#i refuse to acknowledge ecclestone

[youjustwaitsunshine]

entranced by whatever that rindt-marko-vettel web is. helmut marko and jochen rindt were best friends and raced together. sebastian vettel reminds helmut marko of jochen rindt. sebastian vettel is a great fan of jochen rindt. did seb become a rindt fan because marko told him stories of him. is marko obsessed with seb because he reminds him of his friend. i have so many questions. there's a story about rindt and marko driving to the german gp at the nürburgring and sleeping next to the track to get woken up by von trips and hill practicing in their ferraris the next morning and rindt looked at them and said to marko that that was what he wanted to do too, become a racing driver. cut to sebastian getting interviewed as a child saying "i would like to- no, i want to become an f1 driver"

[schumigrace]

This looks fun! Okay so unpopular opinion(s): - the cars have much more to do in the terms of who wins than they used to - the wave of new fans has as much pros at is has cons (maybe even more cons) - F1 was better back in the day (like the 90's, that was crazy) - Some "fans" started to treat F1 like reality show and they don't see the drivers as real human beings - Bringing fandom content into real life is creepy and people should stop (I'm not talking about having blogs or writing fanfiction, that is okay, it's what we all do, just about treating fan content like it's the reality and forcing drivers to see/acknowledge it - especially the shipping)

This got a bit long so gunna read more it:

- agreed to an extent, but I think since 2009 it's primarily been about the car, and I started watching in 2010 so my knowledge on prior seasons is purely from rewatching races. So I don't feel like I can comment loads on this, but I'd agree that it seems closer in years prior to 2009.

I personally don't mind too much, part of the charm of F1 to me is that the car is so vital, its one of the very few series that doesn't have equal machinery, so it lets me nerd out about car development more than anything else.

- I don't believe new fans are the problem at all. I wan't new fans, F1 needs new fans. the problem is how liberty media and FOM are handling the influx of new fans, and how disillusioned people like Domenicalli are with how we consume media nowadays. F1 started to lose fans in the early 2010s because Ecclestone refused to utilise social media, which is where the majority of people now consume media and the news, so liberty media has been vital for the exposure of the sport - but then it just stopped listening to what fans wanted. Thats the issue, not the fans themselves. I'm not about gatekeeping.

- Again, i'm not massively into commenting on the sport being better at any particular point in time, because I wasn't watching in the 90s. I agree certain aspects were better. The tyres, for a start (bring back bridgestones!) and the reduced calendar was definitely better. But I enjoy how the sport is now, for the most part. For me, 2010-2016 was when it was at its peak, but that's my opinion.

The last two points I agree on 100%. Number one rule, leave the drivers alone. I hate when people discuss personal lives, unless the driver themself has discussed something (i.e. in a book or an interview). The whole taynando situation still makes me want to throw up

[milarvela]

How Do You Solve a Problem Like Barrowman? + A Response to Nerdrotic

I like this video. A few thoughts:

What stopped two grown women from telling Clarke that it’s quite enough of that demonstration, end it now? They weren’t new to show business, young, inexperienced etc. Seems to me they were getting uncomfortable with Noel’s inability to stop before it got embarrassing, rather than being affected by bad memories or whatever.

If you talk about alleged harassment from 2004 in 2021, shouldn’t you at least have an excuse for why it took so long to come forward? Were you in coma all that time? Aren’t you ashamed of letting this man continue to harass others because you waited so long before speaking about it? What sort of person unashamedly talks about something like that as if nobody else matters? Shouldn’t you instead be quiet and grateful that nobody found out that you were harassed but didn’t say anything? I don’t understand how these people think.

Who was the assistant director complained to? What’s their name? Why is it okay to name Noel Clarke but not the higher-ups who failed at doing their duty properly?

Same goes for that supervisor type.  

That David and his impeccable behaviour helped rein things in to a certain extent makes it sound like it was Christopher Eccleston who caused most of the trouble during s1. Or were there other changes too except his leaving? Weird, because I had the impression that Christopher wasn’t happy with the goings-on on the set, while David laughed along and even sang about John’s willy-waving later.

That neither of them has as far as I know said a word in defense of Noel/John is quite something. Nor have they spoken against them. Silence from the companions too. Basically the only conclusion from this is that they’re all fearing for their own careers. And nobody’s apparently even asking them to comment on this? How nice and considerate of the media to leave them be. The Guardian tried to get comments from Coduri and Badland, as if that fan event was the main thing in this saga and those two the biggest enablers or something.

