i want the “strong woman” trope to be retitled “The Athena Complex”

because athena felt that, since she was not born from a woman but rather from zeus’s head, and since she was strong and wise, she was not truly a woman, but in fact much more masculine and often sided with men in disputes

which really reminds me of everything we see in television and movies and literature, when we see a woman we’re supposed to look up to, but all she keeps saying is “stop calling me a girl, i am Too Strong to be labeled feminine”

like yo, the two can coexist, and better yet… you dont even have to possess both at all

you can be strong without being the goddess of the wisdom of battle, and you can be the goddess of the wisdom of battle and still be feminine, ya feel

(Source: shriios, via birdsquirrel)




if i see that ergot poisoning post about the salem witch trials ONE MORE TIME i will scream

why were only the girls affected? why only 1692 and no other years previous or after? ergot poisoning would have affected an entire store of grain and thus would have happened more than once.

look, these girls got in trouble and they blamed the black slave girl and then shit snowballed. people took advantage of one another. they saw ways to hurt each other in a rigid, sexist, racist, and puritan society and they went for it. 

it was cruel, unjustified, terrible shit. 

ergot poisoning has caused weird things to happen, but this was not one of those times.

here’s how we know it wasn’t ergot poisoning: no one’s legs turned black and fell off

ergot may have some incidental psychedelic properties but unless you turn it into LSD (or, at the very least, LSA) its vasoconstrictor properties are a helluva lot stronger

(via facingthenorthwind)


megaparsecs replied to your post:hey, did you know we’re four years away from the…

im not sure if its even poss to determine the exact date of pub (tho now im curious….), but the date she had the dream that inspired it was 16 june 1816 so theres always that.
ETA: NVM. actually wikipedia has. the exact date im silly. it was the first of january happy new year.



aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand they cut the ‘heart of hearts’ speech


your accent, your interpretation, eee! I love them both!

"with good accent and good discretion", even? uvu

thank yooouuuuuuuuu

I’m so proud of you and so excited for the Sydney visit in August



oh my god he’s wearing the funeral shoes, when sherlock escapes from hospital and when “who would he bother protecting” and “why does sherlock think i’ll be moving back in” and consequently it must be with the mary reveal, abort fucking mission he is wearing the funeral shoes

OH GOD HE WAS, S2 buff!Sherlock I can forgive because he was doing all the ST stuff but I don’t know what they did with his face in S3 but they went overboard with the bronzer. I want too want the lanky skinny pale look back *sob*

he was so gorgeous and then he buffed up and now it’s just “”“”“”manly”“”“” and I don’t like it at all

I mean, his face is still his face, with the cheekbones and the eyes and the mouth, and that’s all lovely and intriguing, but

w h y


[emits a deep sigh of relief]

It’s over. We’re stopping now. I’m sorry to everyone involved, however tangentially, but especially to synteis, and to the friends who’ve fruitlessly tried to get me to let it go all day, and who are probably very annoyed with me.


emmadelosnardos said: Great essay on queerbaiting in Sherlock! You really did your research, and it was fascinating to see everything laid out so clearly. Those guys (Moffat/Gatiss) are terrible! Horrendous! Way to call them out! Emma

Wow, thank you! As a student of history, research and referencing are very important to me, but it wasn’t that hard. I remembered plenty of awful quotes from interviews and stuff, and resources like stfu-moffat and yourfaveisproblematic made finding links and articles a lot easier.

I think it’s a little simplistic to reduce it so “so-and-so is awful”, but I do also kind of agree. They’re probably not terrible people, not at all; but Moffat especially, repeatedly and without self-analysis, both writes into his shows and says explicitly extremely problematic narratives/characters/attitudes, and his refusal to accept criticism about these things is nothing short of childish. I care so much about this show and these characters, and I want them to be good, and productive, and interesting without offensively adhering to Moffat’s (incredibly restricted and privileged) worldview. I shudder at generalisations, but when these problems are laid out — like in my essay, and in numerous other posts around tumblr — it gets incredibly hard to harbour any sympathy for someone who so consistently and outrageously fucks up like that.

So I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat are inherently terrible; but with Moffat, it’s hit the point where the barrage of offensive ignorance the spews from his mouth and pen are so outrageous that I’ve lost any obligation to be objective. The people who know him may defend him all they like (looking at Cumberbatch and Smith presenting that BAFTA), but the fact of the matter is that he’s offensive, egotistic, and ignorant. He may not be a bad person per se, but god damn is he a bad writer.