so a bunch of my theatre friends are having a get together at a lake house someone’s family owns, and there’s gonna be a whole bunch of people there and we’re all heading up tomorrow midday and coming back sunday afternoon and i don’t even know if there’s internet there ‘cause i haven’t asked and i’m just like…

… it would be weird if i asked, right?

… it would be weird if i brought my computer, right?

NORMAL PEOPLE DON’T SIT ON THEIR COMPUTERS AND TUMBL WHEN THERE ARE LAKE- AND ALCOHOL- AND LARGE GROUPS OF FRIENDS-FESTIVITIES HAPPENING, RIGHT?

oh man i should bring books and stuff just in case. maybe i can hide my computer in my backpack in case of emergency, lol.

posted 23 hours ago

so i just finally got around to finding a good download of the tennant/tate much ado about nothing and was watching it and now i know why the dude playing giuliano de medici in da vinci’s demons was ever so vaguely familiar to me. (like vaguely enough that i didn’t even bother to look it up.)

he was totally claudio in the tennant/tate much ado.

also: MEMORIES OF BEING THIRD ROW NEAR-CENTER WITH MY AWESOME!TWIN.






"The Weeping Angels have gone from an incredibly creepy one-off villain into creatures that, like the Daleks before them, have lost any ability to inspire fear. They are only terrifying if they obey the rules that make them feel real … and these angels never do. They attack you in an instant if you blink, but Rory and Amy can look away from them for a good minute to debate how to defeat them without any dire consequences. They zap you back in time if they touch you, unless you’re River Song, in which case they just grab hold of your wrist and don’t let go. They always cover their eyes to protect themselves from being quantum locked, except when they don’t. They turn to stone when observed, but can cross a huge, vibrant city full of people with no problems. They only send people back in time when they are weak, otherwise they just kill them (a la Season 5), but when they’re superpowerful in New York, they stick to the back-in-time plan. And it’s lucky that there are no pictures of New York City landmarks, since an image of an angel is an angel and all."
— An interesting criticism of The Weeping Angels by FeministFiction, The Angels Take Manhattan Review (via neighborly)

kill-whitepeople:

charmandork:

fatflagrantfeminist:

thedarkchocolatedandy:

beam-meh-up-scotty:

Kanye West getting deep on twitter

SOLID.

this is why I love this man. 

Okay, if you don’t love Kanye, I question you and will forever until you learn.
I’ve never had a man ask me straight up if it was okay to use the word “bitch” even endearingly.
Not once.

is this real

yes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/kanye-west-introspective-word-bitch_n_1853966.html


fishingboatproceeds: TRIGGER WARNING: Rape, misogyny, general horribleness I am asked all the time why I think Professional Internet Types tend to be male more often than female. Is it because women aren’t as aggressive about building an audience and so struggle amid the media saturation? Is it because women aren’t as funny, or aren’t as talented, or blah blah blah? Maybe we need to consider that one of the central reasons women artists/vloggers/musicians/etc. are less likely to rise to prominence online is that whenever women build an audience online, men threaten those women with rape and murder. And unlike traditional celebrities, most of these women do not have the resources to hire the kind of lawyers and bodyguards that one needs to stay safe.  Like all misogyny, and I want to emphasize this, this is bad not just for women but also for all human beings. We are better off as a species if everyone has a chance to be heard, and we are worse off if talented people like Kitty Pryde don’t have the basic safety and security that one needs in order to effectively make and share stuff. But it’s not just these kinds of horrifying threats (which as pointed out above is “the most normal thing”). I also want to say something to all those guys who are like I was as a teenager: You’re not a sick person trying to get someone’s attention by harming or threatening them, but you do have a weird relationship with the women who make work you like.* You think that if this person knew you, you could be friends…maybe more than friends. And so you want to get her attention, so you can get to know each other, because then you’ll definitely become friends or maybe— Stop. When you start falling down that rabbit hole, stop. I know it’s hard. But stop. What we love—even if these people make highly personal and confessional vlogs or whatever—is the stuff they make, not the people themselves. And what we really want is for more of that stuff to exist in the world. So the only proper way to be a fan is to let them be, so that they can bring more good and useful stuff into the world for us to enjoy. * EDIT: Many people are yelling at me for saying the person in the above ask is not a sick person harming or threatening people. That is not what I am saying here. I am speaking to the people out there who are NOT like this person, but whose excessive and sometimes romanticized attention can shut down discourse. I thought that was pretty obvious from the grammar, but I just want to underscore it.

fishingboatproceeds:

TRIGGER WARNING: Rape, misogyny, general horribleness


I am asked all the time why I think Professional Internet Types tend to be male more often than female. Is it because women aren’t as aggressive about building an audience and so struggle amid the media saturation? Is it because women aren’t as funny, or aren’t as talented, or blah blah blah?

Maybe we need to consider that one of the central reasons women artists/vloggers/musicians/etc. are less likely to rise to prominence online is that whenever women build an audience online, men threaten those women with rape and murder. And unlike traditional celebrities, most of these women do not have the resources to hire the kind of lawyers and bodyguards that one needs to stay safe. 

Like all misogyny, and I want to emphasize this, this is bad not just for women but also for all human beings. We are better off as a species if everyone has a chance to be heard, and we are worse off if talented people like Kitty Pryde don’t have the basic safety and security that one needs in order to effectively make and share stuff.

But it’s not just these kinds of horrifying threats (which as pointed out above is “the most normal thing”).

I also want to say something to all those guys who are like I was as a teenager: You’re not a sick person trying to get someone’s attention by harming or threatening them, but you do have a weird relationship with the women who make work you like.* You think that if this person knew you, you could be friends…maybe more than friends. And so you want to get her attention, so you can get to know each other, because then you’ll definitely become friends or maybe—

Stop.

When you start falling down that rabbit hole, stop. I know it’s hard. But stop.

What we love—even if these people make highly personal and confessional vlogs or whatever—is the stuff they make, not the people themselves. And what we really want is for more of that stuff to exist in the world. So the only proper way to be a fan is to let them be, so that they can bring more good and useful stuff into the world for us to enjoy.

* EDIT: Many people are yelling at me for saying the person in the above ask is not a sick person harming or threatening people. That is not what I am saying here. I am speaking to the people out there who are NOT like this person, but whose excessive and sometimes romanticized attention can shut down discourse. I thought that was pretty obvious from the grammar, but I just want to underscore it.