problematicwelshman

[problematicwelshman]

So the Gaiman stuff, I know it’s not your area, but I’m spiraling and was just curious if you had any thoughts on it? Even if it’s in regards to how it was adjacent to Michael and David, etc. anything at all

To borrow a phrase from our Sherlockian friends: Not dead. So let’s dive in, shall we?

Received this one a while back and to be honest I have no idea what they’re talking about. I’m not “madd” about anything. (At least nothing fandom related. I’m sure I could find something else annoying--oh look, idiotic anon messages!)

As for the first message, let’s get into this absolute shitshow. If the allegations against Neil Gaiman are true—and frankly, I have zero reason to doubt so many women coming forward—then he deserves everything coming his way.

Prosecution? Absolutely. Career obliteration? Sign me the fuck up. Throw metaphorical (or real) tomatoes at him. Drag Amanda Palmer into the mess if she’s complicit, because accountability doesn’t stop at him. Torch it all.

Now, should Michael Sheen or David Tennant say anything? Hell no. And here’s why:

Let’s pretend you live next door to a meth lab. You know it’s a hot mess, you report it to the cops, and then…crickets. Do you decide to storm in and handle it yourself? No, because:

Meth heads are dangerous, and you don’t have a death wish.

There’s probably shit going on behind the scenes that you don’t know about, and barging in like a self-righteous moron could fuck everything up.

The same logic applies here. Michael, David, and anyone tied to Good Omens have likely been told to zip it—whether through legal gag orders, PR strategies, or just plain common sense. Anything they say could screw up investigations, tank the production, or bring unnecessary chaos to their lives.

And for the love of all things holy, stop with the idiotic take that their silence equals approval. (Not that you're saying that, Anon.) That’s not just wrong; it’s dumb as hell. These are people whose entire worlds have been rocked by this betrayal. Imagine finding out someone you’ve worked with and respected is a garbage human, and now everyone expects you to perform outrage on cue. That’s not how this works.

So, here’s the deal: Leave Michael, David, Anna, Georgia, and everyone else out of this. They’re not the morality police, nor are they your personal crusaders. Season three deserves to finish without idiot fans baying for blood. Channel that energy into something useful, like holding Gaiman accountable.

He deserves to face every ounce of shit coming his way—and trust me, it should be a lot.

[problematicwelshman]

Anna and Georgia trying to get people to ship them the way people ship Michael&David is so funny/sad. I also have a terrible feeling they both will make an appearance in GO 3 since it seems the only way they both can get jobs is through their partners.

Response under ‘read more’

Haha, I don’t follow them so I have the pleasure of missing most of it. I do laugh when I see it though, not so much because they do it for attention and clearly when there is something to promote, but because people buy into it. They have to do so very little for people to eat out of their hands and it’s just fascinating to me.

But what’s even funnier is that M/D shippers get torn to shreds for shipping even though they have so much material to work with, and a genuine relationship, meanwhile two women hashtag themselves once and everyone buys into it, ships them, and messages them lots of intimate things that if M/D shippers did it… damn. It’s seriously fascinating. Maybe people aren’t freaking out so much because with them they know it is fake. But damn different rules apply to them.

It is interesting how people can go into such depth to tell shippers why they’re wrong about M/D but somehow with the two women they mumbled wife once and the same people jumped on the train and screamed cho cho.

I will be angry if NG shoves them somewhere for the sake of it because they can’t act for shit and I do genuinely want a good show. Good Omens matters to me a great deal, we have an important storyline to resolve, it is the last season, and I want it to be good. Not Bingo or Where’s Wally?, sorry, another Tennant. Or Michael’s girlfriend.

There are so many good actors and actresses out there, I hope NG gives a chance to someone who deserves it.

[problematicwelshman]

Are you alive?

I am, Anon. Thanks for asking. Just been quiet since there’s not much new to say lately.

The Eponymous Welshman has been quiet too, some say it’s because he’s busy, some are saying he’s been chased off Twitter by mean assholes, others say his PR team has told him to pipe down again. All I know is that we’ve been without Sheentweets for a while, and since that’s his main form of interaction, I got nuthin.

At least until today.

Some awards were announced recently, congrats to David Tennant and Michael Sheen for their “Best Comedy Partnership” award, to Staged for “Best Returning Comedy” (even though--Staged? Really?), and to GO for “Best Returning Drama.”

