GoneTrending

This past week, Bob Dylan and publishing company Simon & Schuester came under fire after it was discovered that several copies of Bob Dylan’s book The Philosophy Of Modern Song were autographed using a machine to create replicas of his signature.

The book contains Dylan’s commentary on 66 different songs by artists like Nina Simone, Elvis Presley, Hank Williams and more. Copies with Dylan’s supposed signature were going for as much as $599.

Today (November 26), Dylan has taken to Facebook to address the controversy.

To my fans and followers,

I’ve been made aware that there’s some controversy about signatures on some of my recent artwork prints and on a limited-edition of Philosophy Of Modern Song. I’ve hand-signed each and every art print over the years, and there’s never been a problem.

However, in 2019 I had a bad case of vertigo and it continued into the pandemic years. It takes a crew of five working in close quarters with me to help enable these signing sessions, and we could not find a safe and workable way to complete what I needed to do while the virus was raging. So, during the pandemic, it was impossible to sign anything and the vertigo didn’t help. With contractual deadlines looming, the idea of using an auto-pen was suggested to me, along with the assurance that this kind of thing is done ‘all the time’ in the art and literary worlds.

Using a machine was an error in judgment and I want to rectify it immediately. I’m working with Simon & Schuster and my gallery partners to do just that.

With my deepest regrets,
Bob Dylan

Simon & Schuester also addressed the controversy earlier this week, saying, “To those who purchased the Philosophy of Modern Song limited edition, we want to apologize. As it turns out, the limited edition books do contain Bob’s original signature, but in a penned replica form. We are addressing this information by providing each purchaser with an immediate refund.”

For the first time since 2000, the Michigan Wolverines won a football game in Columbus. Jim Harbaugh’s third-ranked squad walked into Ohio Stadium on Saturday afternoon for a highly-anticipated showdown with the No. 2 Ohio State Buckeyes, and despite things being close and tense for the first half, the Wolverines ground the Buckeyes into dust during the game’s final two quarters en route to a 45-23 victory.

The win means the Wolverines are headed to Indianapolis for the second year in a row to compete for a Big Ten championship. But for these two teams, the rivalry is about more than getting to compete for titles, as there is a remarkable amount of pride on the line. And while the Buckeyes have owned this series over the last two decades, the Wolverines now have a winning streak for the first time since 1999 and 2000.

Michigan players were, unsurprisingly, fired up after the win, especially the manner in which they won, as the team outscored the Buckeyes in the second half, 28-3. To celebrate, someone on the team grabbed a flag with the iconic michigan Block M on it, went to midfield, and planted it right in the center of the O at midfield in Ohio Stadium.

Another angle shows that the player who grabbed the flag and ran to midfield was defensive back Mike Sainristil.

Baker Mayfield famously did this in 2017 after the Oklahoma Sooner walked into Columbus and beat the Buckeyes.

If you felt the forthcoming R-rated horror film Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Money ruined your Disney-bred childhood, then brace yourself for more. As per Dread Central (as caught by Entertainment Weekly), the same producer has another House of Mouse classic character on the chopping block: Bambi, the nice deer who’s simply trying to get over the murder of his poor mother by heartless human hunters.

The film, which begins production in January, is called Bambi: The Reckoning, and it takes a macabre twist on both the 1942 Disney classic as well as Bambi, a Life in the Woods, the Felix Salten book that started it all. As the title suggests, the plot finds an adult Bambi out for revenge upon the hunters who offed his mom (and subsequently traumatized every generation that’s watched it as children).

How far will this new version go in destroying an iconic fictitious woodland critter? Director Scott Jeffrey promises an “incredibly dark retelling” of the classic story, describing their take on Bambi as a “vicious killing machine” and warning people, “Prepare for Bambi on rabies!”

Winnie the Pooh and Bambi aren’t the only classic children’s characters getting bloody new twists. This holiday seasons, the Grinch is also getting The Mean One, a horror parody courtesy starring David Howard Thornton, star of the freak sleeper hit Terrifier 2. RIP you childhood.

(Via Dread Central and EW)

In 2019, rapper EST Gee was shot in the eye after filming a video with Sada Baby. He took a bullet in his left eye and was shot in the stomach four times. Since then, he has signed to Yo Gotti’s Collective Music Group and released his debut album, I Never Felt Nun. Though, he seems to have been dealing with the aftermath of the shooting for years.

EST Gee took to his Instagram story yesterday (November 25) to share an update with fans. He revealed that he is losing vision in one of his eyes.

In a video, he showed his eye, which appeared to have a cataract, to the camera.

