August 27, 2014

#can i pretend that this is their first diplomatic mission as a command team?? #and they have no idea what they are doing #even though they are both geniuses

(Source: ahahahohohehe, via damespock)

August 27, 2014

I might be able to get a cat this year
I MAY BE ABLE TO GET A CAT THIS YEAR

August 26, 2014

(Source: deranged-cheeses, via songofsunset)

August 26, 2014

legalmexican:

science side of Tumblr explain why the ride home always takes less time 

Oh oh I think I know this one! There’s a psychological phenomenon where we estimate places we know well to be closer to us than places we aren’t so familiar with. Similarly (and okay this might just be my inference, it’s been a few years since I took this class), when traveling somewhere we know well, it seems to take less time than traveling to unfamiliar places. Thus, cognitive biases make going home seem shorter.

(via tsarwars)

August 26, 2014

brainsella:

itsraininbritishmen:

type40:

roachpatrol:

court-of-ocelot:

laureljupiter:

court-of-ocelot:

culturalrebel:

aka “Elitism is my middle name”

I like how Moffat would say that Reinette - a female character that he wrote into the show - is obviously a perfect match for the Doctor based on her level of ‘civilization’ and education.

As opposed to oh say…Rose Tyler - a lower-class girl who never went to university - whom the Doctor actually fell in love with and did settle down with in another universe.

This quote just has it all, doesn’t it?

- The elitism

- The dig at Rose Tyler and RTD, by extension

- The elevation of ‘his’ character at the expense of existing ones.

- The implication that Madame de Pompadour - one of the most powerful women in the country - would of course drop everything she had worked for to go and ‘settle down’ with a man who is basically a homeless spacehobo.

People who call Moffat a talentless hack are mistaken.  It takes some skill to cram that much fail into just three sentences.

Hah, excellent Moffat-criticism here. He is so petty, and so unequipped to write insightful sci-fi.

Like, okay, let’s pretend for a second that by “educated and civilised” he means “has a lot of knowledge and social insight” (which is a valid thing to look for in a romantic partner) rather than, you know, “rich, fancy and subservient” (which is what Moffat expects people to look for in a romantic partner).

… I really don’t think that an 18th century aristocrat has more understanding of science and society than a 21st person without A levels but with a working television. And in any case, if the Doctor was really looking for people who are Intellectual Equals, he’d surely look in the future, when people understand time travel, and have wikipedia installed in their brains, or whatever. Or AIs! I can’t imagine anyone more educated and ‘civilised’ than AI people!

Just, one thing I really loved about RTD’s Who arcs - which Moffat clearly didn’t understand at all - was that EVERYTHING the companions knew was useful - Harry Potter trivia! Game-show quickness! Fast typing! - and that the, like, real-world hierarchy of skills and marketability was always shown as less important than courage and compassion.

WITHOUT A LEVELS BUT WITH A WORKING TELEVISION

YES THIS.

I’m imagining the real Madame de Pompadour and how very unimpressed she would be by Steven Moffat declaring his ~admiration for her, but

wow

did this man just admit that he think the position of Companion is actually the Doctor’s maîtresse-en-titre?  Jesus wept.

That is exactly what this man thinks, and what he writes also. He thinks women are wired to ‘cling’ and men are wired to want to escape them, and the only way a relationship can be agreeable to both parties is if the woman accepts that they can only spend time together when the dude initiates it.

… Suddenly I am kinda surprised that Sherlock and Irene didn’t set up a long-distance relationship where she spends her days in an orientalist parody of a villa, waiting for Sherlock and passing the time taking luxurious bubble-baths and emotionlessly spanking female nobility.

Oh my god this is some sick shit— and really, really, really highlights how much Moffat doesn’t understand the fundamental heart of the show he’s fucking running. If the Doctor was so hot for intelligent, well educated, civilized women why the fuck did he ever leave his home planet? Why has he only ever had one Gallifreyan companion after he left his granddaughter to go her own way? Romana was foisted on him by the time lord ellimist, he didn’t go picking her out of a catalogue. 

The Doctor runs around with soldiers and schoolkids and teachers and sailors and students and journalists and shop girls and alien refugees and orphans and robot dogs and barbarians and private detective penguins and renegade archaeologists. If he wanted a slice of properly civilized girlfriend he had the whole universe to go pick one out from, and he never did till Moffat wrote him launching himself smooch-first at the lady in the fancy dress and historically inaccurate boobies.

