deerstalker
Today, the RE: Anime YouTube channel released their trailer for the new live action short, One Punch Man vs. Genos. The film features the epic fight scene between One Punch Man and Genos based on the original anime and features Alfred Hsing and official Friend of the NOC, Yoshi Sudarso in the titular roles. Check […]
Source: WENN/Avalon / WENN
The family of George Floyd is taking his autopsy into their own hands. After the preliminary findings stated that there were “no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation,” the family has announced that an independent autopsy will be performed.
“They’re going to have their own autopsy,” the family’s attorney Benjamin Crump said during a press conference according to the NY Daily News. “We’re not going to rely on this DA or this city to tell us the truth. We’re going to take custody back of George Floyd’s body, and we’re bringing in Dr. Michael Baden to perform an independent autopsy because we saw in the Eric Garner case and so many other cases where they have these people who work with the city come up with things that are such an illusion.”
Dr. Michael Baden is a well-known medical examiner who also testified in the notorious O.J Simpson trial and also performed an autopsy Michael Brown, the Ferguson, MO teenager that was shot and killed by a police officer. He was also the chief medical examiner for New York in the late 1970s.
The preliminary findings from the medical examiner’s office states that “the combined effects of Mr. Floyd being restrained by police, his underlying health conditions and any potential intoxicants in his system likely contributed to his death.” Floyd also had coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease.
Floyd’s killing caused mayhem in cities across the country after the video of his death went viral. In the video, former Minneapolis officer Derek Chauvin is seen kneeling into Floyd’s neck while he is in handcuffs after he was suspected of using a counterfeit $20 bill. Chauvin has been charged with third degree murder and second degree manslaughter. He was fired from the Minneapolis Police Department after Floyd’s death.
Children’s book author and billionaire Joanne Rowling has also become known for her transphobic views. Rowling has, over the years, been seen to sympathize with TERFs (trans-exclusionary radical feminists) on Twitter, before doubling and tripling down and expressing trans-exclusionary sentiments in her own words. Many of us have long since written Rowling off as a result, yet she still finds new ways to infuriate and provoke disgust.
This was the case today, when Rowling accidentally copy-pasted a line later said to be from a message into an unrelated tweet. The sentence is about an incident between a trans activist and a person the Evening Standard describes as a “radical feminist,” and the text she pasted in intentionally misgenders the trans activist. It would seem that Rowling is passing the time by discussing TERF-laden propaganda and talking points with someone. A friend? A group? Sycophants on social media? The world will likely never know.
lmao @jk_rowling gurl you gotta be more careful with your transphobic copy/pastes while you do marketing for your new children’s book!! pic.twitter.com/vHR0LUoOkO
— ella dawson (@brosandprose) May 29, 2020
The extraneous sentence was tacked on to a tweet Rowling made showing a child’s fan art for her latest effort, The Ickabog. The juxtaposition here feels sickening to me: that so many people, young and old, still put such love and faith in the works of a woman who has proven herself to have reprehensible beliefs. That such exclusionary intent could be amended to such a joyful artistic output from a child.
Can you explain why someone was messaging you about a trans activist, and why they were misgendering her, and why you wanted to copy and paste that…? pic.twitter.com/DPXH7rQfLP
— Max Curtis (@MaxCCurtis) May 29, 2020
transphobia really does rot the brain huh
— ryan john butcher (@ryanjohnbutcher) May 29, 2020
The case Rowling was discussing took place three years ago, in which trans activist Tara Wolf was fined £150 for assault after “striking Maria Maclachlan on the back and shoulder during a protest at Speakers’ Corner.” Actions were taken by all parties involved. Maclachlan seems like a real charmer, even in the phrasing of the right-leaning Evening Standard:
Maclachlan, who blogs and tweets about gender issues, admitted grabbing hold of Wolf’s girlfriend and kicking her, believing she had snatched her camera and thrown it to the ground, adding that Wolf’s partner – who was never identified – had kicked her first.
Wolf denied one count of assault by beating, but admitted striking the complainant, saying she acted in defence of her partner and to prevent any footage being posted online that might make members of the group the target of online abuse.
[…]
Ms Maclachlan admitted that following the event she had sent out a tweet featuring a close-up of the defendant’s face with the words: “Hiya, got any hair restorer while I’m in hiding? Love Tara.”
She had to be repeatedly told to refer to the defendant as female by the judge during her evidence.
The judge in this case also declined to award Maclachlan compensation, and said, “It was notable that when I asked Ms Maclachlan to refer to Ms Wolf as ‘she’, she did so with bad grace – having asked her to do so she continued to refer to Ms Wolf as ‘he’ and ‘him.'”
This was the same intentionally misgendering language about Wolf that J.K. Rowling shared in her tweet some three years later. One of the most successful writers in the history of the world is, on a May day in the middle of a deadly pandemic, apparently still chatting about this event, framed in such a way as to induce pearl-clutching and scaremongering. Wolf, for her part, in explaining her Facebook post, “claimed she made the comment out of bravado and wanted to protest peacefully.”
To better understand why many British so-called “feminists” and others are comfortable with their openly trans-exclusionary bigotry, I often point people to this excellent New York Times article by Dr. Sophie Lewis that first helped flesh out that phenomenon for me. Titled “How British Feminism Became Anti-Trans,” Lewis explores TERFism and how in Britain, a history of colonialism, a long-held cultural obsession with “biological realities,” and a concerted lack of modern social movements have combined to thrust this virulent group into the mainstream. (I rarely commend America for doing much these days, but I have to applaud the fact that here in the U.S., as Lewis describes, “TERFism today is a scattered community in its death throes.”)
