Hi.
I love you.
Yes, you.
You're beautiful.
And don't you forget it.


ambisagrus:

no image has ever described my life quite so well

ambisagrus:

no image has ever described my life quite so well

ambisagrus:

no image has ever described my life quite so well

"This little fucker…"

-- How every Gallifreyan history book refers to the Doctor, probably. (via theenigmaofriversong)

beckyhop:

I love the Sixth Doctor and none of you can talk me out of it.

beckyhop:

I love the Sixth Doctor and none of you can talk me out of it.

beckyhop:

I love the Sixth Doctor and none of you can talk me out of it.

itsstuckyinmyhead:

School and Tumblr photoset

syntheticbaeddel:

"space lesbians" is both my aesthetic and my ideology 

slarmstrong:

christel-thoughts:

this is what i just picked up from the grocery store. it cost $32. Thirty. two. dollars. for 1 pineapple, 2 bags of grapes, a small container of raspberries, 1 soft drink and 2/$1 nuts…. 
do you know how much junk food i could have for $32? do you have any clue how much McDonald’s you can get for $32?
stop shaming fat people poorer than you or people poorer than you in general for not eating healthier. stop lying about how cheap it is or how it’s comparable to fast food. just stop.

I think the thing that pisses me off most are all the holier-than-thou people who keep telling the OP to shop wiser, shop in a farmer’s market, go to multiple stores… and I all see are people with a hell of a lot of convenience and privilege.
Not everyone has a car or excess time in their day to visit five stores. Not everyone has a farmer’s market they can just pop on by to. Not everyone has the luxury of being in an area with loads of shopping options. Some cities have no grocery stores. They’re called food deserts, and you’d be lucky to find a banana under $2.
There are vast swaths of America where $24-$32 for some bare bones fruit is normal, and denying it only makes you look like a privileged dink. It is NOT easy or cheap to eat healthy, fresh food regularly, even where I live, and I have quite a number of places I can shop.

Whilst the above points are very true, I would just like to add something to the healthy eating argument that has nothing to do with money: nobody should try and interfere with the way another adult human being chooses to feed themselves.
I have had certain friends who will look at what I eat and drink and say things like “Do you know how many calories are in that?” or “do you know how much sugar is in that?”, when clearly, if I was the kind of person to care how much sugar or how many calories my food and drink contains, I would have checked on the label, and would not right now be eating/drinking it.
It fact, chances are I do know how much sugar or fat or whatever is in it, because I will read anything readable in front of me if I’m bored enough, and yes I do know how bad for me that makes it, but I am still eating.drinking it because I don’t care.
I could eat egg and chips for dinner and doughnuts for lunch and drink nothing but fizzy drinks every day for the rest of my naturals if I so desired, and the only person it would directly affect would be me. It would be nothing to do with anyone except myself.
Besides, I am fairly healthy. I walk places whenever I can, I get exercise, I drink some water each day, I brush my teeth at least twice a day. I may be a little on the cuddly side, but I am not overweight, I don’t have any fillings, I’m not going to drop dead any time soon. And maybe the way I eat is unhealthy in the long run, maybe I will die slightly younger than I would if I ate healthier, but here’s the thing:  I. Don’t. Care.
And quite frankly, if I don’t give a toss, then there is no logical reason why you should give a toss either.

slarmstrong:

christel-thoughts:

this is what i just picked up from the grocery store. it cost $32. Thirty. two. dollars. for 1 pineapple, 2 bags of grapes, a small container of raspberries, 1 soft drink and 2/$1 nuts…. 

do you know how much junk food i could have for $32? do you have any clue how much McDonald’s you can get for $32?

stop shaming fat people poorer than you or people poorer than you in general for not eating healthier. stop lying about how cheap it is or how it’s comparable to fast food. just stop.

I think the thing that pisses me off most are all the holier-than-thou people who keep telling the OP to shop wiser, shop in a farmer’s market, go to multiple stores… and I all see are people with a hell of a lot of convenience and privilege.

Not everyone has a car or excess time in their day to visit five stores. Not everyone has a farmer’s market they can just pop on by to. Not everyone has the luxury of being in an area with loads of shopping options. Some cities have no grocery stores. They’re called food deserts, and you’d be lucky to find a banana under $2.

There are vast swaths of America where $24-$32 for some bare bones fruit is normal, and denying it only makes you look like a privileged dink. It is NOT easy or cheap to eat healthy, fresh food regularly, even where I live, and I have quite a number of places I can shop.

Whilst the above points are very true, I would just like to add something to the healthy eating argument that has nothing to do with money: nobody should try and interfere with the way another adult human being chooses to feed themselves.

I have had certain friends who will look at what I eat and drink and say things like “Do you know how many calories are in that?” or “do you know how much sugar is in that?”, when clearly, if I was the kind of person to care how much sugar or how many calories my food and drink contains, I would have checked on the label, and would not right now be eating/drinking it.

