BBC and BAFTA in Hot Water Over Their Bigotry

At the BAFTA Awards over the weekend, one of the nominated movies was a biographical film of John Davidson, who suffers from Tourette's syndrome. Tourette's is a disorder characterized by multiple movement (motor) tics and at least one vocal tic.  Approximately10-15% of people with Tourette's experience vocal tics like coprolalia, which is the involuntary, uncontrollable outburst of obscene words or socially inappropriate phrases.  There is no cure for Tourette's, there is no single most effective medication, and no one medication effectively treats all symptoms.   

Naturally enough, John Davidson himself attended the awards ceremony and could be heard shouting various expletives, due to his Tourette’s.  When "Sinners" stars Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo took the stage to present an award, Davidson shouted out the "n-word" which was picked up by nearby audience microphones and was also heard on the broadcast, which was on a 2-hour delay.  25 minutes later, Davidson left the auditorium.  

The BAFTA organization was aware that Davidson was going to attend the ceremony and later admitted that they met to discuss what might happen were he to swear during the broadcast. Despite these efforts (if we are to believe they took place) they took no precautions to seat Davidson away from live microphones that could pick up his outbursts.  The ceremony was on a 2-hour broadcast delay, and the BBC had ample opportunity to "bleep" out the racial slur.  After the ceremony was broadcast, it was made available for streaming for 15 hours before public outrage forced the BBC to take it down.  To make matters worse for the BBC, they did take advantage of the 2-hour delay to edit out award winner Akinola Davies Jr.'s  mention of "free Palestine" in his acceptance speech.

The fallout has been major.  The BBC has been widely criticized for leaving up a version of the ceremony on its streaming platform (in which the racial slur was audible) for over 15 hours before it was taken down. The broadcaster has also been criticized for failing to edit out the racial slur, while it did edit Davies Jr.’s speech, including a part where he says “free Palestine.”

British actor Ṣọpẹ́ Dìrísù shared a lengthy statement on social media, criticizing what he described as the “institutional racism” behind the BBC’s decision to edit Davies Jr.’s BAFTA speech but not Davidson’s involuntary slur.  

“On a night of incredible joy and celebration, not only of our film but many other wonderful artists, especially black artists, this is the biggest talking point walking away from the evening,” Dìrísù wrote in the statement. “I didn’t want to fuel the discourse about it, but like Vinícius Júnior, racism, bigotry, and injustice have to be exposed and shouted from the rooftops.”  (last week, Real Madrid star Vinícius Júnior reported racist abuse during a game against Portuguese team Benfica). 

Dìrísù continued: “That the BBC found wonderfully creative ways to censor Akinola’s beautiful speech about inclusivity and justice and freedom, but were comfortable and actively made the decision to broadcast a message of hate and intolerance shows where its priorities lie.” 

Dìrísù added he is not “ignorant” to how “institutionally racist the UK, the industry, or the BBC are and continues to prove themselves to be.” But he said the actions still hurt when “it’s thrown in your face in front of the world.” 

The Gangs of London actor ended his statement by commending Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo, whom he described as “gracious, dignified, and defiant.”  Dìrísù said he is looking forward to a [BBC] apology and repercussion, but he wasn't holding his breath.  Neither am I, frankly.

 

Trump Shows What a Sick Bastard He Really Is

Convicted felon Donald Trump showed us once again what an ignorant jackass he is-- and that he is no leader.  Commenting on the tragic death of Rob Reiner and his wife yesterday, Trump posted: 

 

1. Rob Reiner was neither tortured and struggling (but Trump certainly appears to be himself);

2.  There is no such thing as "Trump Derangement Syndrome"

3. Reiner did not pass away due to a "mind-crippling disease"-- he was stabbed by his son;

4. The Trump administration is not surpassing any goals or expectations-- in fact, the administration is falling behead on most of his promises (lowering prices, staying out of foreign wars, deporting criminals)

5. America is definitely NOT in a "Golden Age" 

All of this hateful bullshit is what everyone has come to expect from a man who danced on the grave of the late Sen. John McCain, called military members who died “suckers and losers,” and seems to delight in the pain he inflicts on others daily. 

