life ailments such as fibroid tumors and cysts stem from the demonic sperm after demon dream sex, an activity she claims affects “many women.”

“They turn into a woman and then they sleep with the man and collect his sperm,” Immanuel said in her sermon. “Then they turn into the man and they sleep with a man and deposit the sperm and reproduce more of themselves.”

According to Immanuel, people can tell if they have taken a demonic spirit husband or spirit wife if they have a sex dream about someone they know or a celebrity, wake up aroused, stop getting along with their real-world spouse, lose money, or generally experience any hardship.

Alternately, they could just be having dream-sex with a human witch instead of a demon, she posits.

“There are those that are called astral sex,” Immanuel said in the sermon. “That means this person is not really a demon being or a nephilim. It’s just a human being that’s a witch, and they astral project and sleep with people.”

Immanuel’s bizarre medical ideas don’t stop with demon sex in dreams. In a 2015 sermon that laid out a supposed Illuminati plan hatched by “a witch” to destroy the world using abortion, gay marriage, and children’s toys, among other things, Immanuel claimed that DNA from space aliens is currently being used in medicine.

��They’re using all kinds of DNA, even alien DNA, to treat people,” Immanuel said.

Immanuel’s website offers a prayer to remove a generational curse originally received from an ancestor but transmitted, in Immanuel’s telling, through placenta. Immanuel claimed in another 2015 sermon posted that scientists had plans to install microchips in people, and develop a “vaccine” to make it impossible to become religious.

“They found the gene in somebody’s mind that makes you religious, so they can vaccinate against it,” Immanuel said.

Immanuel elaborated on her fascination with witchcraft in her 2015 Illuminati sermon, claiming that witches were intent on seizing control of children.

In her 2015 sermon on the Illuminati’s supposed agenda to bring down the United States, Immanuel argues that a wide variety of toys, books, and TV shows, from Pokémon—which she declares “Eastern demons”—to Harry Potter and the Disney Channel shows Wizards of Waverly Place and That’s So Raven were all part of a scheme to introduce children to spirits and witches. Immanuel warned that the Disney Channel show Hannah Montana was a gateway to evil, because its character had an “alter ego.” She has claimed that schools teach children to meditate so they can “meet with demons.”

In the sermon, Immanuel preserved special vitriol for the Magic 8-Ball, a toy that can be shaken up to “reveal” any answer. Immanuel claims the otherwise innocuous Magic 8-Ball was in fact a scheme to get children used to witchcraft.

“The 8-Ball was a psychic,” she said.

Immanuel’s oddball claims about the world extend to politics. She didn’t bring up this allegation publicly in Washington, but she has claimed that the American government is run in part by non-human reptilians.

“There are people that are ruling this nation that are not even human,” Immanuel said in her 2015 Illuminati sermon, before launching into a conversation she had with a “reptilian spirit” she described as “half-human, half-ET.”

Immanuel has also used her pulpit to preach hatred of LGBT people. Shortly before the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage, Immanuel warned her flock that gay marriage meant that “very soon people are going to be seeking to marry children” and accused gay Americans of practicing “homosexual terrorism.” In the same sermon, she praised a father’s decision to not love his transgender son after a gender transition.

“You know the crazy part?” Immanuel said. “The little girl demands he must love her anyway. Really? You will not get it from me, I’d be like ‘Little girl, when you come back to be a little girl again, but you talk—for now, I’m gone.’”

Unusually for a pediatrician, Immanuel has praised corporal punishment for children. The American Academy of Pediatrics opposes corporal punishment, and claims that the “vast majority” of pediatricians do not recommend it.

“Children need to be whipped,” she declared in a 2015 sermon, before adding that she didn’t think children should be “abused.”

It’s also not clear that Immanuel has abided by her claims that face masks aren’t necessary. In her Washington speech, Immanuel claimed that she and her medical staff had avoided any COVID-19 infections while wearing only medical masks. But in two videos shot at her clinic, Immanuel appears to be wearing an N95 mask, which offers more protection.

Immanuel has also alleged that masks of all kinds are superfluous, because she says COVID-19 can be easily cured with hydroxychloroquine. But in a Facebook video advertising her clinic, Immanuel said anyone seeking treatment should wear a face mask before entering the clinic.

“Wear a mask, or a scarf, or anything to cover your face,” Immanuel said in the video.

Immanuel has seized on her newfound celebrity, tweeting a video demanding that CNN hosts and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases chief Anthony Fauci give her jars of their urine so she can test if they’re secretly taking hydroxychloroquine even as they caution against its use.

“I double dog dare y’all give me a urine sample,” Immanuel tweeted in her challenge.

Now Immanuel is angling for the key rite of passage for any budding MAGA-world personality: a visit to the Trump White House. Late Monday night, Immanuel tweeted that she was open to meeting the president.

“Mr President I’m in town and available,” she tweeted. “I will love to meet with you.”

#stella immanuel #donald trump jr #donald trump #science is fake news #'family values'#white coat summit #tea party #turning point usa #diamond & silk #faux news

12 notes · View notes

prophezeiung · 4 years

Text

ways of realizing that you’re falling in love with your best friend pt. 1: the murdering of his girlfriend a holden vaisey x pollux parkinson drabble @vorhersage

A young woman had been killed, murdered in cold blood, the papers said. Whatever noteworthy family members she had left behind were not only, understandably, in mourning, but also desperate to find whoever was responsible for this tragedy and hold them accountable. Among them were her sister, Ophelia, who some people claimed had gone a little insane over this loss; and her boyfriend, Pollux, who wore the darkest shades of black and the hardest facial expressions in the weeks after her death. Among them was her killer. Holden Vaisey, this killer's best friend, had watched the events unfold like the one-man audience at the enactment of a drama. He had missed most of the lead-up to this breaking point, by his own volition, but he had been there when she had died. He had seen the desperation creep into her eyes the moment she realized that she had put her trust in the wrong person, and the gravity of this mistake. He had seen it leave her eyes as well, along with every last glimmer of life at one stroke of his best friend's hand. The months that had led up to this moment had been agonizing to watch, but now his front row seat was paying off. He supported Pollux fully in this decision, not only because their relation had become more than a nuisance to Holden, but because he thought it better for Pollux to rid himself of this unsustainable foolery. He surely would have helped out, had Pollux himself not come to the conclusion that entertaining a charade like this was anything but beneficial to him. Taking matters into his own hands had proven to Holden that Pollux, when it came down to it, was still the man he took him for. They had not talked about it, Holden hadn't known the plan or if there even was one, but he had sensed it, the stern determination and the cool composure that had taken over his friend, and he had felt at ease, just as much as if he had taken this life himself.