Acceptance videos were recorded and shared, and everyone is happy and proud. (Well, we’re assuming that, since Michael only makes a cardboard appearance in David and Georgia’s video. No mention at all from his partner.)

But look at all the other content we got! Leather gloves! Ugly boots! Sideboob! I’m late to the discussion. If you want all the juicy details and discourse, go see @invisibleicewands, @ingravinoveritas, or @artificial-indulgence. There’s some great discussion on all those blogs about timing, messaging, and thought experiments.

What I am going to address is this:

This set of comments was in response to one of these poses, and…eew. TMI.

But what really gets me is the casual body shaming going on. I mean, look--APAT looks GOOD. Even sexy if generic blondes are your thing. No question she's got a good body. She's not a natural in front of the camera, but I’m guessing her target demographic doesn’t care about that. So yeah--you go girl. But just because you had 2 kids doesn't mean you automatically turn into a potato. People gushing over her looking this way after 2 kids are perpetuating a harmful myth. ALSO, people who expect women to look like that after having kids are also jerks. Let people who have kids look like they look without commenting on how it is JUST BECAUSE THEY HAD KIDS.

I know the commenter was trying to give a compliment, but to frame it as a surprise that a mid-20s woman with the means and the time to “shape up” after giving birth did just that is not really the compliment it was meant to be.

[problematicwelshman]

Thoughts on MS's posts on twitter today? I think his heart was in the right place but he was coming from a place of emotion and was therefore crap at wording it

I maintain that Michael is well within his rights to block whomever he chooses and that's all I'm going to say about that.

[problematicwelshman]

[problematicwelshman]

New red carpet pics and ugh what is wrong with APAT? Can’t she look happy even for paparazzi? And why does Michael always look so uncomfortable next to her in public?

Also girl needs to know how to smile if she plans to be on screen. Best she can do is a grimace 🤦🏻‍♀️

...I think you're mistaking 'grimace' for 'resting smug-ass bitch face,' but why quibble?

[problematicwelshman]

I see MS (and members of the fandom) refer to some personal difficulties he went through in about 2019. Do we know what this is? Do you have any guesses? Is it the breakup with SS?

Well yeah, he was caught out cheating with and knocking up APAT, he gave up all his money for the HWC, he was suddenly a sex symbol with a crazy fandom. I'd say 2019 was just the beginning of crazytimes for him, and a lot of it was detailed on this blog back then...

[problematicwelshman]

I have just recently got introduced to MS through GO2 and I was so sure he was gay that I’m surprised to see he is in fact very popular with the ladies. I’m honestly quite shocked i still don’t quite believe it lol

I mean...

[problematicwelshman]

Once again another snarky tweet about his looks. Guess she fucks with the lights off and thinks about how much work she doesn't have to do because she's a shack job.

Do any of you watch Ted Lasso? I’m slow on the uptake but have been wending my way through it.

A little background for those who may not know: Rebecca Welton (played by the outstanding Hannah Waddingham) has an asshole ex, Rupert, who married a much younger woman also named Rebecca, called Bex. Rupert and Bex have a baby girl. In the episode I watched most recently, Rebecca asks about the baby:

Rupert: "Oh, yeah, Diane. She's already walking. Can you believe that? Yeah. Drooling and pooing around the house." Bex: "Takes after her father."

Later in the episode, Rupert and Bex are departing the football stadium after the match, and as usual he’s being a jerk:

Bex: "It's so good to see you, Rebecca." Rebecca: "You too, Bex." Rupert: "Oh, Rebecca, my dear. So sorry for your loss. (It is hard to convey how disingenuously he says this, the slimy bastard.) Rebecca: "Thank you." Bex: "Come on, old man. It's way past your bedtime."

Is this a thing now? Young women who’ve grabbed the brass ring being twats about their sugar daddies? Is it art imitating life or did life in this case pick up something from art?

Perhaps it’s an inside joke. But inside jokes are called that for a reason. They’re not for everyone, and those who don’t get the punchline are left feeling out of the loop: Inside jokes are bad for a few reasons: they’re un-funny, boring, and aggravating to the listener. Worst of all, inside jokes alienate people by making them feel left out, alone, and un-special.

So why this recent spate of openly putting your life partner down? Art? Joke? Either way it’s not funny. Especially when only one partner does it and does it so repeatedly and so publicly.