Of all people, even Marjorie Taylor Greene called out Trump’s post. “Rob Reiner and his wife were tragically killed at the hands of their own son, who reportedly had drug addiction and other issues, and their remaining children are left in serious mourning and heartbreak. This is a family tragedy, not about politics or political enemies,” Greene wrote in a post on X. “Many families deal with a family member with drug addiction and mental health issues. It’s incredibly difficult and should be met with empathy especially when it ends in murder.”

 

Kim Kardashian's TV Show Gets Trashed by the Critics

To be fair, Kim Kardashian is not an actress-- she is basically a reality internet star who got famous when her sex tape with Ray J was leaked on the internet. She filed a lawsuit against a distributor for selling copies of the tape, despite many in the industry telling her that the suit had no merit.  But guess what?  She dropped the lawsuit three months later (just as sales were peaking) in exchange for a financial settlement (i.e., a cut of the profits, perhaps?).  A mere four months later, her reality show debuted on cable TV.  Numerous media outlets later criticized her and her family for using the sex tape's release as a publicity stunt to promote their forthcoming reality show. 

Kardashian tried to raise her profile as an activist in 2017 during a visit to Uganda.  She was widely criticized for lending her celebrity to legitimize an increasingly authoritarian government, which had recently begun cracking down on political opponents and gay people.  Two years later, it was reported that she began studying for the bar exam (without going to law school).  Two years after that, she passed the "baby bar" on her fourth attempt.  After a further four years of "study," Kardashian failed to pass the actual bar exam.  But now, she is trying her hand at being an actress . . . I'll give you one guess on how that has turned out.

The reviews of Ryan Murphy's divorce drama have been universally horrible.  On Rotten Tomatoes, the show has garnered a shocking 4% rating.

The Guardian's zero-star review was titled "Kim Kardashian’s Divorce Drama is Fascinatingly, Existentially Terrible."  For context, I should tell you that the Guardian (in its 75 years of reviewing TV programs) has only given out two other zero-star reviews.  On the reality star's performance:  "Kim K as Allura . . . is as expressionless as you might expect, but is at least inoffensively useless."  On the overall cast: "No one seems to know what they’re doing; the performances seem to respond to about nine different ideas of what the show is and the plots are dismal. The trio (“You’re the best divorce lawyers in town – maybe the country”) wrap up multiple cases in the time it takes Kim K’s nail varnish to dry."  The show has also been derided for a jarring obsession with brand names (“Let’s get those Goyard travel cases and start stuffing!”), conspicuous consumption (“Oh my God – didn’t this belong to Elizabeth Taylor?”), and a concept of female empowerment (“I settled … Did I not love myself enough?”) that would have shamed the Spice Girls thirty years ago.

Empire magazine said that Kardashian performance makes "Keeping Up With The Kardashians" look like Citizen Kane.  "Then there’s Kim Kardashian herself, the show’s inexplicable lead. In one early scene, an absurd number of candles are lit around her, presumably to create the illusion of emotion on her otherwise bored face. “She’s a dominatrix, I love that for her,” says Kardashian at one point, yet no “love” or expression of any kind is apparent. So wooden is her acting that the furniture around her looks positively alive by comparison," it added.

The Hollywood Reporter said that Kardashian’s performance was "stiff and affectless without a single authentic note."

USA Today said "the dialogue is stilted to the point of laughability . . . the plots are offensively dull and idiotic, and . . . it’s all wrapped in expensive and tasteless fashion."

You get the idea-- no need to pile on.  Good luck to Kim K in her future endeavors.

Grumpy Old Man Needs His Sleep!

 Convicted felon Donald Trump spent the wee hours of the night complaining about late night host Seth Meyers.  “How bad is Seth Meyers on NBC, a ‘network’ run by a truly bad group of people,” Trump wrote on his social media account shortly before 1:30 a.m. ET. “I got stuck watching Marble Mouth Meyers the other night, the first time in months, and every time I watch this moron I feel an obligation to say how dumb and untalented he is, merely a slot filler for the Scum that runs Comcast.”