Somebody who did not know Holden Vaisey might see this: A deeply disturbed man reenacting the traumas of his youth. An affinity for the violent things in life born from the foreignness of affection and devaluation of empathy. An untrue self-image through distorted reflection. The physical denial of feeling — quite literally the drowning of emotions to the brink of extinction, self-torture under the pretense of betterment. Somebody who did not know Holden Vaisey might also see this: A love, like a flame, obsessive, hungry, scorching and selfish to the core, yet oxymoronically sacrificial. The sickening satisfaction over the misery of somebody else, only unusual and therefore more twisted in the context of their mutual and exclusive love. The routined incomprehension and denial of either.

Holden Vaisey himself was happy. Not the pure, unadulterated form of happiness, the innocent joy that grows rarer with wisdom, nor the twisted schadenfreude, the malicious pleasure at others' despair. He was simply and wantlessly content. It did not matter that someone had died and that consequentially something had to die. Things were like they were before, or soon they would be. He had not cared at all for this phase, this short-lived phenomenon that had been his best friend's relationship, and so it was good that it was over.

He didn't know how it had started, and he wanted and didn't want to understand it in equal measures. The less he knew the better, it should seem, but the material with which his mind filled in the gaps was at times just as unsavory as the sting of the truth, if not worse. He caught himself asking Pollux to decide in his favor time and time again, a little private experiment conducted in order to measure how invested in their friendship he should remain: "Stay a little longer?", "Are you coming?", "Any plans for tonight?"

The girl — rather than a woman, because they too barely were men — was secondary to Holden. They had met before, of course they had, whoever met Pollux would subsequently meet Holden as well, but she had instantly fallen in the same category that Holden filed most acquaintances in: Useless, uninteresting, unimportant. She was but background noise to him. The more surprised he was when Pollux began to seek her favor. She was not plain aesthetically, but she lacked even a spark of charm to Holden, and beyond that, she represented the class of leeches and lowlives that neither of them had ever paid much mind to, as well as political opinions that should alert even Pollux' sense of self-preservation. She was not only their inferior, she was their opposite. And yet Pollux spent every moment he could afford by her side — time that had previously been reserved for Holden, because of course they spent every spare minute of their life together. It was elemental to their bond. It was all they knew.

Someone who wasn't Holden Vaisey might have seen this: Jealousy.

Pollux Parkinson had withdrawn his attention slowly but noticeably, and even someone like Holden, who took the only meaningful bond he had for granted — because since he was born until now, it always had been granted —, noticed. When the unthinkable suddenly becomes reality, the first natural reaction is apprehension. When the only stability suddenly becomes unreliable, the first natural reaction is wariness. When the source of mutual trust is suddenly opened to a stranger, the first natural reaction is reticence. So Holden had just flashed his bloodhound growl grin and let Pollux believe that nothing had changed. He didn't let him know how unbalanced he became when Pollux went to spend time with his lover, he didn't show his disdain for his new strange lifestyle, he didn't express his doubts over how this choice would affect either of them. They barely spoke about her or Pollux' feelings, and Holden was quite happy with that.

He did not understand what they meant, anyway. The love that he had seen was this: A thoughtless devotion that made you blind and deaf to the world. The sacrifice of freedom and rationality. Bitter disappointment and lifelong aching for a never-real fantasy. It was this: Weakness. He didn't claim to know it, neither to want it, nor to understand it. But what he had seen of it did not match what he knew to be true about his best friend. The Pollux that he knew was clever, alert, rational. He was strong. To Holden's mind, it was easier to believe that what Pollux claimed to be love was false than to believe that his view of him was. The possibility that there were things that transcended previous beliefs and devotions lay so far outside of his reach that it wasn't even within sight. Any dark inkling that the person he'd known his entire life and was confident he knew by heart had a side that to him that was unknown and incomprehensible was buried as quickly as the victims of the manhunts that Holden conducted with increasing frequency. With or without Pollux, though more and more without.

Finally Pollux had seen how vulnerable he had made himself, how he had lost control, and so he had taken it back by force. Given her what she deserved. To Holden's eyes, it had been long overdue. The only consequence of Pollux' decision to kill this alleged love of his that Holden cared for, then, was the relief he felt at the prospects of things going back to how they were. Pollux had, to him, changed beyond recognition, but not beyond reversal. Whatever this girl had done to him, he had shaken it off, and even though Holden presumed that some of it might preoccupy him for another while — Pollux had always been the quieter of the two, and neither of them had a habit of prying innermost thoughts from the other —, nonetheless this choice must surely mean that he had found closure, or was confident that he would.

Someone who knew Pollux and the thing most important to him might see this: Two lovers, heartbroken, torn apart by the expanding gap between their two worlds. Doubt, rearing its ugly head for the last time, so strongly this once that the bond that had always managed to squash it before now snapped under its heel like a twig. The admittance of a true nature, supposedly, against all previous efforts of salvation, and the destruction of any proof that there had ever been such.

Nobody, not even those who knew Pollux and the thing most important to him, would see this: Two lovers, oblivious, each breaking their own heart and turning away from help and each other. Love masked as habit, desire masked as codependency. Knowledge of one another, so intimate it might predict actions even before they are initialized, yet an intentional blindness towards the most basic psychological processes, their own and the other's.