Imperial Britain imposed policies to enforce heterosexuality and the gender binary, while simultaneously constructing the racial “other” as not only fundamentally different, but freighted with sexual menace; from there, it’s not a big leap to see sexual menace in any sort of “other,” and “biological realities” as essential and immutable. (Significantly, many Irish feminists have rejected Britain’s TERFism, citing their experience of colonialism explicitly as part of the reason.)
But having a clearer understanding of why TERFs have gained such a foothold in some British circles doesn’t excuse Rowling’s continued behavior. In fact, because British-specific TERFism has been so neatly dissected is all the more reason someone with Rowling’s influential reach has a duty to better educate herself. Since her support of TERF ideas became public knowledge, she has likely received thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of replies and pleas from her fans and followers to revisit her views. She appears to have done nothing of the sort.
Even worse, when called out for her behavior as she was in the wake of her most recent tweet debacle, Rowling responded by tweeting about “thought crime” and suggesting those who are objecting to her interests are trying to censor her. This also happens to be a favored mode of shutting down conversation by far-right trolls like Donald Trump.
However, I am not – as many of the people now swarming into my mentions seem to think – ashamed of reading about the assault. You should know by now that accusations of thought crime leave me cold. Take your censorship and authoritarianism elsewhere. They don’t work on me.
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) May 29, 2020
She also got into a spat and seemed to be threatening legal action against a Twitter user who wrote that Rowling’s transphobia made her dangerous around children and caused real harm, among other claims.
I’m also very much interested in the truth. Tweeting support for someone who is indisputable transphobic is transphobic in and of itself. Suicide rates among trans people are so high due to lack of acceptance, hence transphobia is dangerous to children.https://t.co/0bbb7A5cF5
— Nicola Spurling 🌿 🏳️🌈 🏳️⚧️ (@NicESpurling) May 29, 2020
I’m afraid your lawyers might need a little more than my tweet in support for Maya Forstater, who believes that humans are a dimorphic species, but who has stated her unequivocal commitment to treating trans people with respect. Again, I must ask you to provide evidence
1/2— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) May 29, 2020
It doesn’t have to be this way. Rowling could choose not to engage on this topic, since I fail to see how the vital fight for trans rights and recognition could possibly affect her staggeringly privileged lifestyle—save that now she is called out for her toxic rhetoric, and many former fans have sworn off her properties. Or she could learn from other popular writers who impact young adults like Rick Riordan, who listens when his community of readers want to see themselves reflected on the page, and proudly writes such representation into his works. But Rowling’s continued alignment with transphobia and apparent contempt for many in her audience only show her to be self-centered and narrow-minded.
Ah, yes, the occasional “Why did you put gender fluidity in your book your agenda is ruining the story” comment. Perhaps what is ruining the story for that reader is their insistence on believing that a non-cishet character’s right to exist in a story is an “agenda”?
— Rick Riordan (@rickriordan) April 26, 2020
I’d remind J.K. Rowling that she created a fictional universe where the evil villains are a bunch of rotted, fascist aristocrats who oppress others for being different. While we wait to see if she will ever realize this hypocrisy, we can gaze upon the latest fan art reflection of her output.
Dear @jk_rowling. How are you? I drew a picture of The Ickabog and I hope you include it in your book! pic.twitter.com/ISSr30aNOM
— ROU Frank Exchange of Wooloos (@mockferret) May 29, 2020
(image: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!
—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—
After the surprise success of The Invisible Man earlier this year, Universal is getting the ball rolling once again with expanding and updating their catalog of classic monster titles. According to a report in Variety, the latest of these will be an all-new version of The Wolfman. This time Universal is looking at none other than Ryan Gosling in the lead role. Lauren Schuker Blum and Rebecca Angelo, writers for Orange is the New Black, are writing the screenplay based on Gosling’s original pitch for the idea.
Lionsgate
Gosling will apparently also serve as a producer if he signs on the dotted line. He will reportedly have his pick of who gets to direct the film. According to the original report, right now Universal is looking at Cory Finley. He’s the director behind HBO’s recent hit, Bad Education. The weirdest part about this news is that this take on the Wolfman is apparently in the vein of Nightcrawler. No, not the monstrous looking X-Men hero, but the Jake Gyllenhaal drama about an amoral reporter. In fact, The Hollywood Reporter has confirmed that Gosling will play a reporter who gets bitten by a werewolf, which sounds a bit like The Howling.
If it does follow in the footsteps of Nightcrawler, then this likely be a lower budget affair; this is not unlike the recent The Invisible Man. The previous remake of The Wolfman came just a decade ago in 2010, directed by Joe Johnston and starring Benicio del Toro as the titular monster. That film cost a whopping $150 million to make, a lot for a horror movie. It only made $62 million at the domestic box office. If this had been a low budget affair however, it would have been considered a hit.
This low budget style worked like gangbusters for The Invisible Man, so we imagine Universal could have similar success here. They are probably going to take similar approaches for Dracula and Frankenstein down the line. Gosling has at least one other film on the docket before The Wolfman enters production, so whatever happens, this one will be awhile before it hits theaters.
Featured Image: Universal Pictures
The post Ryan Gosling in Talks for New WOLFMAN Remake appeared first on Nerdist.