I'm Lilly. This blog is a slapdash of multiple fandoms, though the main ones are Welcome to Night Vale, Supernatural, Doctor Who, and miscellaneous. Sometimes I just get really passionate about history and philosophy and religion and ugh all that stuff. Here there be lots of gay. Also comics, books, movies, words, reference, writing advice, doodles, quotes, Huffley-puffley things. I suggest going to the 'about' for a more in-depth look at my fandoms and tags.

 

allxthirteen:

theladylillibet:

black-nata:

AND FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER IN CINEMA HISTORY AN AMERICAN MADE MOVIE SWAPS FANATICAL PATRIOTISM FOR BASIC HUMAN DECENCY EVEN THOUGH THE MOVIE ITSELF IS CALLED CAPTAIN AMERICA AND IT DOESN’T GET ANY MORE PATRIOTIC THAN THAT BUT MARVEL CHOSE A DIFFERENT PATH AND I’M THANKFUL FOR THAT pardon my capslock

and in a fantastic plot twist, the answer was not to nuke the enemy

(Source: taylor-swift)

teddytrumpet:

gotpasta:

cosbyykidd:

sickomobb:

ghivashels:

colinmorgasms:

what if obama does the ice bucket challenge and nominates queen elizabeth

what if obama actually talks about what’s going on in ferguson

what if obama stopped exterminating the middle eastern population with drones

what if obama lowered my gotdamn tuition

What if everyone gets educated and stops acting like the President can make decisions for the country by themselves

^that one 

oodlyenough:

abadplanwellexecuted:

oodlyenough:

Asexuality and aromanticism are different. The Doctor could have loved Rose but not wanted to have sex with her. In fact, it goes a ways to explain why he never could say it.

I know they are different — my issue is when people use them interchangeably precisely to dismiss the Doctor’s feelings for Rose. (I suspect this is a piece of rhetoric used less by people who really care about the Doctor’s asexuality, and more by people who care about Doctor Who not being an ~icky girly romance~.)

I’ve kinda had the feeling that part of the appeal of looms/pseudo-asexuality for the fanboys was because it helps maintain the power imbalance between the Doctor and the female characters — the companions are supposed to realize it’s futile early on and keep their distance as his plucky support crew, while the one-off lady characters are allowed to fall head-over-heels, flirt desperately, get a few swashbuckley-charm moments from the Doctor, swoon, and then get the brush-off.  They’re left behind ostensibly to pine after that tiemcock forever and ever.  

Nine’s whole your-wish-is-my-command attitude must have been a real bummer for them.

Yeah, I get that vibe too.

I mean I think there are, certainly now anyway, two very distinct segments and one of those segments are people for whom the Doctor as asexual is really personally important because they need/want/appreciate that kind of representation and I don’t really have any beef with that even if I don’t really happen to share that particular interpretation.

But it absolutely also gets misused by people who I think are less invested in the Doctor being an asexual icon and more invested in the Doctor as this male power fantasy who is so above all the measly human women he travels with that they have nothing to offer him on any level, he’s immune to their sinister womanly wiles, et cetera et cetera. That’s usually where you get the conflation of asexuality and aromanticism too, because again it’s less about him being asexual and what that means, and more about the companions not getting any grand ideas and the show not being tarnished with icky girl things.

Anonymous asked
I've only ever seen new Who, what's up the whole looms thing?And why are some people so touchy about it?

oodlyenough:

Looms are something from the extended universe novels, especially the novel Lungbarrow. I haven’t read Lungbarrow so I can’t give you the exact details but basically it’s a means of reproduction for Time Lords in lieu of sexual reproduction that involves growing new adult-sized Time Lords. I guess kind of like in “The Doctor’s Daughter”. (Which, for me, always kind of begged the question of “surely he wouldn’t be so weirded out by Jenny if this is more or less how things were done on Gallifrey”.)

Uhhh people are touchy about it because in fandom you get touchy about things… lol. For some people in fandom looms became a really important part of the asexual Doctor, like, mythos. I don’t personally care what people think the Doctor’s sexuality is until/unless it turns into “the Doctor is expressly canonically asexual ergo he could never have loved Rose” and/or all variations on “the Doctor should be asexual because romance is for ICKY STUPID GIRLS”.

To me looms are not canon because they’ve sort of been directly contradicted several times now by the screen, but I find them really funny. (There’s a passage about like, freshly-loomed Time Lords with the minds of children but the bodies of adults living in oversized houses with giant furniture to give the illusion of being children and I just… lmao.) Other people really like looms so they either choose to ignore that or they come up with ways looms can still fit into the canon today.

Anonymous asked
Do you think Rose haters and Martha haters are one and the same?

oodlyenough:

lumos5001:

oodlyenough:

not usually, although there is some overlap (usually this is the ‘DONNA IS THE BEST COMPANION BECAUSE NO ICKY ROMANCE’ camp)

but quite often people who really hate Rose hate her in part because they somehow blame her for Ten not loving Martha and other fans hating Martha

and people who hate Martha often hate her because they are so blinded by their Rose love that they can’t fathom how it’s acceptable for Martha to, like, exist and dare have a crush on Ten even though it is very obviously not returned and therefore not a threat to their ship in the first place

just going to add a bit to this because i am a Donna fan, she is my favorite companions. now that’s not to say that i don’t like Rose or Martha. Rose is a great introductory companion and her and the Doctor are clearly in love with each other. Martha has the unfortunate circumstances of coming in after Rose and being labeled the “rebound companion”. and i think as a viewer after watching three series of woman basically swooning over the Doctor (though Martha did realize it was unhealthily and got out while she could) it was refreshing to see a companion that didn’t want a romantic relationship with him. so yeah the “no icky romance” was a part of it but it was totally more than that. it was the “you can be friends with a guy and not do not have to be romantically attracted to him to be his friend” kind of thing. and i really think that is important to showcase in a tv show because really you don’t see too much of that nowadays. 

donna is also my favourite companion

however in my time in fandom i’ve observed that a lot of the “Donna is the best” rhetoric has less to do with Donna herself and more to do with run of the mill fandom sexism, where Rose and Martha are the weak ones who dared be in love and that makes them Weak Women and Donna is the only ~strong woman~ and she’s the only independent one because obviously being in love means you can’t be independent, etc etc etc. you can like ten& donna’s relationship without insinuating that the relationship with rose and martha was lesser or that rose and martha themselves are lesser, but lots of people don’t do that.

not every donna fan does this and it’s certainly not the only reason to like donna, but it is very common, and was especially common back in 2008/2009 before amy and clara were on the scene, when the new who girls were just rose, martha and donna. sooo much “finally a REAL companion who isn’t just LOVESICK, UGH” sexist nonsense 101 from camp donna. and like i said, lots of times these people never even list any positive attributes about donna herself, it’s just like “donna wasn’t a love interest and so she’s the only acceptable woman”.