That Pollux was keeping his distance even after the deed was done and the circumstances had shifted back to something familiar was always part of the equation. Holden knew his friend, and he was patient with him. Not the calculating patience he had for everyone else, people that he expected to gain something from and would therefore suffer through their antics if the price was right — no, for Pollux he would wait, however long and for whatever reason. In this case he knew what he would win from it, and it made him display an almost childlike anticipation that grew with every day, but it made no difference. Holden was certain that, sooner or later, Pollux would return to his old self, return to him.

Because in turn, nobody knew what Pollux Parkinson meant to Holden, not even Pollux himself. It was this: Glue that held together something irreparable. A silver lining for someone irredeemable. An extension of himself, as irreplaceable as a limb and as vital as an organ. A mirror, and at the same time, guidance. The promise of safety, taken for granted and the only reason why his world didn't collapse daily.

Had he been provided with this clear-cut definition, cold as steel, and asked, was it love? The answer would undoubtedly be yes. But a man who let a sick mind decide over a healthy heart would never consider that it was able to love when he had decided long ago that he didn't subscribe to this strange concept. No, the admission to anything but self-sufficiency would certainly crumble the so carefully constructed self-image.

For a person so keen on controlling every single aspect of their presence, Holden paid very little mind to the routines pertaining to his best friend. Whatever he felt like doing, he just did; Pollux understood, he was the same. There was no reason to overcomplicate matters that so smoothly ran on their own. If a future without the other was impossible, why bother trying to live any other life?

#death /#murder /#long post /#( in case the read more fails pray for me )#( n e ways i wrote this a while ago but it's time to put it on here )#( ft. nici's ophelia whom we love )#vorhersage #wahrsagung #𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐯𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐲 › general › the murderer #𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐯𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐲 › ship: pollden › fuel the pyre of your enemies #𝐫𝐩. › drabble › the things we invent when we are scared

7 notes · View notes

terflies · 4 years

Text

Looks like @blue-exorsexist has blocked me, so I can’t respond to their comments directly, but there’s a lot of misinformation here. I’ll try to be brief, so if you want me to explain/clarify/justify anything please ask.

The current medical and scientific consensus is that being trans is not inherently a medical disorder, and that Gender Dysphoria (which is a disorder) is not an essential part of it—exactly what “tucutes” argue. Transmeds have consistently failed to produce scientific evidence to the contrary.

If anyone wants to disagree with (1) please do so appropriately: with sources that explicitly support your argument and a (brief) explanation of how they do so, not just a list of links without context.

The APA (and the DSM-5) are by no means beyond criticism—I have a few myself—but it is a lie to say there is “no science” to support them.

The relevant working group* for the DSM-5 have outlined their reasoning and evidence for the change from GID and GD, and why being trans is no longer considered a medical condition in its own right [Cohen-Kettenis & Friedman, 2009; Zucker et al., 2013]. Again: not beyond criticism, but if you are to criticise to so by honestly engaging with the work. For example see [Davy & Toze, 2018].

It is worth remembering that changes in the DSM-5 are informed by criticisms of the DSM-IV, and in particular the observation in literature that not all trans people experience GD. For example see [Bartlett, Vasey, & Bukowski, 2000].

The APA has inconsistently defined ‘transgender’, with some instances erroneously including gender expression. The definition given in the DSM-5, however, is “individuals who transiently or persistently identify with a gender different from their natal gender”, and gender non-conformity is explicitly excluded (differential diagnosis).

I didn’t pretend the whole Western media isn’t liberal-biased (though it evidently is not) but this is irrelevant; @transmedking alleged that “the dsm-5 and (especially) the apa, and majority of other psychology associations, are very heavily liberal based” [sic]. This assertion has not been justified with evidence, and specifically with respect to the work group for GD (which includes Zucker, so...have fun).

More to the point, though, you need to justify that this bias has compromised the intellectual honesty and/or scientific integrity of changes to the DSM-5 entry for Gender Dysphoria (from GID).

Even if such bias were proven, it would not be proof in itself that the DSM-5 is wrong with respect to trans people and GD. Transmeds still need to prove that anyway.

I didn’t misread; I was referring to transmeds’ general practice of trying to sway public opinion.

More to the point, which organisations like the APA do (and, I believe, should) consider social factors (e.g. stigma), you still need to justify a claim that they’re “more political than science-based”.

Regarding the 90% of psychologists use it state they’re dissatisfied [citation?]—how much of that dissatisfaction is related to the entry for GD specifically, and how many wish for an alternative that lists trans people as mentally ill?

That the DSM-5 is criticised does not mean transmedicalism is right by default; as always the burden of proof is on you to prove that being trans is inherently a mental disorder and GD and intrinsic part of it.

The post feels like a microcosm of transmed discourse, especially the lack of any evidence.

*Not to be confused with the “GD Working Group”, a self-appointed group concerned with junk like ROGD and social contagion.

#transphobia #transmedicalism #blue-exorsexist #blue exorsexist #bad science #outright lies #red herrings #bias #DSM 5 #apa