“See that cataract growing over my eye,” he said, “sh*t getting worse. It’s harder to see. It’s getting bigger.” He shared that he had planned to get surgery on his eyes a few years ago, but wasn’t able to due to the pandemic.

The video was captioned with text reading, “How can I stop this grey part from spreading I use to could see a lil bit but its getting worse I’m starting to see less.”

It is unclear whether EST Gee’s vision loss is directly related to the 2019 shooting.

You can see EST Gee’s video above.

Donald Trump has associated himself with plenty of unsavory figures over his lifetime, but he might have finally found someone too horrifying even for his die hards. The former president had Thanksgiving dinner with Kanye West and another guest: Nick Fuentes. Both Fuentes and Ye have said awful thinks about Jewish people. But Fuentes goes further: He’s a Holocaust denier, a white supremacist, a sexist who thinks women shouldn’t be able to vote, and a self-described incel who once said “dating women is gay.”

Why would a presidential candidate dine with someone like that? Trump tried to explain away his dinner with a bigot, using a familiar excuse: He claimed he “didn’t know Nick Fuentes.” He thought it was only supposed be him and Ye, he said, and had no idea he was bringing a guest, much less one who’s frequently said disparaging things about Black voters. For what it’s worth, Trump said that Fuentes “expressed no anti-Semitism” during their meal, so that’s nice.

Perhaps it’s true, and Trump — who bragged that the anti-Semite racist said “nice things” about him and was, as Ye put it, “really impressed” with him — simply thought he was some young fanboy. Whatever the case, people weren’t exactly buying his claim that a former commander-in-chief who still gets Secret Service detail would simply let some sketchy rando break bread with him.

Besides, Trump’s line — that he didn’t know about this horrible bigot with whom he’s linked — sounded awfully familiar.

Even it’s true and Trump had no clue who Fuentes was, he may still have caught the time he attended the same white nationalist event as Marjorie Taylor Greene, who also claimed — also not very convincingly — that she had no clue who he was.

Then again, Ye — who recently torched his career by going anti-Semitic — wasn’t exactly an ideal dinner guest. Nor is Trump himself, for that matter.

The dinner earned widespread scorn, even from within the GOP. It also enraged a key wrestler.

This article originally appeared on 10.12.17

“Why didn’t she say anything sooner?”

It’s the question that frustrates sexual assault prevention advocates and discredits the victims who bravely come forward after they’ve been targeted.

Stars Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow — who both disclosed to The New York Times they’d been sexually harassed by movie mogul Harvey Weinstein years ago — are among the latest women now having to trudge through a predictable wave of victim-blaming following their disclosures.

Paltrow and Jolie’s descriptions of abuse follow an explosive report in the Times on Oct. 5, 2017, that chronicled decades of alleged sexual harassment at the hands of Weinstein — a man with seemingly boundless sway and power in the filmmaking world.

Sadly, Paltrow and Jolie were met with various forms of the question. “Why didn’t the women of Hollywood stop him?” sprouted up immediately in corners of the internet.

u201cGwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie just publicly accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual harassment nhttps://t.co/fviyF1kruYu201d

— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed)
1507659784

One viral comment on the Times article, however, nailed why questioning a victim’s actions after surviving sexual harassment or assault does so much harm.

“It is disheartening to see so many comments already blaming women for not ‘speaking up,'” the reader, identified as “K” from Brooklyn, began.

“Please count yourself lucky that you’ve never had your career on the line based on whether or not you sleep with your boss,” they continued. “It has nothing to do with fame and riches; this happens to women making minimum wage in retail as well as women who fought through it to become CEOs.”

“An NYT reader’s reaction to Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and
others saying Harvey Weinstein harassed them https://t.co/apUsZUGbKI”

u201cAn NYT reader’s reaction to Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie andnothers saying Harvey Weinstein harassed them https://t.co/apUsZUGbKIu201d

— The New York Times (@The New York Times)
1507663802

“K” continued, giving context as to why it’s often very difficult and complicated for survivors to speak up after being abused (emphasis added):

“The psychology behind this kind of thing is not that complex, so please spare a moment to consider: Not only are these women made to feel humiliated and embarrassed, but in some cases if they had come forward, they not only would never work again, they also would be seen as whiners and ‘too sensitive.’ Both Jolie and Paltrow fended him off. Imagine if they made a big stink about it. They would have been ripped apart in the media! ‘Oh for goodness’ sake, a dirty old man came on to you. You rejected him and moved on, why the fuss?’ But, of course, now we must insist on blaming them for ‘perpetuating’ Weinstein’s behavior. Please.”

