quellines-stories - Tumblr blog

quellines-stories · 4 years

Photo

Harley and Ivy in Injustice: Year Zero (2020-) Issue 8

HOW ARE WE FEELING HARLIVY NATION

#WE CERTAINLY LOVE PROGRESS YES WE DO!!#hivy #Harley Quinn #poison ivy

8K notes · View notes

quellines-stories · 4 years

Photo

Injustice: Year Zero #8 (2020)

written by Tom Taylor art by Cian Tormey & Rain Beredo

#This is so satisfying get his ass hfbfbfbhhsh some versions of joker we just do not stan at all lads #ivy #Harley #hivy #joker

15K notes · View notes

quellines-stories · 4 years

Photo

Mark Strong photographed by Julia Kennedy for Vera Magazine

#I don’t date men but.. 👀#mark strong

8K notes · View notes

quellines-stories · 4 years

Text

@sashibunbun

I can’t reblog the post because OP blocked me without acknowledging any of the points made so my response wouldn’t show up on their post. I would have enjoyed having a discussion on there, but unfortunately that isn’t possible.

I used this particular article because it was a convenient compilation of facts from various certified sources that’s geared towards relaying those facts— not unsourced gossip. It contains links to the court documents and other certified sources within the article and the judge is not the sole source within each point that relays facts— not opinions.

There’s a judge, state prosecutor, three witnesses, Woody’s therapist and others sourced, so no— this is not a single judge’s view. The article’s closing is a personal statement regarding the author’s opinion on the matter but the ten points are facts with sources.

Furthermore, as far as I’m aware Mia was never jailed either, but that doesn’t make her any less of an abuser than it makes Woody a pedophile. Defending/believing one without defending/believing the other in this sense brings attention to one of my main problems with this post— both are abusers that don’t need to be defended since the evidence against them both is incriminating regardless of people who try to dismiss evidence against one or the other as no more than allegations since the justice system failed to deliver appropriate consequences.

What loopholes are you referring to? I don’t tend to consider gossip— I prefer sources supporting claims made, as seen in the article I referred to regarding ten incriminating legal facts. Woody had loopholes in his defense given how he backtracked on his story and changed it as seen in the source, so that should be noted if we’re going to talk about loopholes.

tl;dr: The sources are summarized and quoted facts with evidence provided, although there is an opinionated closing— given that, it’s not celebrity gossip unless you consider legal documents celebrity gossip just because they happen to be about a celebrity. In that sense, wouldn’t that mean Moses Farrow’s claims are celebrity gossip? To argue this would be to argue that any facts pertaining to celebrities legal cases are just celebrity gossip. Additionally, there’s at least four people that worked legally on this case and three other witnesses that relay these facts— not just one judge.

@ everyone considering engaging in a discussion: Please consider actually going through the article and its sources rather than just giving it a glance beforehand. Having to be repetitive doesn’t add anything to the argument and stating information that isn’t true (such as this just being one judge’s opinion and claiming the sources supported by legal documents are no more than celebrity gossip) just spreads more misinformation. Additionally, please provide sources (such as the loopholes accusation) since accusations can also tend to be misleading and I’d prefer looking at the evidence you’re referencing in comparison to the evidence I’ve brought to the table. You aren’t required to discuss this with me, but if you do please be equipped to do as much by also bringing something to the table.

#woody allen

3 notes · View notes

quellines-stories · 4 years

Text

The OP defending Woody Allen in this post blocked me when I brought up evidence as to why Woody is a pedophile. Given this, it’s pretty clear that they obviously had no counter evidence to the misleading claims they were making. Unsurprisingly, they did the easy thing and blocked me rather than address the fact that they were being deceptive in purposefully leaving out dire information regarding Farrow’s case that I brought up since they failed to include as much. Now, this ensures my response doesn’t show up on their post so they can continue spreading misinformation.

They were insisting Dylan Farrow’s trauma was a hoax and no more than a plublicity stunt created by the mother, Mia Farrow, as a claim to fame. They brought attention to Mia being an abusive mother towards Moses Farrow and used this to insist she was the real abuser. However, what they failed to understand was that both Mia and Woody were abusers— Woody molested Dylan and Mia abused Moses as well as her other children. Essentially, they weren’t in the wrong for calling out Mia’s abusive tendencies but they were absolutely in the wrong for excusing Woody’s. They could have brought attention to Mia being an abuser without undermining Dylan’s abuse.

I made this post to ask you to please consider reblogging the debunked linked version of the post instead of feminismisahatecrime’s (yes that’s their username) original misleading post to ensure misinformation isn’t further spread. If you reblogged their initial post, please consider deleting it and taking a look at the debunked one to see why their post is geared towards relaying misinformation that fails to address the primary legal aspects that weren’t in their claim’s favor. Furthermore, I believe this behavior should be brought attention to given how it’s one thing to share someone’s beliefs, but it’s another to be aware of how they practice those beliefs since practices can be unacceptable regardless of whether or not values may be shared. I would personally want to be aware of whether or not someone I looked up to did things such as this.

I appreciate everyone who has contributed to resisting misinformation by reblogging the debunked version so far!

That being said, please don’t derail this post. I don’t want to use this post to engage in drama regarding whether or not it’s okay to watch Woody’s content if you refrain from giving him profits in doing so. I also don’t want this to be derailed into a discussion about how he ended up marrying his wife’s of-age daughter after meeting her when he was over thirty years older than her, and so forth. Those are all valid things to discuss if you want to make your own post, but I don’t want this post to get derailed. This post is about the user I referenced valuing a boy’s allegations against his mother over a girl’s allegations against her father to push an agenda. The trauma of both Dylan and Moses should be respected and the abuse that both Mia and Woody engaged in should result in them being acknowledged as abusers. The Farrow siblings trauma is not meant to be pitted against one another and treated as a means of providing personal experiences to be drawn from selectively in order to push personal agendas. Their trauma is not something to invade with a bias in order to promote a misleading dictation of it for personal gain.

#signal boost

6 notes · View notes

quellines-stories · 4 years

Photo