52 notes · View notes

xcayde6 · 5 years

Text

For the one last time... Dear Destiny community,

I think I have to face it that was never welcome in the community from the start. I give up defending myself. People who already couldn’t stand me will end up believing the stories they like best anyway. I’m tired. Tired of made up stories with people or blogs I’ve never seen or interacted before, being exposed for my love and sexual attraction for Cayde, my experience with bullying and sexual abuse questioned, being called biphobic or homophobic for not liking certain Cayde ships or sharing fanart, manipulated proof and screenshots, being accused of fake blogs and followers. Overall just tired of a community that once again showed their true self and bullied another person off Tumblr. I’ve tried to fight hate with love, but I guess I’ll give you what you want and leave. The reputation you gave me just cannot be repaired, no matter if I’m innocent and the truth comes out, or not. You’re lucky that I’m so much stronger than I used to be, cause I don’t know if other people could handle dealing with so much hate. It may be just the internet, but there’s a person with feelings behind every screen and everyone handles bullying differently. It’s their life in your hands. Please consider that in future with your next victim(s). I’ve met amazing, creative and overall wonderful people here in the past half year and even found friends. Sadly I realized too late who turned out to be bad for me and others, and the hurt they’ve done cannot be excused. I never stood for any kind of bullying, harassment and especially not for death threats, since I’ve dealt with this myself online and in reallife a lot. You claim I never made a point that I don’t tolerate this kind of behavior, but that’s not right. I’ve apologized many times for the behaviour of some of my followers, I just think you didn’t want to see it, or that it wasn’t enough. Maybe it wasn’t enough, maybe I should’ve done more. But better late than never. I won’t call anyone out, since I don’t want anyone to go through what I have to right now, but today I’ve told someone I considered one of my friends here that I want a future without them. Some of you may know who I mean. It seems she didn’t take it well and deleted herself. Maybe some of you are right and I should’ve done it earlier to protect me and others, but I can’t rewind time. If I could, I would. But you most know, I always try to see the good in people and give them another chance. I guess that was one of my biggest mistakes here. But please, I just cannot repeat it enough, that I don’t have the same views like toxic followers and ex-friends of mine. I don’t stand for any kind of homophobia and bullying, these people are responsible for their own actions. Let’s not forget that online bullying and sending someone death threats is considered a crime in Germany and it’s easy to track. I’m not that stupid to risk my future at the police over a videogame character and arguments online. It’s not worth it. I’m sad and really heartbroken right now, but i’ll live. Life goes on and leaving Tumblr is not the end of the world for me. It was just my safeplace for a little while. I’m okay with being alone with my love for Cayde for now again, I guess no one can hurt, expose or laugh at me that way. He may be just a stupid videogame character, but I’m so grateful for him. He’s truly a light in the dark and done so much for me than anyone else ever could. Fictional or not. I have nothing to hide and I won’t delete this blog. I’ll keep it as an archive for anyone who wants a trip down memory lane and for anyone who will fall in love with Cayde in future. There will be one last final post coming up that means a lot to me, but promise no more texts defending myself, it’s just useless at this point wasting my time. Who knows. Maybe I’ll come back when people calm down and all of this blows over, but it’s more likely I won’t come back at all. Me, my health and my apprentice and future job are just more important to me now. Overall I’d like to apologize from the bottom of my heart if I ever made someone uncomfortable with my behaviour. I’m sorry if I sadly was part of making people leave Tumblr because I didn’t speak up or done enough against my toxic followers and ex-friend behaviour. I’m sorry that even though I’m sexually open when it comes to a fictional character, a rough sex joke somehow triggered me. Also I’m sorry for all the other things I’m supposed to have done, doesn’t matter anymore if for real or not. I’m sorry. I’ve always aspired to be and do good. Cayde once said: My calling is to do good. Maybe not always to “be” good, ya know, but do good. There’s a difference. I somehow really relate to that. Maybe too much of trying to do good was too much. Maybe I’ve failed here, trying to overly protect myself from people who hurt me in the past. But no one will ever make me believe that I’m a bad person or that Cayde would be disappointed in me. It hurts but I know it’s not true. I want to leave in peace and forgive anyone who ever hurt me, lied about me, called me out and sent me hateful messages and death threats. You have to face that your behaviour wasn’t right and that you’ve made mistakes either, but I’ll forgive you. We all are just human after all. All these allegations and things I’ve read about me are horrible, but it happened, I’ll leave it in the past. You’ve taken my safeplace away, but you can’t take my love for Cayde and the wonderful time and experience I’ve had here in the past half year. One last thank you to everyone who believes me, everyone who still supports me and sends me love, everyone who took me and my nonsense the way I am, everyone who just fangirled with me, everyone who enjoyed my Cayde thirst and content, everyone who made my day better with their posts, drawings, messages or just being here and of course thanks everyone who at least took their time and read all of this. I’ll always love and appreciate you. <3 See you starside. XOXOXOXO Nicole

#Destiny #farewell

264 notes · View notes

princess--catherine · 4 years

Text

Maybe y’all will hate me for this, I’m all for women’s rights and the Me Too movement but has it maybe taken a turn it shouldn’t have? I can already feel the hatred

Just in the past couple weeks I’ve seen at least 3 “predators/rapists exposed”, and after looking into it I saw no predatory behavior to expose that was given. And people are losing their shit over this “cancelation?” The evidence for this one? “Had a minor backstage”...you think that didn’t and doesn’t currently happen with idk, every Disney star EVER and boy band on the radio? I’m sure a portion of Billie Eilish fans who’s parents buy backstage passes are REAL young, is she cancelled too? Since when does having a minor in your presence = any type of sexual behavior? This allegation causally mentions “backstage minor” and quickly moves to “predator” with no cohesion there. Since when does an adult simply being around a minor automatically make you guilty of doing sick shit? The “evidence” shown was pretty pathetic: cropped and blocked out texts with no name as to who it’s from, no name but said star predator, no time stamp or date, no pics, no voice memos, no emails, no proof of any kind that there was any truth to the claims, no detail, no real allegation actually even made from what I saw. Unless the “so and so did this” part was in invisible ink. I could literally google the date of a ‘insert famous person here’ concert or general tour dates, and do the same with a texting app or with someone else’s phone. This is an Accusation on someone of a serious sex crime on the sole basis maybe 5 texts, some of which are hidden, and ALL of which are anonymous, detail no criminal activity, are never worth ending or attempting to make sure someone’s career over.