As “K” described, victims often stay silent because they’re vulnerable to the power abusers have over the situation; victims could lose their job or see their credibility attacked, for instance. These kinds of power dynamics — whether it be in Hollywood or not — play a big role in why victims stay silent.

u201cGwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie speak out about their own “bad experiences” with Harvey Weinstein https://t.co/SAPyBtYi5Yu201d

— British Vogue (@British Vogue)
1507743900

For victims of sexual harassment, the threat to their livelihood does not end after a single encounter with an abuser. If a young, less accomplished Paltrow had spoken out against a figure like Weinstein, would he have irreversibly tarnished her reputation? Would he have planted unforgiving stories about her in the media? Would she have ever worked again? These are the sorts of threats victims weigh before speaking out. A predator’s hold on a victim’s career or reputation creates a culture of silence.

The commenter also used Brad Pitt’s involvement in the story to note a sexist double standard in how we see victims of sexual assault.

If we’re blaming Paltrow and Jolie for not speaking up sooner, why aren’t we blaming Brad Pitt as well?

Pitt, who’d been romantically involved with both Paltrow and Jolie at different points in his career, reportedly knew about Weinstein’s predatory behavior, according to The Daily Beast, yet he worked with Weinstein on two films following the disturbing encounters. The fact that he’s largely been left out of the discussion says a lot about how we view victims of sexual assault, particularly when they’re women.

“K” went on to say that the attitudes of blaming women for their own persecution are astounding: “Note that the comments have not centered around Brad Pitt’s not saying anything, though he knew about it with not one but TWO romantic partners…It is not the women’s job to monitor men’s behavior.”

u201cAngelina Jolie said that after what Harvey Weinstein did to her during her youth, she never wanted to work with him again. Her former husband and father of her kids, Brad Pitt, KNEW about the situation and fought w her. He continued to work with his partneru2019s abuser +u201d

— ud83dudd2a (@ud83dudd2a)
1630756734

The assertions made by “K,” whose comment drew over 3,000 likes and a long thread of supportive replies, aren’t just steeped in opinion; advocates argue sexual harassment is rarely just about sex — asserting power plays an instrumental role.

“Most frequently, survivors of sexual harassment, exploitation and violence delay making an official report of what has happened out of fear of how others will respond,” Kristen Houser, chief public affairs officer at the National Sexual Violence Resource Center, explained to HuffPost in March 2017. “From retaliation by the perpetrator to gossip, dismissive responses and outright victim blaming by colleagues, friends and family.”

We need to stop asking “Why didn’t she say anything?” and instead wonder “Why aren’t we doing more to support survivors?”

This article originally appeared on 07.31.17

After much breathless waiting and anticipation, the animated kids short “In a Heartbeat” was finally released on July 31, 2017.

The four-minute short film — which follows a closeted boy as he “runs the risk of being outed by his own heart after it pops out of his chest to chase down the boy of his dreams” — has captivated certain corners of the internet since its trailer was released in May and instantly went viral.

The finished film is just as adorable and sweet and pure and squee-worthy as fans were hoping.

People are just totally loving it.

u201cDID U JUST HEAR SOMEONE SCREAM BC IT WAS ME WATCHING IN A HEARTBEAT ITS THE CTUEST THNIG IVE EVER SEENu201d

— ud835udd20ud835udd1eud835udd2a (@ud835udd20ud835udd1eud835udd2a)
1501515099

Like, honestly, truly adoring it.

The short is only four minutes long and completely void of narration or dialogue.

But its creators, Beth David and Esteban Bravo — who completed the project as part of their college senior thesis project — were able to invoke so many relatable emotions to queer fans watching at home: the helplessness of puppy love, the adolescent dread of being outed as LGBTQ, the judgmental gaze from peers when you are outed as LGBTQ, and the comfort of finally learning you’re not alone.

The project’s 30-second trailer tugged at heartstrings back in May, so you can imagine what a difference the full movie is making now.

“We’re very touched by the response we’ve gotten so far and we’re happy to know that our project has already had a positive impact on so many people,” the creators said in May of the film’s blossoming fandom. “It proves to us that there is a need and a want for media that addresses LGBT+ themes in a positive and lighthearted way.”

The two hoped their film’s positive reception will lead to more LGBTQ-inclusive films being produced down the line.

Fans, it seems, passionately agree:

Take four minutes out of your day and watch “In a Heartbeat” right now, below:

“In a Heartbeat” – Animated Short Film by Beth David and Esteban BravoA closeted boy runs the risk of being outed by his own heart after it pops out of his c…

Many of the rivalry games that happen in college football’s final full week or the regular season involve conference foes going head-to-head. One of the exceptions to this occurs in the great state of South Carolina, where the Clemson Tigers and the South Carolina Gamecocks take the field at the end of every regular season.