Eve Myles? I don’t remember even hearing her name before last week but apparently she is famous for not realising that John Barrowman was assaulting her that one time with his penis. Lol, I guess she’s remarkably stupid or there’s some major patronising happening. Could be both.

Nobody’s hopefully saying that touching random co-workers with a penis is an okay thing to do. But if she didn’t complain, why is it now a big deal? I don’t know if she’s made a statement about it but I imagine it’d be pretty difficult. Either she’s going to sound like she thinks what John did was cool and that’ll get her hate or she’s going to say it wasn’t cool and she’s that coward who failed to report the incident.

BTW, whatever happened to Russell T Davies? He said he never saw John’s penis and that’s all there is to it? Why, everybody’s so accommodating and kind and understanding of his pain due to this terrible neglect. Apparently it would’ve been quite a sight. So very inconsiderate of Barrowman to leave the showrunner out of the fun.

Seriously though, I think it gets hopelessly hilarious, this detailed, belated  outrage for what Barrowman did. Yes, it’s terribly pathetic and attention-seeking and juvenile (which he wasn’t), and the joke or whatever must have gotten old fast. But they all knew about it at the time. Now it’s all pretense and hypocrisy or silence from those who were there. Except this Julie Gardner who, if not lying, acted exactly how one should after receiving a complaint.

That it didn’t end there wasn’t her fault unless she got more complaints and did nothing about those. She’s not responsible for John’s behaviour elsewhere later. Honestly, there must be some fancy name for this willy-waving compulsion. Can’t Barrowman get some shrink tell everybody about it or possibly just claim mental health issues? That should get him sympathy these days and it might not even be that far fetched. Lol, he could even come out as nonbinary to confirm that.

Can’t help thinking though that he must have gotten more than the pleasure of making people laugh out of it. If not sexual then some other kind of satisfaction. Like maybe seeing the alarm in the eyes of some young woman. Mean streak.

Eh, that celebrity show (I always thought those were for has-beens and wannabes) article could just be promotion.

David Tennant isn’t saying anything even as they refuse to release a thing with him in it. Why? All he has to do is to make a “it was all in good fun but maybe a bit foolish and thoughtless” statement and add something about how fans needn’t be punished because of whatever else is happening. But no. What a coward. Well, I guess he got paid and the rest doesn’t matter. Which is fine. Maybe he should donate the money to a fitting cause now that his colleague has been exposed. Nevermind that he had nothing against working with said colleague until what must have been quite recently. All the time knowing what he did/does.

Generally speaking, I think it’s a remarkably bad idea to remove or not show finished stuff regardless what the people involved may have done. Way too complicated to ever be fair or consistent about these things. Utter idiocy. And some fans get carried away with their defending of and excuses for their favourites.

Couldn’t it be okay to admit that if somebody fucked up, it really was a fuckup but still be a fan?

I suspect the BBC may just be looking for reasons to cancel Doctor Who. I mean reasons other than waning popularity. And these kind of scandals don’t really make the franchise stronger. I guess Mr Tardis is a dedicated fan and needs to be positive about it. So fair enough. That teaser trailer certainly would be welcome, I agree. Although not everybody interested in the Clarke/Barrowman situation cares about the show.

I’d love to know the number of people who’ve been driven out of showbusiness because of unsafety. That all these allegations come, like in some big cases before, years after harassment/whatever started suggests very few are concerned about their safety as long as they are promised rewards for tolerating all sorts.

Safeguarding seems to be a fashionable word. Just give everybody bodycams. Brains could be useful too. At least teach everybody what to do/say when someone is harassing them. And stop with the victim-playing years after something allegedly happened. Or have a good excuse for the delay. Not getting what you expected and feeling disappointed afterwards isn’t enough.

People will want to defend their favourites. It’s kind of fun seeing how far they will go with it. There are nuances sometimes but it’s best to be an honest fan or move on.

As for Nerdrotic and his fellow whiners, eh, if they and their audience shouldn’t be allowed in a workplace (okay, I’m not sure if Tardis really meant it what with that voice he did) for not condemning the likes of Noel/John, surely the same goes for the people who worked with those two and allowed them to do what they did?  