Another one I saw was an explanation that another social media person made a somewhat crude comment/gusture towards a woman he knew but wasn’t super familiar with. One time, no actual touching. He was later told by a friend “not cool, other lady friend did not like”, he did as he should have and apologized, and it didn’t happen again- admittedly on both sides. The two girls told him everything was cool and okay, no harm no foul, don’t worry about it. It didn’t happen again and the friendship continued. Days later, “evidence” comes out from one of them citing him as a sexual predator for this situation. This incident. Yeah, it’s not cool to get in peoples space or compliment them in certain ways if your friendship is not on that level and it hasn’t been established. That I agree with, that it simply wasn’t very polite, but a) no one was actually touched physically in anyway and b) the “crude” comment from my understanding was about an outfit fitting her well or being firm fitting. Yeah, that might make ya feel a lil icky, but there was no sexual suggestion or threat. There’s a huge difference between unwanted attention and sexual harassment. Someone else later gets involved but says she’s “not comfortable/willing to discuss” but still insists he’s a predator but doesn’t show a single shred of any involvement or information. If I was these people being falsely accused, getting death treats and doxxed, and ultimately, “cancelled”/therefore loss of income possibly long term , with basically no evidence or someone saying shit like “yes, that’s a predator. Nobody gets to know why I’m saying that though. I don’t want to relive it, my bad. You horrible people need to stop supporting this sex offender!” I’d be sueing the shit out of someone and everyone for slander. Like this is unreal to me. It really blows my mind.

Before you message me hateful shit, hear me out. I’m not saying these guys are stand up, amazing, perfectly well behaved dudes. I’m not saying they’ve never done anything predatory or wrong before in their lives or careers. Lord knows narcissistic and higher than thou types run entertainment. I’m sure they all got their attitude and behavioral problems. I’m just saying the info I just read and described is almost nothing being real generous, no rational person sees that and labels someone a sex offender. You’re accusing someone of a very serious crime, in a lot of cases a fat ole felony, being a RSO list sometimes for a lifetime. Bill Cosby? Deserve it. Weinstien? Deserve it. Epstein? Deserved to be under the jail. I understand there’s not always physical evidence, or maybe there’s not enough to build a case/a case is unwanted by victim. Some say they want people to know and be warned. If that’s what you truly want, you truly truly are trying to protect others, go in 150%. Everything you got. But when this person publicly and openly calling someone out by name for being a “rapist/sexual predator”, absolutely dragging them thru the mud, and the reasoning, the justification for this is that he was dating other women? nah sis. That’s not how this works, getting played, while scummy, is NOT RAPE/SEXUAL ASSAULT/etc. (*this is excluding things that don’t apply to this particular story like recanting consent or knowingly passing on an STI) So sure, he’s a probably a POS, clearly unloyal, he’s maybe learned the art of sweet talkin his way into this one way monogamous relationship, and I frankly wouldnt feel bad if one of those girls who got played popped 3 of his tires, bought a fuck ton of spiders and sneak them into his bedroom or something. But not jail or prison. What he did (unless other info comes out) isn’t something to be uplifted or encouraged, it’s poor, unfair behavior. But what he did is not CRIMINAL. It’s just shitty and inconsiderate. And I know y’all are reading this thinkin “fuck this bitch”, making assumptions before you read a fraction of what I’m saying.

So let me explain a situation I was accidentally involved in a few years ago with someone who was “famous” around those parts and had lots of fans and groupies. Let’s call him “Lee”. Long story short, a friend and I were with him and different other people basically from like 8-9 pm to around 4 am. He was alone (out of my sight) only 3 times: once to use the bathroom at my friends before leaving, once in the men’s bathroom at a club, and for maybe 5 minutes when I had to change at my friends place before going back over. They lived in the same complex and stuff so it was basically throwing on some sweats and taking an elevator down. We hangout, drink, smoke, talk. Lowkey, chill.

I wake up the next day, someone texted me this link about “Lee” raping a girl. I’m thinking “holy shit, that’s scary and insane, we were just with him last night drinking and shit.” Keep reading...it says it was the night before. Same date we were with him. And the time the assault supposedly took place was when we had come back to his place, where other people were already there, we were sitting there forever talking/whatever, this girl who pointed the finger was not even in the room and left before we did. She poked her head in once and asked where Lee’s roommate was. He told her cookout, it’s late so it’ll be a minute. Asked her if she wanted to hang out with us. She declined. So I figured maybe this info was wrong somehow and at the time I wasn’t making the connection between that girl and this story. I was like, no way a girl would lie about that of all things and especially knowing it’d likely get picked up by the local media, or at least local gossip. Her life here would be over. My friend and I decided to go talk to the police even though I avoid the damn police at all costs. The first thing I asked this officer was: “are you POSITIVE this is the date, place, and time, and are you POSITIVE “Lee” is who she is accusing?” And I asked that mostly because I was not about to defend or vouch for someone about a situation I wasn’t present for. Also, I wasn’t the biggest fan of “Lee”, so I sure as shit I wasn’t getting myself involved and going to bat for him without knowing it’s right. The Officer was very adamant that all that info was correct, victim was very sure. I explained to him everything I explained above, but I’m sure in better detail and included texts, pics, videos all with times, plus receipts showing how this isn’t adding up. He wasn’t alone the entire night and early morning. Officer ask me if she (the victim) was visiting a roommate of Lee’s, if they were sleeping together during her visit, I told him the truth which was that I didn’t really know for sure but it was a possibility. He told me somebody else had claimed she was no longer welcome for unknown reasons and believed this to be be related. I explain to the officer that I won’t speak on her time with the roommate because I saw her only long enough for her to ask a question and respond to another. Before she peeped out the door, I had no clue anyone was in there. I said I think she told me her name but I’m awful with names even sober so. He started getting kinda hostile and cutting me short. I repeated exactly what I told him the first time: I’m only speaking on what I witnessed and what I know to be true. So, if you and she are correctly reciting the time, place, person being accused, this accusation is untrue. He first makes a bitchy threat like “you know these girls who lie for these athlete boys can really get in trouble? They all end up broke after the NFL anyway if they even make it. Lying for a friend is illegal, that’s breaking the law and will get YOU in jail.” I lost all my fear of speaking to a police officer at this point because they KNOW this man did not just call me a liar to my face despite my 1:2 of the evidence already fucking up this accusation. I told him that I honestly wasn’t a fan either professionally or personally of “Lee” and I would lie for no one regardless of friendship or status about this, I’d turn in my own flesh and bloood brother and sing like a bird if I caught him doing any sex offender shit. So again, I told this slow man with 2 braincelle this was the reason I asked about how sure he was and he believed the victim was, on the time, place, person, etc. Officer says something along the lines of “well, something happened to this girl and this boy’s gonna be hurtin for it. Someone’s getting charged here.” Which I dunno bout y’all, maybe I’m reading it wrong. But What I gathered from that is: “I’ve decided to be judge and jury in this situation and moreorless declare this young man guilty despite evidence in front of my own eyeballs that shows that there is a good chance the accused is innocent.