It fact, chances are I do know how much sugar or fat or whatever is in it, because I will read anything readable in front of me if I’m bored enough, and yes I do know how bad for me that makes it, but I am still eating.drinking it because I don’t care.

I could eat egg and chips for dinner and doughnuts for lunch and drink nothing but fizzy drinks every day for the rest of my naturals if I so desired, and the only person it would directly affect would be me. It would be nothing to do with anyone except myself.

Besides, I am fairly healthy. I walk places whenever I can, I get exercise, I drink some water each day, I brush my teeth at least twice a day. I may be a little on the cuddly side, but I am not overweight, I don’t have any fillings, I’m not going to drop dead any time soon. And maybe the way I eat is unhealthy in the long run, maybe I will die slightly younger than I would if I ate healthier, but here’s the thing:  I. Don’t. Care.

And quite frankly, if I don’t give a toss, then there is no logical reason why you should give a toss either.

slarmstrong:

christel-thoughts:

this is what i just picked up from the grocery store. it cost $32. Thirty. two. dollars. for 1 pineapple, 2 bags of grapes, a small container of raspberries, 1 soft drink and 2/$1 nuts…. 

do you know how much junk food i could have for $32? do you have any clue how much McDonald’s you can get for $32?

stop shaming fat people poorer than you or people poorer than you in general for not eating healthier. stop lying about how cheap it is or how it’s comparable to fast food. just stop.

I think the thing that pisses me off most are all the holier-than-thou people who keep telling the OP to shop wiser, shop in a farmer’s market, go to multiple stores… and I all see are people with a hell of a lot of convenience and privilege.

Not everyone has a car or excess time in their day to visit five stores. Not everyone has a farmer’s market they can just pop on by to. Not everyone has the luxury of being in an area with loads of shopping options. Some cities have no grocery stores. They’re called food deserts, and you’d be lucky to find a banana under $2.

There are vast swaths of America where $24-$32 for some bare bones fruit is normal, and denying it only makes you look like a privileged dink. It is NOT easy or cheap to eat healthy, fresh food regularly, even where I live, and I have quite a number of places I can shop.

Whilst the above points are very true, I would just like to add something to the healthy eating argument that has nothing to do with money: nobody should try and interfere with the way another adult human being chooses to feed themselves.

I have had certain friends who will look at what I eat and drink and say things like “Do you know how many calories are in that?” or “do you know how much sugar is in that?”, when clearly, if I was the kind of person to care how much sugar or how many calories my food and drink contains, I would have checked on the label, and would not right now be eating/drinking it.

It fact, chances are I do know how much sugar or fat or whatever is in it, because I will read anything readable in front of me if I’m bored enough, and yes I do know how bad for me that makes it, but I am still eating.drinking it because I don’t care.

I could eat egg and chips for dinner and doughnuts for lunch and drink nothing but fizzy drinks every day for the rest of my naturals if I so desired, and the only person it would directly affect would be me. It would be nothing to do with anyone except myself.

Besides, I am fairly healthy. I walk places whenever I can, I get exercise, I drink some water each day, I brush my teeth at least twice a day. I may be a little on the cuddly side, but I am not overweight, I don’t have any fillings, I’m not going to drop dead any time soon. And maybe the way I eat is unhealthy in the long run, maybe I will die slightly younger than I would if I ate healthier, but here’s the thing:  I. Don’t. Care.

And quite frankly, if I don’t give a toss, then there is no logical reason why you should give a toss either.

Anonymous said: "OH MY GOD DO YOU NOT REALIZE THAT JOHN IS FUCKING MARRIED TO A WOMAN IN THE BOOK?!?!? IF THEY DON'T MAKE JOHN STRAIGHT, IT WILL BE A GREAT INJUSTICE DONE TO BOTH THE AUTHOR AND THE BOOKS."

wsswatson:

Ah, hello, Person Of Immense Politeness. I suspect you’re here to talk about my OTP. Luckily for you, I’m in a good mood, so I’m going to go through this nice and rationally.

