Played 2,911,867 times








Press play and enjoy fuckers.


At first I’m just like “it’s fucking clapping, I don’t ca-” and then he began to sing and I took in such a deep breath my uncle had to make sure I was ok.


If you don’t reblog an acoustic version of My Songs Know What You Did In The Dark (Light ‘Em Up), something is wrong with you.


​I don’t usually reblog music but this is definitely worth it 100%





apparently e.l. james called former child star mara wilson (matilda) a “sad f**k” for critiquing the 50shades books a while ago and now there’s a feud. i love it.

I have a love for her that runs deep.













(Source: toughhabittokill)



I keep seeing gifsets of Clara hugging the Doctor and it’s seen as something cute or funny and it makes me uncomfortable because he clearly says he doesn’t want her hugging him and she ignores that. She tells him he doesn’t get a say in it and does the same thing a few episodes later. I find it difficult telling people not to touch/hug me because all too often they respond like Clara. Even if they back off physically they’ll still probably mock me for it. So seeing that’s not fun.

It’s not cute or funny. She should have respected him. Moffat seriously needs to learn how to portray respect between people.

For better or for worse the Awkward Hug is a fairly common trope, often associated with putting on an artificial air of grumpiness, which is why it’s “funny” or “cute,” although that’s not necessarily the case here.

I don’t think it’s so much a problem with Moffat’s writing as it is a consistent fact about Clara’s character.  She doesn’t respect other people’s comfort a whole lot.  She’s very much focused on herself and doing things on her own terms, which at times is a real strength for her and at other times really makes her come off as a kind of a horrible person. 

The problem is that it’s usually framed on the balance positively, when, as you say, it can actually be a real problem :/

My normal response would be ::hugs:: but, given the context, that seems wholly inappropriate.  Um, how about ::contact free symbolic hugs of support and commiseration::  I hope that people treat you with more respect, and I’m sorry that you’ve been made uncomfortable by this trend

"And I’m a scientist. I assure you that the study of reactions to pain and injury is something that we scientists are used to viewing with clinical detatchment. And we’re used to administering it, too." –– Liz Shaw

Liz Shaw | Underappreciated Companions (6/22)



#Three era is my favourite

(Source: queenofthebeasties)



cries for the rest of my life

Sometimes I think he understood the character better than the writers did.

(Source: timelordsandladies)

Anonymous asked
In response to the ask about calling people "biologically X": the problem is that it suggests that male or female are biological facts, or that biology itself is a fact, when the binary structure imposed by (male) scientists is just as socially constructed as gender roles and masculinity and femininity. In saying somebody is "biologically female" you are parcelling up a whole load of culturally constructed assumptions that aren't helpful, because "female" doesn't mean anything. (1/2)

(2/2) so AFAB/AMAB are way more accurate because they refer specifically to the idea that a doctor, on looking at a baby’s genitals, made an assumption about their gender, whereas “biologically female” suggests that a person has a vulva, a vagina, ovaries, a womb, and makes other implications such as their hormone balance and their chromosomes, which actually, we cannot know just by sight. The thing with AFAB/AMAB is that we’re acknowledging that it’s just a guess.

(This is really aimed at the Anon asking the question, but…)

…Biology is fact. It’s science.

There is a DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GENDER AND SEX. ‘Gender’ is a purely societal construct. ‘Sex’ is a biological fact. Your ‘gender’ can be cis to your biological sex or trans to your biological sex (in a wide variety of ways).


Would you mind not standing on my chest? My hat’s on fire.


I promised I’d talk a little bit about Doctor Who, of which I’ve been a fan since the late 80s. The Doctor nearest to my heart is Sylvester McCoy, and my favorite companions are probably Romana I and Ace. Don’t judge me.

To be crassly commercial for a moment, you can actually find a little essay from me on my early Who fandom in the newer, revised edition of BEHIND THE SOFA: CELEBRITY MEMORIES OF DOCTOR WHO:

I was delighted when the show came back in 2005. Right off the bat, RTD seemed to grasp the most important thing about the series, something that had been all but lost between 1981-86 and only recovered in the Sylvester McCoy years: This is a show about a) a mysterious but good-hearted alien and his b) brave, good-hearted friend(s) who c) have a time machine and d) THINK IT IS AWESOME. The Rose/9 dynamic was on fire with this, and the addition of Jack only multiplied the fun.