I have no idea why this happened. But after we spoke to that dickhead cop it was dropped relatively quickly. I don’t remember now if she pulled the charges herself or the state denied to prosecute. And even still, this followed him. The internet is forever. When his great grandkids google his college career, that will show up. Please keep in mind this was a black athlete, playing ball for a big college in the south, with a white girl accuser, all the cops I saw at that station were white in the short time I was there and at least the one I spoke to had his mind made up. He was loud and clear about that. He said basically the same to my friend who was interviewed separately, that he was determined to convict him, he was “the one”. This city I’m speaking of has been sued for police brutality against BPOC and I’ve heard my friends/classmates getting called the N word (hard ER) in the broad, open day light. So yeah add that info in with the rest and come to your own conclusion.

Before anyone comes for my throat again: idk exactly what DID happen but I know what DID NOT. Which to be clear, is pretty specifically: this rape with this person, did not happen here and at this time. So I’m not saying something didn’t happen but under different circumstances. I know trauma can mess with memories and if something did happen under different circumstances, I am so sorry that happened to her, I wouldn’t wish sexual assault on my worst enemy. I’m also not saying she necessarily had ill intentions or knew it would proceed and go viral as it did. The point is I just don’t know, no clue. Not throwing any blame or shade her way, all blame and shade on that cop though. ACABs, no excuse for his ass.

Anyway, y’all don’t gotta believe this since it’s been a few years and I highly doubt that stuff is anywhere in my phone like 4 iPhones and two laptops later. No reason to front, I don’t gain anything by lying but a guilty conscience. But this scenario that I btw, very much did not wish to be a part of, showed me another side of things. Can we agree to yes of course, trust and support women but also trust evidence and testimony? While, yes, stats show few women lie about this, can we at the same time understand questioning and thoroughly investigating such a heinous crime? Can we also recognize the system is literally built to “serve & protect” some by severely and systematically oppressing others? There are people, too many damn people, who have lost absolutely everything, served major time in big boy maximum security 23-1s, and have been put to death, based on biases and little to no evidence.

Next time you see an accusation, regardless of what it is, please do a little research. Make your own conclusion. Put yourself in their shoes, would you want to be “convicted” (either legally or through SM bullshit) on a snip it of convo with almost no information/context? Called a rapist cause you led someone on? No. You wouldn’t. Actually for any crime for that matter. You would reasonably ask and expect for it to be fair, two sided, and with as much evidence or info as possible. So let’s treat musicians, athletes, influencers, celebs the same way. Let’s not condemn before gathering as much information as possible. If not, I am so afraid we will drive an innocent person to suicide. We would all feel so guilty if someone was driven to suicide over false or misleading statements. Let’s avoid this, please.

#2020 #people aint gon like this one #assault #SA #metoo #accusations #incarceration #also most importantly ACABs

2 notes · View notes

onisiondrama · 5 years

Text

onision.co questions part 4

He didn’t answer the next 80 questions so I just included the rest of his answers.

Question for ya bub. How does kai feel about all of these accusations? They seem to be pretty inactive whilst you go on a love spree/ tumblr dom spree.

Onision Staff answered 6 hours ago

Kai can speak about his own feelings whenever he chooses.

In light of recent events will you give your dad a second chance? Since you and Kai are facing what you claim to be false accusations… do you not think the same could be said of your father?You’ve claimed multiple people have spoken out about your dad. Multiple people have spoken out about both you and Kai and yet you dismiss those claims. To paraphrase one of your recent quotes, if he really did commit a crime wouldn’t he be in jail?

Onision Staff answered 6 hours ago

My father and I have many issues, ones that extend beyond my own family members claiming he did things. If I found out my father was innocent, we would still not be speaking due to other things he has done to me specifically.

replied 6 hours ago

Tbh he’s probably pretty ashamed of the man you became. Doubt he would want anything to do with you either.

replied 5 hours ago

Who are you to judge someone’s family dynamics… ? He doesn’t need your, nor his fathers approval.

Onision Staff replied 5 hours ago

*shrugs* He doesn’t know me, not many people do.

About the grooming… So do you honestly see nothing wrong with knowing Sarah since she was like 15-16, being her legal guardian, referring to her as a “little sister” in your videos, saying how there would never be anything between you because that would be gross, and then finally, once she’s 18, have sex with her? Was that very honest of you, Mr. One Of The Most Honest Youtubers?

Onision Staff answered 6 hours ago

I didn’t meet that person till they were 16. Legal of consent is 16, and still nothing happened. The fact that nothing happened between any of us at 16, 17 & even right when she turned 18, that says it all. Especially considering as I understand only a medical waiver was signed, meaning we were not her legal guardians or anything. Just people who coexisted for years without any gross situations. Wish her well on the rest of her hopefully long/happy life though ~

replied 5 hours ago

any gross situations? like your spouse sending and asking for nudes from underage girls (proof of which can be found on the laineybot twitter) yeah sure greg. the legal age of consent is only if the person with the 16 year old isn’t that much older than them you fucking idiot. I hope kai is crying~

Why have you been making the same content for 10 years? Why is almost every ‘punchline’ someone getting shot or someone screaming? Do you not find that gets stale after a thousand times?Maybe consider going on a script-writing course?