As he has before, Trump complained that late night talk shows are “contributions” to the Democratic party. He also appeared to threaten Comcast, the parent company of NBC, which airs Meyers’ show. “These are not shows or entertainment, they are simply political hits, 100% of the time, to me and the Republican party,” Trump griped. “Comcast should pay a BIG price for this!” 

The president-elect has long complained about late night shows for making fun of him. He has called Jimmy Kimmel (whose joke at the Oscars really seemed to get under Trump’s skin) “one of the dumbest human beings ever.” Trump has also slammed Jimmy Fallon as “weak and pathetic,” attacked Stephen Colbert as a “total loser,” and dismissed all of the late night hosts as “the talentless, low rated CREEPS of Late Night Television.” Trump seems to especially dislike Kimmel, whom he attacks more frequently than others. During his previous term in office, Trump tried to have Kimmel censored.  There have been no reactions from Kimmel, Fallon, Colbert or Meyers-- apparently no one seems to care.  I do, however, have some advice for the orange jesus: Get some sleep, old man-- you look terrible!

 

Disney's Acquiescence to Trump Signals a Shift in the Culture Wars?

Over the weekend came the news that ABC News had decided (surprisingly) to settle Trump’s defamation litigation against the network. Disney additionally released a statement expressing “regret” for anchor George Stephanopoulos’ on-air claim that Trump was found liable in court for “rape.” 

Experts on media law told The New York Times that traditionally media outlets fight suits harder than ABC had chosen to do.  ABC's decision is in line with recent media outlets capitulating to the Orange Jesus.  Last month, the L.A. Times, along with The Washington Post (owned by billionaire Jeff Bezos), both spiked endorsements of Vice President Kamala Harris ahead of the election.  

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, and X’s Elon Musk have also publicly praised Trump’s win (Musk having  spent millions to help engineer it), raising serious concerns about the impartiality of the platforms the men own.   For his part, Trump has now threatened future defamation lawsuits against the media. Among his targets are The Des Moines Register, “60 Minutes,” reporter Bob Woodward, and the Pulitzer Prizes in retaliation for reporting by The Washington Post and New York on Russia’s role in attempting to influence the 2016 election.

ABC's settlement with Trump could only have been with Disney chief Bob Iger’s consent, and that we might be entering a new era at Disney-- one where the company’s social activism gets tampered down for a more populist approach to creative content. This is evidenced by new reporting that Disney's Pixar removed a transgender character’s storyline from their upcoming “Win or Lose” animated film.

A spokesperson for Disney confirmed that the “Win or Lose” story arc was removed, saying "When it comes to animated content for a younger audience, we recognize that many parents would prefer to discuss certain subjects with their children on their own terms and timeline." This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, as earlier this year Iger said that he wanted to “quiet things down” at Disney “after years of culture wars.” This seemed to be in reference to the company having been accused of promoting a “woke agenda” in their movies. 

 

Social Media Goes Crazy Over Tay Tay's New Album

Jimmy Kimmel Destroys Dimwit Aaron Rodgers

Last week, vaccine denier Aaron Rodgers unwittingly stirred a hornet's nest on Pat McAfee's show when Rodgers insinuated that Jimmy Kimmel's name might show up on documents released as part of the Jeffrey Epstein case. Of course, that was not true-- and Rodger's statements had real-life implications for Kimmel and his family. Rodgers' lies prompted Kimmel to threaten legal action. Then, McAfee apologized on the air. Then, ESPN apologized. That's where things stood until Monday night's monologue by Kimmel:

Called Out For Supporting a Criminal

Musician Jack White sounded off with a list of high-profile Donald Trump supporters who glad-handed the former president over the weekend.

The White Stripes frontman lambasted Trump-friendly celebrities like Mel Gibson and Guy Fieri in an Instagram post that featured photographs of the stars interacting with the 45th president during a UFC event Saturday in Las Vegas.

“Anybody who ‘normalizes’ or treats this disgusting fascist, racist, con man, disgusting piece of shit Trump with any level of respect is ALSO disgusting in my book,” White wrote.

“That’s you Joe Rogan, you Mel Gibson, you Mark Wahlberg, you Guy Fieri,” White went on. Though he did not name UFC President  Dana White, the MMA mogul was featured in several of the photos.