You know how weird stuff can happen in rivalry games? Well, we got that in a big way thanks to … whatever this is by the Tigers. A South Carolina offensive possession ended with a safety, which meant Clemson was slated to get the ball back. On the ensuing kickoff by the Gamecocks, the Tigers’ return man brought the ball into a huddle with a few of his teammates, hoping that they’d be able to hand it to someone and confuse South Carolina’s return team.

That did not happen. Phil Mafah was able to pick up a few yards on the return after everyone huddled up, but as Todd Blackledge pointed out, he was just a bit too loose with the football. So, when his arm went flying, so did the ball, and the Gamecocks were able to get it right back.

South Carolina’s offense would go on to score a few plays later.

Jonathan “Hovain” Hylton, a veteran hip-hop artist manager, has died, according to a message from his representatives.

Hovain was well-respected in New York City’s hip-hop scene and known for managing artists like Cam’ron, Styles P, Lloyd Banks, and T-Pain.

The news arrives by way of his social media accounts, through which, his reps made the announcement.

“It is with deep regret that we message to all family, friends and colleagues that Jonathan “Hovain” Hylton passed away while at his home on Friday, November 25. He was a beloved and devoted father, husband, son, brother and a proud Brooklyn representative.

We’d like to thank all of his close friends for all of the love and support that you have shown during this difficult time. We ask that you all continue to keep his family in your prayers and respect their privacy at this time.”

After the news broke, several fans, musicians, and industry peers took to social media to pay tribute to Hovain.

“Love you brother 4 ever,” said Fat Joe in Hovain’s Instagram comments.

At the time of his death, Hovain seemed to have several projects in the works.

“Hovain had just hit me up about doing some music with lloyd banks,” wrote producer Hit-Boy on Twitter. “God bless his family.”

At the time of writing, a cause of death has not been confirmed.

Anyone who was a teen in the ’90s will remember the grunge era. Nirvana, Pearl Jam and Soundgarden were topping the charts with their gravely metaphorical lyrics, but they weren’t alone. Soul Asylum burst onto the scene with their solemn anthem “Runaway Train” complete with a video that showcased missing kids.

The video gave missing and exploited children a much bigger platform to be recognized on, because before the video was showcased on MTV, milk cartons were the common method to distribute these photos. In theory, milk cartons seem like a pretty effective way to highlight missing children, but in reality, eventually people would become blind to the photos.

The music video for “Runaway Train” was played all around the world and to the target audience that would most likely recognize the faces. It should come as no surprise, then, that the video helped to bring home 21 missing children. What is surprising, is that the band had to push to keep the pictures of the missing kids in the music video because people didn’t think it was working.

David Pirner, the band’s lead singer, explained to The Guardian that the song was a metaphor for his depression and the line “call you up in the middle of the night” was actually about a friend that would answer his late-night calls no matter what time. He told the outlet that he had a fascination with trains from a young age, so he used the imagery of a runaway train as a metaphor for when his depression was out of control. As cliches would have it, the rest is history.

Well, that is, of course, until you realize that the song did more than give moody teens an anthem for their feelings. It actually brought them home.

When I watched the music video as a young teen, the gravity of the photos that flashed across my screen didn’t truly sink in. What Soul Asylum did in 1993 was the epitome of using your platform for a good cause and unbeknown to young teens like myself, it saved actual lives.

The producer, Tony Kaye, got the idea to put missing children in the video after seeing a billboard of a milk carton that displayed the face of a missing child. He told The Guardian that The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children sent them photos of the missing kids they wanted highlighted in the video and at the end of the video the text would instruct viewers to call a number if they had seen the children featured.

But the record company was fully prepared to pull the plug because it didn’t seem to be working. Kaye insisted on leaving the photos and before too long, the tactic started working. Child after child was returning home and when one was found, they’d replace the photo with a different child. They told The Guardian that 21 of the 36 kids featured were returned home.

That definitely seems like something to brag about and with the group’s 30-year anniversary album release and their upcoming tour, it’s something to highlight and attempt to repeat. In 2019, a different artist recorded their version of “Runaway Train” in partnership with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children in hopes of bringing more missing children home using updated technology. The song is powerful on its own but coupling it with helping to locate missing and exploited children, elevates it to another level.

If you’re itching for a grunge fix like me, go reacquaint yourself with Soul Asylum’s songs and go catch them on tour with Everclear. The tour starts November 5 in Carrollton, Texas.