Late to the ugandan-news.com party chronicle of the Sophie Hunter / Benedict Cumberbatch Shamwow. Formerly Cackling Anon. There will be venting, swearing, aneurysm inducing levels of side eye, and more arched eyebrows than you can shake a conveniently shaped piece of molded foam at.

You are watching: Benedicts-third-testicle

Judgement free zone. Pretend you"re an adult and discuss topics in that same fashion. Word to the nannies/superfans/precious flowers: Hate all you like. I am in my 30s. I work in music and entertainment including fandom and pop culture events. I run my own business in these industries which is tantamount to hostile territory, and I run my business successfully. I have a life. I feed off hate, there has been a great deal of it aimed at me purely because I am a woman, a boss and dare tell people what to do on a daily basis. Particularly amusing attempts aimed at me will be met by the written equivalent of a size 10 heel to the arse Now with Twitter!
ugandan-news.comSubmit and Anon is ON. Links for all including email are above. Now, who wants some tea?


benedicts-third-testicle:

gnanon:

omg-cyberbatch:

gnanon:

cumberbees:

ucbutudonotobserve:

the-fellowship-of-erdemhart:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/hannah-mcgill-skeptical-about-cumberbatch-fans-1-3974064

Hannah McGill: Skeptical about Cumberbatch fans

Skeptics have a problem with Sophie Hunter and Benedict Cumberbatch.

HANNAH MCGILL15:39Saturday 12 December 2015

THE great clash that finally destabilises civilisation may not occur between ancient religions, political movements or sheets of ice, but between rival factions of Benedict Cumberbatch fans.

I’m not even sure if “fan” is the right terminology. There’s liking an actor’s posh growly voice, appreciating his interesting taste in screen roles, maybe even admiring the unusual arrangement of his facial features – and then there’s giving over a considerable amount of your time to online speculation that his wife is a paid fake, they never really married and their baby is a doll.

Not only am I not making this up, but the Cumberbatch followers who subscribe to these notions are numerous enough to have a collective name. They call themselves “skeptics”, and they are locked in ever-deepening conflict with “nannies” – their term for those Cumberbatch enthusiasts not given to querying whether his wife Sophie Hunter really lives in his house or what their baby is made of.

Over-investment in celebrity private lives is nothing new, of course. Lord Byron’s groupies clustered outside his house and followed him on holiday. A fan of the author Sinclair Lewis who in 1930 offered to do “everything – and I mean everything” for him received a sharp cease-and-desist from his wife Dorothy, signed “Mrs Sinclair Lewis to you”. Early Beatles devotees wept when the band members wed. But the potential offered by the internet for researching celebrities’ lives, coming to bizarre conclusions, and connecting up with similarly-inclined people to egg one another on has cranked things to another level.

In her 2011 memoir Your Voice in my Head, the writer Emma Forrest recounts that during her relationship with actor Colin Farrell, they were grimly addicted to reading horrible online gossip about their relationship. That was only the babyhood of the weird strain of fandom that has now attached itself to Cumberbatch, and other male celebrities including One Direction members, Robert Pattinson from the Twilight films and Jamie Dornan from 50 Shades of Grey. With its preoccupation with falsehood and fakery, it has more in common with extreme conspiracy theorising than with any existing form of groupie behaviour. Just as so-called “truthers” try to rationalise disturbing world events by claiming that every horror from Columbine to 9/11 to the Bataclan has been elaborately staged in the name of extending gun control or promoting the New World Order, so these new celebrity obsessives cope with the fact that their beloved is out of reach by declaring every visible aspect of his personal life to be fake.

A selling-point of an internet-enabled world used to be that it brought us closer to those we admired – we could peep into their lives, maybe even communicate with them directly. Now it’s being used to place famous people yet farther away: on the far side of great far-fetched myths about who they “really” are. Maybe it’s just built into fandom that making stuff up about them, however cruel or mad, feels safer than accepting that they’re just ordinary people after all.

——

TFOE: Besides this incredibly inaccurate and biased article, I wonder when there will be an article written about what the antis do to the skeptics. Not all nans are so “innocent” nor are they mature (writing articles only the nans care about? Like…that’s pretty sad as they think it will scare us into submission because they are so big and bad and powerful and they have their Prince to protect as if he cared the private life he’s chosen to mix with his public life is being analyzed without rose colored glasses).

Lol. If this keeps up, soon I’ll have more articles written about my blog than SH about her career before BC.

See more: Scrambled Egg Whites: Calories In Scrambled Egg White, Scrambled Egg Whites (3 Eggs) Nutrition Facts

Mmm hmm…

*

MMMMMM HMMMMMM…

*
*

Mummy Hunter afraid of losing her cashcow SIL?

Oh, dear, oh, dear, oh, dear, someone’s left their lanes again…or…the Scotsman? Really? This ‘journo’ must be really bored up there in Scotland or she got an assignment from the Hunter clan…. I like that they’re all try to act surprised and dismayed if someone mentions that some couples, families in the film industry are indeed PR fabricated and they act as if this was the first time.

I think regretting to see our favorite actor’s usual public persona doing and 180, hating to be lied to and discussing and dismissing the fakery in Hollywood and in the film industry with the occasional fun posts is much less obsessive that drooling over the possible first Christmas of ccc but what do I know…I’m sure trolling and doxxing people is fine and must be fun too(????). Aaaanyway…

I see an growing intent of ‘divide and conquer’ , and the intent to discredit this teeny-tiny corner of the internet in the past few days.…I always ask myself…if we are such a tiny, irrelevant corner of the internet, why such things as the above articles exist…in the national newspaper of Scotland?