Medicine // Harry Styles

capitalofficial: @taylorswift is officially an ICON 😍 #CapitalJBB

❀ g i r l ✿

Twitter | Instagram | Patreon | Store 

We’re here!  We’re queer!  

And so were Holmes and Watson!

Announcing @astudyincanon an online book club dedicated to queer readings of the Holmesian canon and other works by Arthur Conan Doyle!

If you would like to explore the romantic relationship between Holmes & Watson with like-minded individuals, then we would love to have you join in the fun!

We will be kicking off the online book club with a read-through of The Stark-Munro Letters by Arthur Conan Doyle.  It’s available to download for free, and details are available on the blog.

The letters were published in 1895, during the time when Sherlock was supposedly dead.  It has been said that they were written like love letters, to another “severe-looking genius” who shares many characteristics with our beloved Holmes.

Sounds to us like ACD had a type.  And we love him for it. 

Anyway, a bunch of us were curious, so we downloaded it for our first read and we hope you will join us!

Come check out the blog and read the “About” page to learn how to get involved!  We will start reading the first letter this week!

Signal Boosts appreciated!

have some fab Moriarty

really wanted to do a drawing of these two ^^

As a life philosophy, I’m a believer in calling people out for doing things right. I also wanted to put out a few words since I became relevant for a hot minute during my hiatus and people might be interested in hearing from me. (Sorry for the lack of formatting, I’m on mobile here…)

So, I’ve been off the grid. Not just like hiatus off the grid, like, backpacking in the arctic circle off the grid. While I was gone, a few of you dear people left notes alerting me to the fact that Bronte ( @vauxhallandi1994) has been writing a meta about the queer gothic in TAB for a johnlock fanzine, a topic which I wrote in depth about before the episode came out. In those messages, there were concerns that at best it was bad form to not reference my work, and at worst it could possibly be plagiarism. When I re-entered civilization, that’s what I walked into. Insert flaming pizza gif here.

I just want to emphasize how easily this could have devolved into wank territory. Both of us are passionate about our writing. Both of us come from academic backgrounds, and take our work seriously. And suddenly, we find ourselves in a situation where we’re in a way pitted against each other over a topic we both cherish. If I had wanted to, I probably could have attempted to start a call out flame war something or other. (Obviously that is utterly not my style and something I never *would* do, but, we’ve all seen flame wars start with less around these parts, haven’t we?)

Instead, here’s what happened. Bronte and I had a conversation where both of us acknowledged our mutual respect for the other’s work, emphasized our trust in the others academic and professional integrity, and committed to hashing something out that would leave both of us happy. Both of us discoursed on the assumption that the other had only good intentions.

And guess what? It totally worked. I felt safe enough to share my concerns, Bronte was open and awesome and generously allowed me to read her completed draft - and there are three references to my essay in it.

So what could have turned into a wank fest is now back to two nerds geeking out over what we both mutually love, and growing respect for one another in the process. And that’s how fandom discourse can be helpful and productive, y'all.

Academic writing, at its best, is supposed to be exactly like this. People take the work that came before it, acknowledge it, and then take it a step further. And that’s exactly what Bronte did in her essay - her work is definitely taking on new territory. I feel lucky to have gotten a sneak peak, it adds some excellent points to the queer gothic reading of TAB, and got me really excited to discourse further on the subject. I think it will be a great introduction to the queer gothic for audiences outside of tumblr who may not be familiar with the topic.

So: shout out to Bronte for doing it right. And to everyone else in the fandom, I just wanted to put a positive anecdote out there to maybe - a little bit - counteract the sea of wank out there.

And with that, I’m back to backpacking. I’ll be back in a bit - hope everyone is doing great, my love to each of you. ❤️

@twisteddoodles captures GBBO

Nailed it. 

Drop the Mic with Cara Delevingne & Dave Franco

Layering is an art of combining of your clothing which is aesthetically pleasing to the human eye. Knowing how to harmonize the colors and patterns is crucial and it’s also essential to be bold and experiment with the right wardrobe pieces. I like to minimize my wardrobe by owning a few basics to create an extremely versatile style. Despite its simplicity, wearing a waistcoat definitely stands out to show character. It certainly displays elegance and natural flair. Thank you, Nick Urteaga (Coastal Flicks) for the wonderful shoot. It was fun working with you. A special thanks to The Tailory New York for exhibiting an effortless style and pioneering a contemporary aesthetic menswear designed for women. suit / The Tailory New York shirt / Cego NYC tie & pocket square / vintage vest / no name shoes / Allen Edmonds

Yess!

Amandla Stenberg accepts the Young Gifted and Black Award at Black Girls Rock

“The 17-year-old, Hunger Games actor Amandla Stenberg has come out as non-binary.

Stenberg – who plays Rue in the adventure film franchise – says she feels like she’s not a ‘woman’ all the time, and non-binary is a term that she feels comfortable using to describe herself. (She is using female pronouns).

Writing on Tumblr, she said she is organizing a workshop on feminism, specifically how ‘mainstream feminist movements have continuously excluded women who are not white, thin, cisgender, able-bodied and neurotypical’.