Now, what RTD didn’t know about science would fill a library, and he had less than zero conception of narrative arcs or earned payoffs (his deus ex machina climaxes got lazier and more ludicrous as the series went on), but on his watch the dialogue and characterization were snappier than anything I’d ever hoped for. I was more or less content*, until “The Stolen Earth/Journey’s End” threw me out of my groove by being unforgivably, unnecessarily witless to the nth degree with a suck-cherry on top.

Eventually, I started watching again. I can’t help myself. I’ve seen “Warriors of the Deep” at least three times, I can take nearly anything. Or I could, once upon a time.

As for Moffat, I thought he was a gifted writer of individual episodes (I especially like “The Girl in the Fireplace,” since the cliche of every woman in the universe falling in love with the Doctor had not become a cliche just yet, and “Blink” was frankly brilliant) but I wasn’t sure he had the skills and the mentality of a showrunner, and… nothing since has convinced me I was wrong. I still enjoy the show, it has some great writers and actors doing fine work for it, but I despair at Moffat’s seeming inability to construct a female companion who isn’t defined by her existence as a story puzzle or a vehicle for some deep dark Doctor-related mystery.

He’s got the modern willingness to at least let women kick ass every now and then, but keeps missing the part about letting them have lives and dreams and characterizations of their own. River Song can crack a safe or stage a rescue with the best of them, but after “Silence in the Library” she’s not a person, she’s a spotlight to shine on the Doctor, or a bandage for whatever ails him. Rose and Martha were characters I could see pursuing lives of their own when they were off-screen. Donna was that in SPADES. River is a plot device who goes back into the closet when there’s no ‘sweetie’ around to deliver hints to.

It is impossible to destroy my lasting love of Who in general, or my adolescent memories of the show, or my willingness to keep giving it fresh chances. Still, I do sometimes wish it could be placed in the care of someone with a better grasp of basic plot and consequences, a bolder sense of adventure, and a willingness to not be so fucking smug about their obvious blind spots. Some of the shit that comes out of Moffat’s mouth on the subject of relationships and all the creepy gender-essentialist tosh… jesus. “Men find pregnancy disgusting! Women are needier than men!” How sadly fucking tiresome.

*Exceptions included the unbelievably vile and wildly out-of-character last few minutes of “Love and Monsters,” in which the Doctor, champion of life and dignity and the freedom of the individual, preserves a heroic woman as as an animate stone face so she can live on as a joke and a sex toy. Also, the Sontaran invasion episodes, which are just grotesquely stupid. Also, the bit about Donna’s brain exploding if she ever saw anything exciting again was bullshit. Also, “Voyage of the Damned” was one long slap in the goddamn face. Also, stop me before I “also” again.**

**It is still, despite the fact that I often wanted to pick RTD up and shake him until all the bad story structure fell out, impossible for me to truly dislike the guy, because he did oversee the long-awaited and successful resurrection of something I cherish.

swampskeleton asked
hello! i love the gentleman bastards series and have since i picked up tloll in high school. it's really nice seeing representation in fiction and its one of the things i enjoy about the series. one thing i have wondered about, and im not sure if it has been asked, but since you make a lot of posts about worldbuilding perhaps this is something you have thought about in detail. what is it like for trans folk in universe? and will there be trans characters in the cast in one of the future books?


Well, excepting a few crapsack pervocracies like Jerem, the pressure of absolute gender performance conformity in Locke’s world is significantly lower than it tends to be in ours. Although there are irrational local prejudices (note how many cultures feel about female sailors), generally speaking in the Therin/Vadran/Okanti/Syresti/Jereshite world, men and women are free to dress as they please and act as they please and seek employment as they please (though of course class, wealth, and education issues savagely curtail opportunity for many of them). With the exception of bastions of mild homophobia like the far eastern Therin states, concepts like ‘gay,’ ‘butch,’ ‘femme,’ etc. are simple descriptors empty of value judgments. I personally theorize that this degree of freedom would alleviate many (but of course not all, for there are biological factors to consider as well) of the crushing issues facing those who express gender variance or nonconformity in our world. The TLDR version: Locke’s world is a place where I imagine people, regardless of the other shit they have to put up with like feudal living standards and murderous author-gods, have a generally superior chance of feeling content in their own skins and being accepted by those around them regardless of the traits they embrace or subsume. As for whether there will be trans characters, I’ll just say that some of the characters you’re going to meet are going to dance up and down our spectrums of gender expectation with many a gleeful don’t-give-a-fuck, and I’ll just let you be the judge when you meet them.