[problematicwelshman]

Jesus Christ. I just stumbled upon this blog and I can’t believe my eyes. The amount of misogyny and parasocial relationship is insane. Like don’t you guys ever thing about what y’all are typing here 😭 you don’t know them you can’t know if they’re miserable or not you can’t know if Michael is only with Anna because of their children. You can’t know shit and all you do is yell into a blank space and create these conspiracies to help you cope with your sad and miserable lives. Both David and Michael are in a relationship with women way to younger for them and you guys don’t even talk about how that’s so problematic. You think Anna is using Michael like she’s the superior in the power dynamic?? She could be his daughter ffs. Just think about what are you doing with your lives and find better things to do because this is not normal behavior.

Anon - Originally this blog was called AngelicWelshman. After GO came out and Michael's relationship with APAT was revealed, followed by his increasingly bizarre behavior on Twitter, the blog changed to its current incarnation, ProblematicWelshman. At no time was Michael considered an innocent in any of this. Feel free to browse posts from 2020 on--you might learn something.

[problematicwelshman]

hi! sorry im new to the whole blog could you give me a rundown of the anagrams used? i see APAT a lot and i cant figure out who you're referring to! sorryyyy

Hi Nonny. @ingravinoveritas lays it all out for you here:

[problematicwelshman]

There have been a few incidents lately that have really raised some hackles in various fandoms and I’d like to remind people of something:

And I don’t mean just fans, but celebs too.  

For example, Neil Gaiman could have just as easily ignored the 2nd ask about whether or not Georgia and Anna were going to be in GO, but he chose to publicly call out a fan who had (to them) a legitimate worry. Should the fan have asked? Maybe, maybe not. Fans often step over the line as we all know. But Neil did not have to respond, and he didn’t have to be so unpleasant about it. Now the fan is mortified, and people are angry at them, and it all could have been avoided with the click of a mouse.

Over on the good ship OFMD, there’s furious debate about whether or not the fan who had Con O’Neill sign the R-rated body pillowcase should have done so. My question is should Con O’Neill have opened it up?  Should the fan have said “Please don’t unfold it!” Where is the boundary there? Look- I’m not easily offended, and I’m all about drawing what makes you happy, but even my eyebrows shot up when I saw the artwork on my Twitter. Now the debate is how cringe or not cringe it was, should fans be allowed to bring whatever for celebs to sign, was that fan in the wrong? I submit that it’s another bit of drama that could have been avoided if everyone stayed in their lane. If someone hands you something folded up, don’t just unfold it for the world to see and think twice about bringing something that could cause problems in the first place.

Celebs: Realize what power you wield and use it carefully.  We have seen this sort of “punching down” before, and it never ends well.  Put your ego aside and remember that people love your shows, and the fact that they’re so passionate about them just proves it. Take a breath and let it go.

Fans: For the love of all you believe in, remember that celebs are just people. Would you draw your coworker in lingerie and then show it to them?  Would you show your neighbor the E rated fanfic you wrote about them?  Share your artwork and stories with your friends all you want.  Bitch about the shows and the actors all you want.  But don’t share it with the celebs.

[problematicwelshman]

I guess your long nightmare is over since Neil said the objects of your derision are not in Good Omens 2. So happy you can relax now.

Damn, y'all have been busy. Go away for a while and look what happens.

It took me a bit to figure out what happened, but by now it’s old news for most of you.  Not going to add much, except the idea of having significant others in productions is really nothing new, especially in British TV.  I can think of 6 roles off the top of my head that were played by family members or SOs in Sherlock, Dr. Who was rife, Sandman was practically a family reunion, and I could go on.  There have been articles written about it, diagrams made, and endless discussion.

Is it a problem?  Maybe.  According to one article, “A notable name has often resulted in immediate entry into Britain’s media landscape, leading to a lack of opportunities for the working class.” 

Do I think it’s a problem if Ty Tennant or Peter Davison have roles in GO2?  Not really.  Do I buy that Neil Gaiman didn’t know who Ty Tennant was?  Not really.  Was he saying that to deflect accusations of nepotism?  I think so.  And that’s the part about this whole kerfuffle that gets me.  Just own up to it and move on.

Now- do I think it’s a problem if Georgia or Anna have roles in GO2 or GO3?  Maybe? 

I think what people are worried about is this:

“Does it matter when you’re the producer’s niece?”

“So, she gets to play a scene with Neville Sinclair, and we play scenery.  I love Hollywood.”

Georgia has shown she can act, but the jury is still out on Anna.  She just hasn’t shown she has the chops yet to hold her own with the who’s who of UK actors.  Her 3 IMDB credits include 2 she got because of her relationship with Michael and the other, I’m guessing, was similarly achieved.  At least Ty has a bigger variety of roles under his belt, even if he’s not the best actor yet.