Don’t know why he’s still demanding apologies from Barrowman. He’s done that and even acknowledged this current outrage caused by his “tomfoolery”. Poor fucker has had nobody accusing him of anything, so I guess he needs to apologise to those who were never there and had no opportunity to witness his willy-waving. So funny. Maybe he should make a video where he demonstrates how it happened. Might prove more profitable than some audio thingy with David the coward.

[snowglobesask]

Our Cave Collapsed

The Leftovers Initially published on my Blogger account in 2015. May contain spoiler for The Leftovers, and C.S. Lewis's novel, The Last Battle I could probably write about International Assassin (The Leftovers, Ep.8, Season 2) each day for the next month and still not have covered everything . This show is densely layered and richly written. With that in mind, I'm going to focus on one particular aspect of this episode. Season two starts with in Earth's ancient past, with a group of people sleeping together in a cave. A pregnant woman gets up in the night to relieve herself. An earthquake happens while she's outside, resulting in the collapse of the cave opening. Whether the rest of the cave collapsed is unclear. The shock sends her into labor, forcing her to set aside her grief and focus on survival. She delivers the baby, and sets out search of other humans. It doesn't end well for the woman, but she succeeds in finding safety for the child. The episode shifts to Kevin, speaking to a woman who looks exactly like Patti, although she appears not to be her. During this conversation, the Patti-duplicate tells Kevin that their cave has collapsed. Since the characters have no way to know the events that too, place at the beginning of the episode, we must assume the allusion is for the benefit of the audience. It is meant to trigger our memories of something we may have come in contact with in school and other facets of entertainment and culture: Plato's comparison of our understanding of reality to people watching shadows on a cave wall. When I was about eleven-years-old, I read C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. The final book of this series is called The Last Battle, and the last chapter of this book is called Shadowlands. Aslan returns to Narnia for the last time. He calls Narnian's to follow him. On Earth, the Pevensie's hear his call, with the exception of Susan. Some people have cynically suggested she was excluded because she wore makeup, while I tend to think Lewis was trying to say she'd become too caught up in the trappings of the world to hear Aslan's voice. Aslan is a metaphor for Jesus, so the implications are clear. Shadowlands is a description of the Rapture. Christopher Eccleston's character, Matt Jamison, spent all of season one having his ass kicked for telling people what happened when so many people disappeared at the start of the series wasn't the Rapture, because bad people were taken and good ones were left behind. The fact remains that both the title of the show and events are meant to evoke questions about the Biblical concept of the Rapture. In the same way Patti referenced Plato's Cave, Shadowlands also is built around this concept. Plato, a Greek philosopher born around 428 B.C.E., used metaphors to make his ideas more accessible. He told a story of people sitting around a fire inside a cave. They watch shadows dancing on the wall, and believe what they're watching is reality. It's only when they step out of the cave and see the sun and real world that they realize they've been watching shadows their whole lives. C.S. Lewis was trying to say that Earth is a shadow land of something much better. Even Narnia, always described as magical, is a shadow land of Aslan's kingdom. When the Patti-copy tells Kevin our cave has collapsed, it reinforces what The Guilty Remnant have been saying all along. The world ended. But if the world ended in Rapture, we come back to Matt's struggle: Why have horrible people disappeared while innocent people have been left behind? I keep picturing the dwarfs in The Last Battle; who put closed their eyes and put their hands over their ears when Aslan returned. They had lost faith because of a donkey who went around in a lion skin pretending to be Aslan, and wouldn't risk being fooled again. They were left in a burning cabin that they refused to acknowledge was on fire, while Aslan took other Narnians to his kingdom. I had many questions for my dad when I read this book at the age of eleven. My dad brought my attention to the lands the Narnians passed as they traveled with Aslan to his kingdom. He quoted this verse from scripture: John 14:2 In my Father's house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? The lands they passed were rooms in his Father's house prepared for other people. Thinking about this lead me back to fake-Patti's words. She told Kevin the people inside the cave, the ones who disappeared, might have found another way out. They might have exited and continued on with their lives. The people left over would have to do the same. In this way of thinking, nobody are the leftovers. They are simply in a different room of the same house. But it's hard to accept this way of thinking because it seems cruel. Why keep loved ones away from each other? It only becomes more acceptable if you believe it isn't a permanent condition.