The “Seven Nation Army” singer finished by saying, “This is a statement from me, not a discussion/debate” and then deactivated the comment section.

White has been vocal in his distaste for Trump for some time. Last fall, he savaged then-Twitter CEO Elon Musk over his decision to let the twice-impeached former president back onto the social media platform.

 

Netflix Courts Controversy With Casting Choice in Cleopatra Documentary

Adele James in "Queen Cleopatra"

A fairly polarizing topic in entertainment these days is “race-swapping,” or intentionally changing the race of established characters. Recent examples include “Velma” from Scooby-Doo (an originally white character being depicted as Indian in the new HBO Max series), and the Little Mermaid (an originally white character in the Disney animated movie being portrayed by an African-American actress in the live-action version, later this year).  Given the cultural and political changes of the last few years, it should come as no surprise where the backlash is coming from--there are certain segments of society who cherish purist (to put it kindly) ideals and don’t like agendas being pushed on them.

However, a more recent trend has had filmmakers race-swapping actual historical figures. A notable example is Cleopatra from an upcoming Netflix series. Cleopatra’s ancestry has been traced to the Macedonian Ptolemaic dynasty — these are people generally considered bronze, olive or honey-skinned. When the trailer dropped last week for “Queen Cleopatra,” people noticed Cleopatra was a black woman, played by Adele James.

The film’s director defended her casting choice by saying it was very intentionally conceived, saying, "Why shouldn’t Cleopatra be a melanated sister? And why do some people need Cleopatra to be white? Her proximity to whiteness seems to give her value, and for some Egyptians it seems to really matter,” Gharavi told Variety. “We need to have a conversation with ourselves about our colorism, and the internalized white supremacy that Hollywood has indoctrinated us with,” Gharavi added.

To be clear-- Cleopatra was neither white nor black. But Gharavi doesn’t seem to care because, by the sounds of it, she’s fighting racism with her decision to cast a black actress. No one needs Cleopatra to be anything-- it's a question of what she was. If you're making a documentary, the only thing anyone needs is accuracy.

Regardless, Egypt has decided that they’ve had enough with the rewriting of their history-- and they might be suing. According to Newsweek, top-dog Egyptian lawyer Mahmoud al-Semary is asking the country’s public prosecutor to sue Netflix and the makers of the docuseries. “Most of what [the] Netflix platform displays [does] not conform to Islamic and societal values and principles, especially Egyptian ones,” al-Semary said.

Cleopatra was a source for pride for Egyptians and it shouldn't be unexpected that they’re going to take offense when you decide to blackwash her. The show advertises itself as a documentary on “prominent and iconic African queens”. Then in the trailer itself, somebody is heard saying “I don’t care what they teach you in school: Cleopatra was black”.

And that is the problem. If Cleopatra was a fictional character where race wasn’t important then race-swap as much as you want. But if you're going to base something on a historical figure you should probably stick with their actual race.

 

Gender Neutral Award Categories-- Helping or Hurting Women?

The BRIT awards (the U.K.'s version of the Grammy's) introduced an Artist Of The Year category this year as a gender neutral replacement for Best Male and Best Female Artist categories.  But you guessed it-- all five nominees this year turned out to be male. Oops!

Total and utter backlash has ensued in every London newspaper. The BBC, Telegraph, NME and many more are very angry. When the male- and female-specific categories were eliminated, industry commentators had warned that going gender-neutral in a male-dominated industry would lead to women being sidelined. And it looks like they might be right.

The BRIT awards organization had previously stated that they chose a non-gender specific award to make them "even more inclusive, recognizing exceptional work rather than how artists identify.” Unfortunately, female artists lost out and whatever the intention, the result doesn’t look “more inclusive.”

In reaction, there are some journalists doubling down on the gender-neutral categories and actually saying that there should be a mandatory rule that 50% of the nominees should be women. Guardian columnist Owen Jones said, "My view is gender neutral awards should reserve 50% of nominations for women. Women represent a majority of the music industry workforce, so the Academy making the nominations should also be weighted to be at least 50% women, too.”