Whether you agree with Neil’s response, or if you’re on the side of the anons here, I think we can all say  that we’re concerned about this issue because we all want GO2 (and hopefully GO3) to be the best it can be.

And no, I wasn’t having nightmares.  Been sleeping pretty well actually, thanks for keeping me in your thoughts.

[problematicwelshman]

450£ for a 30 min zoom call with Michael: there’d better be a striptease in it otherwise it’s a total waste of money 🤮

[problematicwelshman]

Have you seen Anna’s latest photo of her and Michael? Doesn’t Michael look so sad and tired? I feel like the whole vibe is just like they’ve just had a fight and are trying to keep it together for the camera, and the kids.

Hello, Anon. I did indeed see the picture that Anna posted last week, and it's honestly hard to know where to begin. First, let's get a visual up, for anyone who hasn't yet seen it:

What I first thought of when seeing this pic was, "How does this even look like a night out?" They're posed against a blank blue wall that gives no context as to where they are or how this has anything to do with a night out. But what came to mind next was that AL posted this specifically because she wanted the same thing that Georgia got when she posted a picture of her and David in an Insta story earlier in the week, which is to have people sharing it all over Twitter and gushing about her and Michael being "couple goals."

The problem, though, is that in the pictures Georgia posts, David at least does not look like he is being held hostage in them. It's that even though those pictures may be posed, Georgia is very adept at being subtle and making them look spontaneous. AL, however, is not...and the harder she tries to make her and Michael's relationship look like Georgia and David's, the more obvious it is that it's not.

What truly confounds me is that we're expected to believe Michael is happy in that picture, especially when we look at it side-by-side with this picture that was taken just one day prior:

When I look at the picture on the left, to me, that is the real Michael Sheen--the man who loves being out in the community and meeting people. In the picture on the right, that is Michael playing a role, the version of himself that exists in AL's fantasy/idea of what their relationship is...but it's clearly not a role he believes in (the difference is particularly visible in his eyes, which are sparkling and bright in the picture on the left, in stark contrast to how dull and lifeless they are on the right). And the thing for me is, if Michael doesn't believe in that role, then why should any of us? It just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.

Overall, though, it's just...really a terrible picture? Even the composition of it next to the picture on the left is so strange, because they're both selfies, yet Michael looks so subdued in the picture with her--perhaps that sad/tired vibe that you were describing, Anon. AL clearly had agency over when/where that picture was taken, and yet she still chose to post it. There were so many choices being made here, and it's sort of mind-boggling to me how astoundingly bad a lot of them were.

To make matters even worse, just a few days later, it came to light that the big "night out" was them going to see a play at a community theater in Swansea, and Michael meeting with people from a charity that he supports, Adferiad Recovery:

Yet there was no reference made to any of this in AL's Insta post--not of the play, nor of the charity of which Michael is a patron, and which she could've easily mentioned. If this was in fact the night out in question, it makes it seem like she was using him for PR and had no problem making his work about her and being purposely misleading about what happened while showing how little she cares about his charity work in the process.

The sad thing is, this isn't even the first time she's done this. In the week before the Insta post, it came to my attention that AL retweeted two of Michael's Mab Gwalia videos, and immediately followed that with a retweet of this:

For those who may not have keyed into the meaning behind the acorn emojis in the caption, Anna seems to be bragging about Michael staring at her tits. (Though personally that is not even remotely close to my interpretation of this picture.) Painfully unfunny, and embarrassing as all get-out to boot. So she retweets the videos of his charity for PR, but it's when she retweets this picture and writes in her own voice that her true nature comes to light, which seems to involve not caring how bad she makes him look.

When the Insta picture was posted, I had several people DMing me about it, so I'd like to wrap this up by sharing a few things that were said, as I think they perfectly sum up what my feelings are. One person said to me that Michael and AL "can’t achieve the same look of happiness together as they can apart" and that "the weird distance" between them "is always present." I'm just not getting "couple" energy from them in that picture, and if Anna's reason for posting it was to convey that, I'd say she achieved the opposite effect instead.