Goddamn I am so mad. 

Oh my god. OH my GOD. If you even like moffat, just read this. WHAT A FUCKING ASS> I AM SO MAD

People who call Moffat a talentless hack are mistaken.  It takes some skill to cram that much fail into just three sentences.

when is moffat gonna stop trying to suck his own dick

(Source: badwollf, via wallflowergoneactivist)

August 26, 2014
Fun with selfies

Fun with selfies

5:26pm  |   URL: http://tmblr.co/ZklDov1PHJZ6R
  
Filed under: my face 
August 26, 2014
"If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also"

Matt 5:39

This specifically refers to a hand striking the side of a person’s face, tells quite a different story when placed in it’s proper historical context. In Jesus’s time, striking someone of a lower class ( a servant) with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person “turned the other cheek,” the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. Another alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect putting an end to the behavior or if the slapping continued the person would lawfully be deemed equal and have to be released as a servant/slave.   

(via thefullnessofthefaith)

THAT makes a lot more sense, now, thank you. 

(via guardianrock)

I can attest to the original poster’s comments. A few years back I took an intensive seminar on faith-based progressive activism, and we spent an entire unit discussing how many of Jesus’ instructions and stories were performative protests designed to shed light on and ridicule the oppressions of that time period as a way to emphasize the absurdity of the social hierarchy and give people the will and motivation to make changes for a more free and equal society.

For example, the next verse (Matthew 5:40) states “And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” In that time period, men traditionally wore a shirt and a coat-like garment as their daily wear. To sue someone for their shirt was to put them in their place - suing was generally only performed to take care of outstanding debts, and to be sued for one’s shirt meant that the person was so destitute the only valuable thing they could repay with was their own clothing. However, many cultures at that time (including Hebrew peoples) had prohibitions bordering on taboo against public nudity, so for a sued man to surrender both his shirt and his coat was to turn the system on its head and symbolically state, in a very public forum, that “I have no money with which to repay this person, but they are so insistent on taking advantage of my poverty that I am leaving this hearing buck-ass naked. His greed is the cause of a shameful public spectacle.”

All of a sudden an action of power (suing someone for their shirt) becomes a powerful symbol of subversion and mockery, as the suing patron either accepts the coat (and therefore full responsibility as the cause of the other man’s shameful display) or desperately chases the protester around trying to return his clothes to him, making a fool of himself in front of his peers and the entire gathered community.

Additionally, the next verse (Matthew 5:41; “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.”) was a big middle finger to the Romans who had taken over Judea and were not seen as legitimate authority by the majority of the population there. Roman law stated that a centurion on the march could require a Jew (and possibly other civilians as well, although I don’t remember explicitly) to carry his pack at any time and for any reason for one mile along the road (and because of the importance of the Roman highway system in maintaining rule over the expansive empire, the roads tended to be very well ordered and marked), however hecould not require any service beyond the next mile marker. For a Jewish civilian to carry a centurion’s pack for an entire second mile was a way to subvert the authority of the occupying forces. If the civilian wouldn’t give the pack back at the end of the first mile, the centurion would either have to forcibly take it back or report the civilian to his commanding officer (both of which would result in discipline being taken against the soldier for breaking Roman law) or wait until the civilian volunteered to return the pack, giving the Judean native implicit power over the occupying Roman and completely subverting the power structure of the Empire. Can you imagine how demoralizing that must have been for the highly ordered Roman armies that patrolled the region?

Jesus was a pacifist, but his teachings were in no way passive. There’s a reason he was practically considered a terrorist by the reigning powers, and it wasn’t because he healed the sick and fed the hungry.

(via central-avenue)

luxettenebris I thought I might leave this here for you. 

(via sonsofthemorning)

(via dazebras)

August 26, 2014

thepoeticandtheprosaic:

Interesting fact:

The BBC series Doctor Who ended in 2010. It was replaced by a show called Doctor Who Cares Now That Steven Moffat’s in Charge. The title of the latter show is often shortened for the sake of brevity. This has caused much confusion amongst viewers with many believing that the two series are one and the same.

(via backofthebookshelf)

August 26, 2014

(Source: puns-for-hands, via sailor-pixiistixx)

August 26, 2014
ponpekopon:

sleepy bunny *:。(´ㅅ`    )

ponpekopon:

sleepy bunny *:。(´ㅅ`    )

(via enjambament)

Liked posts on Tumblr: More liked posts »