If you're going to switch to a gender neutral award category, but allocate 50% of the slots to men and 50% to women-- isn't that the same as having separate nominees for men and women? If the whole point of having industry awards is to promote an industry, then shouldn't the goal be to give out more awards rather than less? It looks like the idea of gender neutral categories is now gaining traction over on this side of the pond. I'm not sure what the right approach is, but it looks like we're still struggling with this issue.

 

Let Me Tell You a Story of a Hawaiian Hippie Nudist Camp

Where the road ends on Kauai’s north shore, a group of hippies in the early 1970s lived in an off-grid Hawaii community of tree houses, grew their hair long, smoked weed and chose to go nude.

Taylor Camp, as it would become known, was named after Kauai resident Howard Taylor, the brother of actress Elizabeth Taylor. Howard owned the 7 acres of land in Haena, a scenic coastline of white sandy beaches, turquoise waters, and a tropical abundance of streams, caves and green cliffs. It was in 1969 that Howard welcomed homeless men, women and children to live on his beachfront property, with no rules or rent to pay.  “We’ve had no trouble,” Howard said in a 1970 Honolulu Star-Bulletin article. “Most of them are just here while they make up their minds to return to the ‘Establishment’ world and what they want to do there.”

When Howard moved to Kauai, he never expected to create a hippie community. He had been living on Oahu, working at the University of Hawaii, and fell in love with the Garden Island. He bought the beachfront property in Haena, moved his family to Kauai, and planned to build a home for his wife and five kids.  After Howard bought the property, he couldn’t get a building permit and no one would tell him why. He eventually found out that the state had plans to create a state park out of the land.

Left in limbo with no way forward, Howard bought land elsewhere on the island and abandoned his Haena land, until he found a purpose for it in 1969. 

Unexpected Developments in the Kevin Spacey Saga

The past five years have been turbulent ones for Kevin Spacey, but things have taken an unexpected positive turn for the Oscar-winning actor. Today, a jury found Spacey not liable for the 1986 molestation alleged by actor Anthony Rapp (when Rapp was 14 years old). There were plenty of holes in Rapp’s account of the events, which likely led to the jury's quick verdict.

Spacey had also been charged in 2017 for (allegedly) sexually assaulting the teenage son of former Boston WCVB-TV news anchor Heather Unruh at a Nantucket bar in July 2016. Then the charges against the actor were dropped after it came to light that Spacey’s accuser had altered phone records/text messages. When the accuser took the fifth in court, that sealed the deal and the case was dismissed.

That hasn’t stopped investigators from London to Los Angeles from continuing to investigate the actor over other allegations of sexual assault. Directors Paul Schrader and Bernardo Bertolucci have defended Spacey over these latest rounds of accusations.

Most of these charges stem from Spacey’s time as the artistic director at London's The Old Vic theater between 2004 and 2015. The actor did apologize for any "inappropriate drunken behavior,” but says he can’t remember any incidents of wrongdoing during that time.

The last we heard of Spacey on this side of the pond, the actor had been kicked off his own Netflix show, “House Of Cards,“ and had his already-shot role in Ridley Scott’s “All The Money In The World” completely erased and re-done by Christopher Plummer.

Last year, the New York Post reported that Spacey was already plotting his Hollywood comeback, stating that was still getting acting offers from Europe and Russia.” Spacey’s not out of the woods by a long shot-- he has yet another trial, stemming from another accuser, coming up next summer in the UK.

 

Has Bruce Willis Sold the Rights to His Face?

It was widely reported that Willis, in the first deal of its kind, had sold his face to a deepfake company called Deepcake. Deepfakes use artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning technology to create realistic videos - often of celebrities or politicians. For actors that can no longer act, the technology has the potential to be game-changing. 

The Daily Mail reported that a deal had been struck between Willis and Deepcake, saying "Two-time Emmy winner Bruce Willis can still appear in movies after selling his image rights to Deepcake," the story reads.  The story was then picked up by the Telegraph and a series of other media outlets.  "Bruce Willis has become the first Hollywood star to sell his rights to allow a 'digital twin' of himself to be created for use on screen." said the Telegraph.