  1. Yes, as a matter of fact, I am aware of that. As it happens, I’m an English literature student, and have not only read all 4 novels and 56 short stories, but studied them in depth. I’m writing a series of essays on them at present, actually.
  2. Perhaps you’re unaware of other adaptations, so let me inform you that in The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, Holmes is gay (see point 6), in Elementary, Watson is a woman, Moriarty is also Irene Adler and the series is set in New York, and in Basil the Great Mouse Detective, the characters are mice. Also, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle cared very little for Sherlock Holmes, and, despite claiming that ‘Holmes is as inhuman as a Babbage’s Calculating Machine, and just about as likely to fall in love’ in 1892, he later wrote a play, and when appealed to by William Gillette, who was to portray Holmes, for permission to alter his character, Doyle replied ‘You may marry him, murder him, or do anything you like to him.' HE DIDN’T CARE ABOUT HIS CHARACTERS BEING ALTERED.
  3. You are completely avoiding historical social context. In the Victorian era, MEN COULD NOT MARRY MEN AND WOMEN COULD NOT MARRY WOMEN. In fact, the Marriage Equality Bill was only passed in England THIS YEAR. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s close friend, Oscar Wilde, was sentenced to two years of hard labour which so severely damaged his health that he died 3 years later as punishment for ‘gross indecency’, i.e. homosexuality. Do you know what was used against him in court? The Picture of Dorian Gray - his novel - because it contained homoerotic subtext. Doyle wanted to portray Watson as a heart in contrast to Holmes’ head, and as such, he had to be romantic. HETEROROMANCE WAS THE ONLY OPTION IN THE ERA IN WHICH HE WAS WRITING.
  4. That said, the canon did contain plenty of homoerotic and homoromantic subtext which queer literary critics have been studying since its publication.
  5. MEN DON’T HAVE TO BE STRAIGHT TO MARRY WOMEN. Wilde was predominantly attracted to men (many consider him biromantic and homosexual), and he was married to a woman called Constance Lloyd. In the Victorian era, marriage was nowhere near so much based on love as it is today - it was about money, power, status, convenience, all kinds of things. Now, I do believe that Watson loved Mary Morstan (and that Wilde loved Constance Lloyd), but this context is important to recognise. In any case, biromantic/sexual and panromantic/sexual men marry women. That doesn’t make them unable to also feel love or attraction for men. John never says that he is straight, only that he isn’t gay (true) and isn’t Sherlock’s date (also true). That’s very open-ended phrasing that doesn’t rule out attraction to men/a man (and, in fact, series 3 creates plenty of space for a bisexual reading). In fact, even straight people are capable of finding themselves sexually and/or romantically attracted to a member of the same sex. The concept of exceptions to personal rules and the fluidity of sexuality was a key theme in A Scandal in Belgravia.
  6. The writers were influenced by The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes* (on which Mark Gatiss said: ‘The relationship between Sherlock and Watson is treated beautifully; Sherlock effectively falls in love with him in the film’ and on which the writer, Billy Wilder, said that he wished he’d had the ability to make Holmes unambiguously gay) and deliberately establish homoerotic and homoromantic subtext. In fact, at Anatomy of a Hit, they said that they regard all adaptations to be part of an ongoing canon, and draw as much influence from them as from the canon. For instance, A Scandal in Belgravia was much more closely based on The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes than A Scandal in Bohemia.
    * more on this interview here
  7. On that note, I’m immensely amused that you are so scandalised by the concept of Holmes and Watson being written into a romantic relationship, yet have no issues with the fact that the stories have been translated into the 21st century (a decision which, at Anatomy of a Hit, the writers stated they felt automatically provided them with ‘license to be heretical’), that Irene Adler was portrayed as a lesbian dominatrix, that the meaning of ‘RACHE’ was inverted, that the Reichenbach Falls were exchanged for St. Bart’s Hospital, that Mary Morstan was portrayed as a contract killer and that Charles Augustus’ surname was changed from Milverton to Magnussen to account for his change of nationality from English to Danish and that he was portrayed as the head of a media corporation.
  8. It is possible to ship something in fanon without wanting it to become canon. There is also nothing wrong with wanting something that you enjoy to happen on screen and hence be more accessible to you, particularly if that thing would also be socially beneficial by providing (much needed) positive representation to marginalised groups.
  9. Shipping makes me happy. Fandom makes me happy. Sherlock makes me happy. I think it extremely rude of you to come into my ask box under the cowardly guise of anonymity to try to take that happiness away from me (you failed completely, I might add), when it literally affects you in exactly 0 ways.

So, in conclusion:

image

thatsupernaturalswiftie:

*Slams fist on table*

 I JUST REALLY WANT MY OTP TO BECOME CANON 

freemarketsocialist:

tooraloora:

rrrick:

astrodidact:

Three years ago, researchers fired whisky to the International Space Station as part of an experiment to see how the conditions in space change flavours. Next month, the whisky will return to Earth.
 http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20143108-26097-2.html 

Scotland’s contribution to space research. Good job.




The Scottish only want independence so they don’t have to sacrifice their space whiskey to the English government.

freemarketsocialist:

tooraloora:

rrrick:

astrodidact:

Three years ago, researchers fired whisky to the International Space Station as part of an experiment to see how the conditions in space change flavours. Next month, the whisky will return to Earth.

Scotland’s contribution to space research. Good job.

image

The Scottish only want independence so they don’t have to sacrifice their space whiskey to the English government.

freemarketsocialist:

tooraloora:

rrrick:

astrodidact:

Three years ago, researchers fired whisky to the International Space Station as part of an experiment to see how the conditions in space change flavours. Next month, the whisky will return to Earth.

Scotland’s contribution to space research. Good job.

image

The Scottish only want independence so they don’t have to sacrifice their space whiskey to the English government.

occult-cupcakes:

scatter—the—nuns:

fanoffandom:

I actually applauded this post