Onision Staff answered 5 hours ago

I like my videos. That’s what matters to me, among other things.

replied 3 hours ago

dude no offense but if you want more viewers, you might want to change up your content. You can make comedy sketches but try to change it up a bit. Have you considered that’s why your youtube channel’s failing miserably. That and there’s documented evidence over the years of how badly you treat others…..yeah. Perhaps if you took criticism, you you wouldn’t be in this mess.

why did your husband accept and send nudes to minors? You always say “the age of consent in Washington is 16 years old”, but that’s regarding sexual contact/relationships. That doesn’t regard child grooming and that doesn’t include sending nudes to a then-17 year old and accepting nudes from a then-15 year old. what’s the explanation behind this and why are you and your husband so adamant in the face of screenshots and evidence?

Onision Staff answered 5 hours ago

I establish the legal age many times to address the fact that no one pursued a 16, 17 or even someone who just turned 18. Kai doesn’t want to be talked about, he communicated that, but I can say I don’t know what you’re talking about with the 15 year old thing. I’ve never seen any evidence of someone sending anyone anything like what you are referring to. As for Kai speaking to someone who was of the age of consent via text, he still never had any desire to send anyone any images like what you are referring to. In other words, people are thinking evil things, so they make evil claims, when in fact, Kai is a good person. That aside, I shouldn’t talk about him because he does not want to be talked about. Future conversations should probably only involve me.

replied 5 hours ago

Greg, Kai is 6 years older than said minor. If you’re 5+ years older than the minor and engage in sexual activity (nudes included) in Washington, you are considered a criminal. We’ve all seen the nude photos that Kai sent. Would you like to see the legal evidence of this? Why don’t you take a seat and let your shell of a husband defend himself for once? He’ll have to do it once he’s in court anyway 🙂

replied 5 hours ago

Kai posted said nude as a normal photo on instagram too so, there’s that. No one blackmailed you two. No one raped you two. I don’t know what narrative you two are spinning, but it’s very sad considering you’re both 33 and 24 years old and most of the allegations are coming from women who are or close to 19 years old. Also, said then-15 year old was friends with this person you’re both spinning the narrative against. Plus Gig Harbor and Pierce County PD are aware of the situation and want everyone to send in evidence. James, are you waiting for them to do so? This is a bad hill to plant yourself on. You are not Johnny Depp. Johnny Depp’s former spouses didn’t speak up against him to corroborate the stories of the victim(s).

19 notes · View notes

statusquoergo · 5 years

Text

Part I

Whoops; Katrina happened to overhear Esther yelling at Louis, and she wants in on stopping the merger without telling anyone about the assault, but to accomplish that, they’re going to need help. From…someone. Cool.

On his way out of the prison, Harvey calls Cahill to inform him that pressing Forstman was a bust, so Cahill needs to start putting pressure on Malik’s bosses to get him to lay off and he needs to do it tonight and I mean now. Cahill, who’s apparently on leave, possibly related to that pesky indictment thing he’s got going on, heads back to the office to ask some guy he works with to “go to Andrew Malik’s boss’s office and read him the riot act.” When Cahill points out that Malik has a long record of going after Harvey, the guy agrees to do it, but he also slips in the reminder that “the person who put [Cahill] in this position isn’t Andrew Malik… It’s Harvey Specter.” (I mean, he’s got a point.)

Donna then decides to get in on the fun, paying Malik a visit to inform him that he’s gonna lose “because [he’s] not just fighting Harvey. [He’s] fighting all of [them].” Well, Donna and Alex, at least; if memory serves, Louis and Katrina are otherwise occupied, but I guess “You’re fighting some of us” doesn’t sound quite as threatening.

Now, who did Katrina have in mind to recruit to Louis’s case? Samantha Wheeler, of course. Meeting up with her in some bar, Louis opens the conversation by telling her that thing his sister asked him not to tell anyone about how she was assaulted. Samantha bets Richmond has done this before, and Louis asks her to “do whatever it takes to take this piece of shit down.” He then goes to visit Esther, apologizing for breaking her trust as they proceed to have a canned discussion about how “you hear about this kind of thing now… But back then, you didn’t”; she blamed herself, she felt ashamed, it’s not her fault, all the standard notes and basically none of the heart. He offers to leave it alone if she still wants him to, but he did “get [them] some help,” and it looks like this one’s going forward after all.

Cahill’s friend getting Malik’s boss to pressure him to leave them alone seems to have backfired, as Malik catches Harvey on the street to arrest him “for conspiring with a federal prosecutor” (that’s not a thing). FYI, if you’re ever arrested, the appropriate response is: “I invoke my right to remain silent. I invoke my right to an attorney,” and then shut the hell up until your lawyer gets there. Harvey, Alleged Actual Attorney, instead says “I wanna call my lawyer,” at which point the arresting officer drops his cell phone on the ground and steps on it, and Malik ships him off to jail. When Malik stops by to gloat, Harvey brags that when “[he] asked for [his] attorney, [Malik] smashed his phone, which means [Harvey] could tell [him] he killed Kennedy, and it wouldn’t be admissible.” Again, false; Harvey said he wanted to call his lawyer, which is not “an explicit request for an attorney,” meaning Malik can ask him whatever the hell he wants and keep any of Harvey’s responses on the record (Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 [1994]). In any event, Malik tries to get Harvey to talk by informing him that Cahill’s been arrested for obstruction, and whichever of them caves first gets to…save his career? I guess this is a prisoner’s dilemma, but I'm going to have to dock them a few points for not making it clear that the first one to flip gets a lighter sentence, and also for Harvey actually labeling the situation “this little prisoner’s dilemma.” Too obvious, man; have a little class.

Back at the firm, Donna tells Alex about a really bad feeling she has about Malik and Harvey, so I expect Alex is going to end up representing Harvey in this matter.