But that doesn't appear to be the case. Bruce Willis's agent has denied reports that the film star has sold the rights to his face.  A representative of Deepcake interestingly said only that Willis had the rights to his face-- which isn't a denial that Deepcake has an agreement of some kind with Willis.  

Willis announced his retirement from acting in March after being diagnosed with aphasia, a disorder that affects speech.  What is true is that a deepfake of Bruce Willis was used to create an advert for Megafon, a Russian telecoms company, last year.  The tech used in the advert was created by Deepcake, which describes itself as an AI company specializing in deepfakes. At that time, the company said, "What he definitely did is that he gave us his consent (and a lot of materials) to make his Digital Twin." 

The company says it has a unique library of high-resolution celebrities and historical figures.  On its website, Deepcake promotes its work with an apparent quote from Mr Willis: "I liked the precision of my character. It's a great opportunity for me to go back in time.  The neural network was trained on content of Die Hard and Fifth Element, so my character is similar to the images of that time."

When the current story broke, the BBC asked Willis's agent whether he had ever worked with Deepcake, or whether the quote used by the company was accurate-- there was no response.  The confusion highlights just how new this technology is - and the lack of clear rules around it.

 

 

 

Just Sayin'

Cannes Film Festival a Continued Source of Racism

Despite the progress that has been made in the U.S. in representation of minorities in the film industry, it seems that it's still the same old elitist "old boys club" at the Cannes film festival (the supposed center of world cinema, but that's for another day).

African-American film critic Valerie Complex from Deadline Hollywood recently wrote about the mistreament she experienced while reporting from the recent edition of the (in)famous French film festival:

"On May 16, the first day I got there, I made my way to the American Pavilion when I was again “randomly” stopped by security. Their reasoning: I had a large bag with me. But everyone else had large bags as well. You would think Interpol was searching my bag as security dumped its entire contents onto the table so they could examine the items and check every crevice of my bag. Even passersby were shocked by what they saw.

The scrutiny of my credentials was constant, especially at screenings in the Palais. Guards and personnel would put my ID up to my face to ensure it was me, even before scanning it. I didn’t see anyone around me treated this way. Once when I attended a premiere screening at the Debussy theater, I headed toward the reserved seated section as those seats were what was printed on my ticket. Every seat usher requested to see my seat number the closer I walked to the front of the orchestra.

I saw plenty of white moviegoers who came in with me, walking toward the same area without anyone checking their tickets. When I finally got to my seat, I looked around me and didn’t see any folks of color in or around the rows directly near me. Maybe this is why? At another premiere screening, I sat down in a reserved row, and three different seat ushers came over to my seat to check my ticket to make sure I was in the proper place. They weren’t checking anyone else’s tickets, just mine.

These types of things happened to me daily. I tried not to let it get to me, but it was taking place so often that I became depressed. When you review a film, you want your focus to be on what is on the screen and nothing else. It was hard to dismiss the emotions of being singled out like this.

I understand the dynamics. Marginalized groups, specifically Black people, are excluded from these “elite” environments. Those in power refuse to accept that the media landscape is changing. The higher one climbs, the more egregious the microaggressions become. It is attributable to gatekeeping, where there remains a misunderstanding of what being established looks like. It’s hard for some to believe that I could be sitting in the reserved section of a premiere at the Grand Auditorium Louis Lumière, which is usually occupied by people who don’t look like me. That in itself becomes an unflattering reflection of the festival."

Big Win For Johnny Depp

In a post last month, I hinted at a potential win for Johnny Depp-- and he has prevailed as many insiders predicted.  The media, who had a clear-cut bias against Depp before the trial even started, engaged in their own kind of defaming-- trying to spin Depp’s victory today in court. “Johnny Depp and Amber Heard Each Defamed Each Other, Jury Rules,” so states Variety.

But clearly the jury saw it like most regular folks who took the time to read all the facts. The pre-trial narrative was that Depp abused Heard and that she was a #MeToo survivor, but things have clearly swung in the opposite direction. It’s not like anyone ever bought that Heard was the victim of this relationship-- there were clear signs and red flags regarding her credibility.  

