(via modern-family-gifs)



(via modern-family-gifs)


15 ore fa · 1.118 note (© modern-family-gifs)

theloveofmylifeissteventyler:

I like older men and you cant stop me

(via beauty-at-matrix)



(via cloaked-clock)


3 giorni fa · 59.063 note (© g-a-la-x-y)

blackjackmothafucka:

This is the devil’s favorite post

(Fonte: pleatedjeans, via spaceandtimeywimey)


4 giorni fa · 370.100 note (© pleatedjeans)

ingredior:

baelor:

i dont know if i want to be buried or cremated if i die

“if i die”

(via spaceandtimeywimey)


4 giorni fa · 130.303 note (© baelor)

datunofficialdisneyprincess:


kitty?

Who did this shit?

datunofficialdisneyprincess:

kitty?

Who did this shit?

(via evelyn-black)


4 giorni fa · 120.735 note (© catsandkats)

javeliner:

think about the concept of a library. that’s one thing that humanity didn’t fuck up. we did a good thing when we made libraries

(via basilof221b)



Anonimo asked: 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.

ceywoozle:

caitlinispiningforjohnlock:

iwantthatcoat:

wsswatson:

harleenquinzel1:

wsswatson:

harleenquinzel1:

And /this/ my friend is why I do not ship Johnlock in the BBC version but I /do/ ship them in the RDJ version when it is based in Victorian England as he does have a reason to hide his feelings and therefore marry a woman

Do I really have to reiterate that men can be bisexual/romantic or pansexual/romantic and marry women, or tell you that John met Mary while he thought Sherlock was dead?

No, and I fully admit that it could be a possibility and would be fine with it if he was, /however/ for me, I don’t see any reason for John to hide his sexuality or feelings for Sherlock if he had any in the BBC version. I welcome anyone to try and convince me otherwise but personally I don’t see it..

I’ve spoken about that here and in the links provided below. I’ll also add that it’s a notable choice to always have John use ambiguous phrasing - I address “not gay” in that post, and he also says “not a couple” and “not his date”, which is true, but doesn’t rule out the possibility of ever being romantically/sexually attracted to/involved with Sherlock/men in general. When writers choose one type of phrasing over another (and use it continually rather than putting an end to speculation with a straight-to-the-point “I’m straight” through a character who points out the different linguistic implications between “previous” and “ex”, which I spoke among other things about here), there’s usually significance to that.

Look, I’m not usually this blunt, but I’m in a bad bad mood for many reasons, so it’s the wrong day to mess with me. I apologize in advance, but I’m still writing this the way I see it.
People who think John has no reason not to just admit his attraction to Sherlock clearly have very little understanding about what it is like to be a bisexual in their early 40s.

I do have that understanding.

Quit judging people who did not grow up in a world where you can be gay and proud. Where you can tell your friend how you feel and have a reasonable chance of still talking to them the next day if you happened to guess wrong and they don’t feel the same way you do. Where people even understand what bisexual means and don’t given you some snarky comment about a rare medical condition in much then same way they would say that asexuals must reproduce by splitting cells.

It is fucking fantastic how much the world has changed for the better, and we still have a long way to go, but for fuck’s sake, don’t think that people who grew up in another world didn’t have that affect them.

Want proof? John says to Sherlock that there is nothing wrong with being gay. Sherlock says he knows. Why does John say that? Because he has lived a life where it was not OK! He is telling Sherlock! I’m not gonna not want to live with you if you are gay. You can tell me. It is fine.

Think about this.

This is step one. Letting people know you are safe for them if they are gay too. Confessing your love? Step 1,000. Some people never do it. Even if you do have the nerve to confess this to a friend, you risk that friendship. Would you risk a friendship like Sherlock and John’s? And worse yet, what if this issue you have struggled with your whole life… what if Sherlock says ‘no, John, you’re straight. I’ll tell you why….’? And John sees Sherlock as asexual ( not that that means anything regarding a potential relationship, but John would be less likely to take the risk if he sees no potential gain).

*Smothers iwantthatcoat in hugs*

(I’m sorry you’re having a bad day)

Thank you so much for this.

I am not queer, but I am in my early forties and grew up with queer family members who struggled hugely with their sexuality

I CANNOT OVEREMPHASIZE how different the world was for non-het, non-cis folks in the eighties and nineties. The seventies really brought the gay rights movement out of the shadows, but then the emergence AIDS/HIV made a lot of (maybe even most) people TERRIFIED of homosexuality. Gay (and I’m using gay here as shorthand for LGBQ, forgive me) people were seen as LITERALLY DISEASED. 

We lived through that. I lived in New York City from 1989 to 1996, one of the most socially liberal cities on the planet, and homophobia was rampant in many circles.

Thank God we have moved beyond that in many ways. Thank God young queer people feel so much freer to be honest and vocal about their orientations. But queer people in their forties are in a unique position…young enough to see and appreciate how the world has changed in so many ways, but old enough that it’s really hard to  free oneself from those decades of cultural conditioning.

It’s a bit like Moses seeing the Promised Land, but not being able to go there himself. 

So to say ‘John Watson should just shake it off and openly declare he’s attracted to Sherlock’ is a naive viewpoijnt really very unfair. It’s just not that easy.

i’m not sure where this idea is coming from that it’s suddenly “easy” to come out just because oh look the modern world is so enlightened! because it’s not. the modern world is slowly changing, but the fact that the process of “coming out” still exists, that it’s still necessary, should explain why it’s not easy. no one is asking heterosexuals, cisgendered people to stand up in front of the people they’ve trusted their whole lives and say “i’m not what you always thought i was.”

maybe people are getting tumblr confused with the real world? i don’t know. because in the glorious space of tumblr, it’s true that things like that don’t matter so much. there are even people on here who glorify queerness (which is just as not good, by the way, as glorifying heterosexuality). but you can’t judge the real world by tumblr standards. and the fact that anyone thinks they have the right to make judgement on anyone else’s choice to “come out” is more than a little enraging.

i wasn’t going to comment on this, and kudos to everyone pointing out the particular difficulty that that particular age-group has, a POV that i specifically lack, but the more i thought about it the angrier i got, so here i am venting. the coming out problem is not one that’s unique to any age group at all, and it won’t be for a long time. parts of the world are getting better, but we’re not even close to being where we could be or where we should be. so don’t you fucking dare tell me that it’s easy for anyone to just say it. every situation is unique. how dare you judge that? especially in this case where we are actually given some insight into the personal life of these two characters. it’s not a straight forward matter. it’s not easy. and no, i’m not trying to belittle real world struggles with fictional characters, but given the context the two things are tied.

in fact, this little bit here:

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 subtext (1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6) which queer theorists 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 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

for me, I don’t see any reason for John to hide his sexuality or feelings for Sherlock is he had any in the BBC version.

is a pretty damn good example of what heteronormativity looks like. straight until proven otherwise, right? how much proof do you need? would a written note from a registered psychologist do? i’m not even going to apologise for being snarky because holy shit the rage i am feeling right now. don’t you dare make that judgement call for anyone but yourself.


1 settimana fa · 17.220 note (© wsswatson)

horns-of-mischief:

New photos from Avengers: Age of Ultron (x)

(via soldierodair)


1 settimana fa · 66.263 note (© horns-of-mischief)