Anyway Malik starts off his interrogation of Cahill by alleging that Cahill owes his job to Harvey for taking down Eric Woodall, which Cahill categorically denies; we then start switching back and forth between Malik’s interrogations of Cahill and Harvey, who appear to be giving exactly the same story (and why that in and of itself doesn’t set off some alarms, I’ve no idea): Cahill’s deal to take down Sutter was with Mike, not Harvey; Harvey took Sutter on as a client because Kevin got Mike out of jail; two dozen calls between Harvey and Cahill at that time aren’t evidence of conspiracy, they were about protecting Mike from Gallo. Malik keeps saying he has proof, but I dunno, so far this sounds like a lot of conjecture and circumstantial evidence. Then Alex shows up to tell Malik that his clients are done answering questions, and Malik gleefully announces that Cahill has retained Faye Richardson as counsel and she advised him to take the deal, which he did, so…take that, Harvey. He’s got you now. Definitely.

Oh, by the way, when Katrina “was a prosecutor for six years before [she] joined the firm,” she once failed to get justice for a woman who was assaulted by her boss even though “everyone believed her,” so she’s demanding Samantha let her help with the plan to get Richmond.

Right, so, Harvey’s first act upon his release from jail is to punch Cahill right in the face (way too much windup, he would’ve seen that coming fifty miles away), also yelling “Fuck you and the horse you rode in on,” which is just very cute. Cahill argues that Malik had them (you sure?) and he cut a deal to keep them both out of prison (a real prisoner’s dilemma should have ended with Harvey going to prison while Cahill went free), and Harvey counters that yeah, he colluded, “but [he] did it to get a man who never hurt a soul away from a convicted murderer who was gonna kill him”; furthermore, he’s spent his entire life doing what he thinks is right, and “rules aren’t right or wrong” so he’s “fine with what’s in [his] soul.” How very sanctimonious. (Also, “every line [he’s] ever crossed, [he’d] do it again”? He’s been a lawyer for like twenty years, I seriously doubt he’d stand by every single decision he’s ever made.)

Tag team time: Donna demands to know how Faye could betray Harvey by getting Cahill to take Malik’s deal, asserting that she just did it because she hates Harvey. Faye counters with actually a really good point: “In his heart, he believes he’s a good man. That’s why he won’t change and why he’s a cancer on this firm.” The fact that everyone at the firm loves him actually makes things worse because they’ll blindly follow him anywhere, and they’re kidding themselves if they think they’ll always be able to convince him to do what’s right. Donna snaps that it was Harvey’s moral code that kept him from turning Faye over to the bar (the judiciary…), which seems to give her pause, although for real, if she’s as stringent about adhering to the law as she claims to be, she should just report herself and let the chips fall where they may. At least that way she gets to control the narrative.

Despite the fact that they’ve found six women who Richmond assaulted over ten years, Samantha and Katrina still have no case because none of the women are willing to testify. Katrina then has the bright idea to go straight to the lawyers who arranged all the women’s NDAs, pitting them against one another in what I think is supposed to be the episode’s second prisoner’s dilemma, except that if these lawyers won’t talk, they have nothing to hold over them, so no one would face any consequences, and if one of them talks, the other one isn’t going to suffer for it, so they have nothing to bargain with. In any case, Katrina talks to one lawyer and Samantha talks to the other, and it’d be a little more badass if they had any actual leverage, but whatever, good on them for trying.

Donna’s hurt that Harvey didn’t tell her about Cahill’s deal, but it turns out that might not matter anyway because Alex discovered, between Harvey’s arrest warrant and Sutter’s autopsy report, that Malik had Harvey arrested not because his boss was giving him shit but because Harvey was closing in on the fact that Sutter died suddenly and thus couldn’t have given a deathbed confession, making Forstman’s testimony inadmissible hearsay. But Harvey doesn’t just want proof that Forstman lied; he wants to nail Malik to the wall, which they might be able to pull off “by giving Sean Cahill a chance to make things right.”

I think Katrina and Samantha’s gambit worked, but it’s a little unclear that it mattered, because Samantha goes to Louis’s to inform him that while they “have a road map to every time Paul has done this before and the settlements he’s paid… [They] still don’t have a plaintiff,” so the case is a no-go. Louis can’t ask Esther to testify, but based on that case she failed to prosecute, maybe Katrina can; meeting one-on-one, Katrina lays the situation out for Esther, plus the fact that she called the plaintiff from her old case, who said that even though they lost, she doesn’t regret coming forward. Also they “don’t have much time” before the merger goes through, so if they’re going to do this, they need to do it soon.

Brace yourself, here comes the big wrap-up: Harvey and Cahill ambush Malik to inform him of their Forstman-related findings and have Malik arrested for fabricating evidence. Malik says he’s not fabricating evidence…because he’s “the goddamn State’s Attorney,” which, no he’s not, New York doesn’t have a State’s Attorney, and even if it did, that doesn’t make evidence fabrication any less illegal. Whatever, he’s going to jail and Harvey and Cahill are friends again, and that's the end of that. Samantha and Louis show Richmond the evidence they collected of all his cover-ups and Esther arrives at the last second to play the necessary accuser, so Richmond resigns on the spot and Esther tells Louis she couldn’t have done it without him. Harvey stops by the prison to let Forstman know that they know he committed perjury and now Cahill gets to decide how much time is going to be added to his sentence, so good luck with that. Also the whole thing with Esther made Louis think about the importance of family to him and Sheila, and now he wants to cram a wedding in before the season finale. I mean, get married before Sheila gives birth.

Okay, so everything in that mad dash to the finish line feels pretty conclusive, right? We’re all happy with how it all ended up? Except according to Korsh, “[Episodes] 9 and 10 are sort of the consequences of what happens at the end of [episode] 8.” There’s like a minute left, what more could possibly happen?

Glad you asked. As soon as Harvey arrives home to preen about his win over Malik and Forstman, Donna makes an announcement: “[His] mother had a heart attack. She’s gone.”

So I have some thoughts about this.

Part III

#suits usa #s09e08 #season 9 #analysis

5 notes · View notes