Heard’s claims of abuse in the hands of Depp seemed sketchy from the get-go. Her WaPo op-ed, which kick-started the firestorm, read as inauthentic as her own acting abilities.  No one is saying that Depp is an angel, but the trial made Heard look like Glenn Close in “Fatal Attraction.”

Things Are Not Looking so Good for Amber "the Slammer" Heard

The whole Johnny Depp and Amber Heard business has been (shall we say) a bit tawdry.  But what once seemed a slam-dunk case of Depp bad behavior doesn't seem that clear-cut anymore.  What didn't get reported widely when Heard first aired her grievances a few years ago was an audio recording in which Heard actually admitted to hitting him, saying ""You are such a baby. Grow the fuck up," followed by:  "I fucking was hitting you... I don't know what the motion of my hand was, but you're fine, I did not hurt you, I did not punch you, I was hitting you."

While it's clear (so far) that Depp did suffer abuse at the hands of Heard, we haven't heard her side of the case-- so we don't know definitively whether or not he's also an abuser.  But there are some things we definitely know for sure. Amber Heard admitted to leaving human fecal matter on Johnny Depp’s bed. We also know that Heard sliced Johnny Depp’s finger with broken glass. We also know that Amber Heard roundhouse punched, kicked and slapped Depp . Heard also took a photo of Depp passed out drunk with melted ice cream on his lap and then blackmailed him with it . It was also confirmed that Heard had purpously timed her infamous 2018 Washington Post Op-Ed against Depp to capitalize on ‘Aquaman’ press

It was also established that the makeup brand Heard claimed to have used to hide her bruises wasn’t even available in the market yet. Further damaging Heard's credibility is the fact that Heard had promised-- but never actually donated-- the millions in Washington Post op-ed money to the ACLU. During the trial, a psychologist also testified that Heard suffered from “histrionic and borderline personality disorder” Of course, that is an opinion-- but it is a fact that Heard was arrested years ago for domestic violence, after assaulting her then girlfriend.

With the "Aquaman" star expected to take the stand this week, we are sure to get more salacious details that could swing the pendulum in the other direction-- but it’s definitely not a good sign that Heard fired her entire PR team on Sunday. So maybe things aren’t going so well for her side of the case. Stay tuned!

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar on the Oscar Slap

"When Will Smith stormed onto the Oscar stage to strike Chris Rock for making a joke about his wife’s short hair, he did a lot more damage than just to Rock’s face. With a single petulant blow, he advocated violence, diminished women, insulted the entertainment industry, and perpetuated stereotypes about the Black community. 

Smith’s slap was also a slap to women. If Rock had physically attacked Pinkett Smith, Smith’s intervention would have been welcome. Or if he’d remained in his seat and yelled his post-slap threat, that would have been unnecessary, but understandable. But by hitting Rock, he announced that his wife was incapable of defending herself—against words.

This patronizing, paternal attitude infantilizes women and reduces them to helpless damsels needing a Big Strong Man to defend their honor least they swoon from the vapors.  This “women need men to defend them” is the same justification currently being proclaimed by conservatives passing laws to restrict abortion and the LGBTQ+ community. 

Worse than the slap was Smith’s tearful, self-serving acceptance speech in which he rambled on about all the women in the movie King Richard that he’s protected. By using these women to virtue signal, he was in fact exploiting them to benefit himself. But, of course, the speech was about justifying his violence. Apparently, so many people need Smith’s protection that occasionally it gets too much and someone needs to be smacked.

The Black community also takes a direct hit from Smith. One of the main talking points from those supporting the systemic racism in America is characterizing Blacks as more prone to violence and less able to control their emotions. Smith just gave comfort to the enemy by providing them with the perfect optics they were dreaming of.  

Read the full post here.

 

Can't Beat Pete for an Unusual Christmas Gift

"Stand up" comedian Pete Davidson is soon to become an obsession with horny women nationwide.  Adult entertainment website CamSoda, will be releasing a sex toy inspired by the 27-year-old comedian, adorned with colorful tats.

The Davidson dildo “will help girls get off to the latest and greatest (and supposedly biggest, wink wink) celebrity heartthrob.” CamSoda announced.  “Pete doesn’t have to be locked down with just Kim. We can all share a piece of the SNL stud and get to know him more intimately,” CamSoda Vice President Daryn Parker eloquently added.