The other thing I'd like to share comes from @thetardisisblueandroseistoo, in response to the fans who did share the picture on Twitter (though I didn't see it on any other social media channels, strangely enough) and who have gushed over Michael and AL as "couple goals":

"[...]All four people [Michael, AL, David, Georgia] are "couple goals" because they're presenting as straight, white, and monogamous. They are comfortable to consume and stan when presented like that. But if you pause and think maybe David and Georgia are open, David is very probably at least bi, Anna is collateral, and Michael is a serial womanizer that fell in love with his married male co-star, that's a lot less comfortable to think about. Fans project onto them, but instead of these people having the same problems that "normal people" have, they evidently have no problems at all. They're projecting an idea of infallibility onto all of them."

As anyone who follows my blog knows, I ardently ship Michael and David. But when I talk about their relationship, it's always from the perspective of what might be, and what seems probable from what has been publicly presented. Do I also discuss fantasies involving the two of them? Absolutely. But (I hope, anyway) that distinction between reality and fantasy is clear, whereas I don't see that at all in the people who vigorously defend Michael and AL's relationship. These fans see what they want to be true of that relationship, rather than discussing the reality of what the situation might actually be.

My aim in having these conversations on my blog and answering these Anons is to let people know that it's okay to ask these questions. It's okay to see Michael and David (and AL and Georgia) as human beings, instead of as "perfect" or "flawless." And it's okay for us to be honest about what we are seeing, especially when pictures like this are posted and stand out to so many of us for all the wrong reasons.

So those are my thoughts on the picture from last week. How accurate (or not) I may be in my observations, who knows. But I think it speaks volumes that more and more people seem to be noticing the marked difference in Michael's appearance and expression in pictures with AL versus with other people, and how that does not seem to bode well for their relationship. I guess we'll just have to see what happens...

[problematicwelshman]

GUAHH STAY MAD ANNAS FAMOUS WITH A LOVING HUSBAND AND YOURE STUCK AT A 9-5 WITH NO ONE THAT LOVES U WAITING AT HOME 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I’m of two minds here, Anon, so you get both responses:

#1: Oh! Did Anna and Michael break up? Did she finally get married? Did she finally get an acting job to go with her multi-continental acting education? Because last I heard she was a stay-at-home mom of two little ones, with no career other than parts Michael gets for her, and the "partner" of an historical bounder nearly twice her age who doesn't seem to believe in marriage.

#2 Again with the “stay mad” and “loving husband” theme. You remind me of a scene from the movie Roxanne. (“One evening, in a crowded bar, a big thug named Jim decides to take a pot shot at Bales’ nose, calling him “Big nose.” It’s a pretty pathetic one-liner and while the thug thinks himself clever, Bales is quick to condemn the bigger man for his lack of imagination.”) Obviously, our hero CD Bales eviscerates the dumbass, much to the enjoyment of the other bar patrons.

The continued chorus of “stay mad” and “happily married” from anons is boring. The best you've got is a bunch of pathetic one-liners. And they’re inaccurate. Michael and Anna are not married, no matter what fanfiction you’ve contrived. Nobody’s mad, and to be honest, nobody’s even really paying attention anymore. If you scroll back you’ll see that the only posts are responses to anonymous posts. So who’s staying mad, Anon? Seems like you are.

[problematicwelshman]

Aussie anon here. Being in the industry I was able to see Amadeus a 3rd time and on closing night.

Guess who was sat right behind me… AL. She was sat by herself, she had a seat that was meant for a plus one but maybe they fell through. My friend who I was with is very chatty and had to make a comment to her about “being able to stretch out because there was so much space around her” she just responded by saying “I know right?” With her hands presenting to the space around her.

I clocked her before the show started. She was conversing with people. To be honest she seems to have perfected being the charming trophy partner. AL was the centre of the group who was talking with her. My friend made comment that she was stunning, but he would say that about any woman. Even me. She is the skinny blonde that we describe her to be. In fact she is more slight than what tv and photos highlight. Who knows, maybe her kids have sucked her dry.

Anyway my brush with MS and AL has been short and simple. I keep up with the life that they portray and coming across them feels notable. I do get a sense AL is quite comfortable being the celebrity’s partner and shows no cracks. Maybe there is a touch of smugness from her, she is after all the mother of his children so there is security in all that she does and all that she shows.

I’m sure both of them are relieved the production is finished.

Thanks for this, Inside Anon. Very interesting observations/tea--everything you've said gives pretty much confirms what history has shown about how Michael interacts with colleagues, but also supports and confirms a lot of things many people have LONG suspected about him and APAT and her perpetual smugness. Guess now that everybody's back in Wales we'll see what happens next...