In case you thought it couldn’t get any more bizarre, the phallic prosthetic offers synchronized sessions with Saturday Night Live. When Pete makes an appearance on the NBC comedy show, the sex toy will start “gyrating accordingly.”

“As Pete graces people’s television screens on Saturday Night Live - and is permanently plastered across their timelines on Instagram with girls fawning over him - they can sync their smart dildos (aka teledildonics) to his appearances on SNL,” they added.

From Kate Beckinsale, Maid star Margaret Qualley, Bridgerton’s Phoebe Dynevor, model Kaia Gerber and most recently Kim Kardashian, Pete has been linked to many A-listers over the years.  He was famously engaged to Ariana Grande for a few months back in 2018 – who could have been responsible for fueling a few rumors about his manhood.

On Twitter, Ariana responded to a fan who asked her how “long” Pete Davidson was, in reference to a song interlude.  “Like 10 inches? … oh fuck … I mean … like a lil over a minute,” she replied in a now-deleted reply.

Pete later addressed the comments during a stand-up set. “I don’t like that she talked all that shit for my penis,” he said. “Why would she tell everyone that I have a huge penis?  So that every girl who sees my dick for the rest of my life is disappointed,” he joked.

 

Eric Clapton Now a Raving Anti-Vaxxer

Robert Cray was stunned when he first heard "Stand and Deliver."  Eric Clapton, his onetime musical hero, who became a mentor and friend, had released his first protest song in 56 years of recording. Only it wasn’t about George Floyd or global warming. Clapton’s mid-tempo shuffle, a collaboration with Van Morrison, went full anti-lockdown, taking aim at the government for trying to control a global pandemic by temporarily shuttering restaurants, gyms and concert halls. 

What grabbed Cray’s attention were the lyrics: "Do you wanna be a free man / Or do you wanna be a slave? / Do you wanna wear these chains / Until you’re lying in the grave?"

Cray — one of the great blues guitarists of his generation, a five-time Grammy winner and Black man born in segregated Georgia — emailed Clapton immediately. Was the 76-year-old guitar great comfortable singing those words, which compared the lockdown to slavery?   Clapton's response didn't satisfy Cray, nor did their next email exchange. Then Cray stopped replying altogether. The next time he wrote was weeks later to politely inform Clapton that he couldn’t, in good conscience, open for him as planned on an upcoming tour. 

Cray watched as Clapton released two more lockdown songs, conducted a lengthy interview with vaccine skeptics, and pledged to perform only where fans would not be required to be vaccinated, or, as Clapton said in a statement, not “where there is a discriminated audience present.”

After a September show in Austin, Clapton posed backstage with Texas Gov. Greg Abbott. Abbott had recently signed the country’s most restrictive abortion law and a Republican-backed measure to limit who can vote in the state. Like that, a 35-year friendship between Cray and Clapton was over.

Many of Clapton’s friends and fans seem to be having a similar falling out over Clapton's behavior.  It’s unclear how much Clapton cares about the criticism, as he has been turning down interview requests from Rolling Stone, Wapo, and others.  

There are reports that Clapton was vaccinated earlier this year, but yet he has been critical of government directives.  Friends tried to attribute his anti-vax views to a lifelong fear of needles. As a heroin addict in the early 1970s, he was known to only snort the drug.  What a bullshit excuse.

Critics say that Clapton is more than one man sharing his opinion. He’s a massive public figure with considerable influence.  “He could be helping us in finishing off this pandemic, especially with a vulnerable population,” says Joshua Barocas, an associate professor of medicine with an expertise in infectious diseases at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. “We’re looking at millions and millions of people worldwide. He could be a global ambassador, and instead he’s chosen the pro-covid, anti-public-health route.” 

Clapton's anti-lockdown campaign has unquestionably damaged his reputation. 24 Stone magazine, which had featured him eight times on its cover in largely glowing terms in the past, produced a searing attack that not only called him out for his pandemic behavior, but spotlighted a 45-year-old incident that remains an inescapable bruise on his career.