Read the full piece here: 

#1: THANK YOU AMANDLA FOR YOUR CONSISTENT AWESOMENESS AS AN INTERSECTIONAL FEMINIST AND ROLE MODEL FOR YOUTH & EVERYONE ELSE!

#2: YOU DON’T NEED TO BE A WOMEN OR CIS TO BE FOR WOMEN’S RIGHTS. Just like white people can and should advocate for racial equality, everyone can and should advocate for gender equality. 

I give Amandla a TON of credit for having to not only grow up in public, but grow up as a non-binary POC in a white / sexist / cisnormative society! She is young and figuring herself and society out.  I’m Team Stenberg and am not looking to call her out, I just wanted to make this crucial clarification. As Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie says, We Should All Be Feminists

HOLY SHIT THIS IS AMAZING.

bye i love this

Man: Siri, what is 1 trillion to the tenth power? Siri: Calculation. The answer is one zero zero zero zero zero [continuing] Man: *starts beatboxing to the rhythm. Woman 1: *joins in* Woman 2: *starts singing to the rhythm*

WHAT. THIS IS THE QUALITY CONTENT IM HERE FOR.

the stereotype that women talk more than men is infinitely amusing to me because men are literally incapable of shutting the fuck up

i hope this post gets popular enough that i hurt a man’s feelings

It’s not a stereotype it’s a proven fact you femanazi piece of shit.

lmao there it is 

You wanna talk proven facts? This shit’s been done, son: researcher Dale Spender in Australia used audio and video tape to independently evaluate who talked the most in mixed-gender university classroom discussions. Regardless of the gender ratio of the students, whether the instructor was deliberately trying to encourage female participation or not, men always talked more–whether the metric was minutes of talking or number of words spoken. 

Moreover, men literally have no clue how much they talk. When Spender asked students to evaluate their perception of who talked more in a given discussion, women were pretty accurate; but men perceived the discussion as being “equal” when women talked only 15% of the time, and the discussion as being dominated by women if they talked only 30% of the time.

Spender’s conclusion, if I may parahprase: you only think we talk too much because you’d rather we were silent.

Don’t fuck with me, asshole, I’m a scientist.

Edit: I can’t believe I got her name wrong multiple times. The researcher in question is Dale Spender and the original publication of this research was called Man Made Language (1980).

So apparently ‘female adventurer’ was early 1900s slang for lesbians/bi/pan women.

EXCELLENT.

I’’m a female adventurer

Hooper

Ok, Talk to me for a minute about Molly here, because I re-watched the speech last night and I am about 99% Certain I heard Lestrade say (and I’m paraphrasing from memory) “Dr. Hooper, I invited him here. Co-operate; that’s an order” 

Let me repeat that. 

“Doctor Hooper, I invited him here”

Doctor. Hooper. 

Doctor. 

So, First of all: YAAASSSSSSSSS HELL YES MY GIRL IS A DOCTOR THANK YOU

Secondly: Let that sink in. Victorian Molly Hooper is such a bad ass. At some point she realised she was clever, she had a vocation for medicine and her whole world said ‘shut up, female, you will get married and produce babies and be nothing’ and she replied with a resounding ‘NO’. As far as the realities of her story define, as a young woman she decided to up sticks and fake it till she made it, and she made it. 

She didn’t walk into that morgue on the heels of the Ricoletti conspirators, she must have been already THERE. For her to be there must have taken YEARS of work. She got herself through the end of school perhaps as a boy. She got herself through university as a man. She got a job, not a big glamorous practice, but she got a job where SHE was in charge and people had to call her by a title she could only ever have earned and never could have married to obtain. She’s angry and strong and a fighter and a murderer because she lives in a world where she decided she had to be. 

Modern Molly is softer and kinder but modern Molly didn’t get a ‘no’, she got an ‘Go ahead if you must’. To which she gave a firm ‘I must’, and then did it. 

NEXT: I think we should tally Molly up with more credit for the Ricoletti murders. She was at the house; she was the bride slipping out of the window, it’s not improbable to assume she was the one who stabbed Sir Eustace. She’s a doctor, she knows how to stab people. 

She may also have been the gun holder who made the martyr of Emilia Ricoletti. Ricoletti needed a doctor; she was dying of TB. She also needed someone she could safely confide in; why not Molly? Molly had to be there to assist in swapping the bodies and painting ‘YOU’ in blood on the mortuary wall. Molly had to find the corpse looking like Ricoletti too- this was planned; they could only proceed once Molly was able to pop up from Barts and say ‘I’ve got one!’. Molly would probably have known how to do the makeup- she’s got her own moustache, wig and sideburns. She’s got some kind of theatrical cosmetics experience. 

AND: Ok, OK so it’s all in Sherlock’s head but nonetheless, it still gives us a big spotlight on Molly Hooper as a character and her relation to the main characters. John Watson is a good doctor; in Sherlock’s head at least a bit of him thinks that Molly Hooper is absolutely John’s professional equal. He knows John is capable of being a soldier and killing. He thinks Molly Hooper given the right conditions, could be just as capable. He assigns her a lot of credit in this. 

Molly Hooper is a bad ass. 

LAST: (and this is just my personal rambling non-concrete musing so feel free to skip this) 

Keep reading

OMG I LOVE THIS.

I’ve been so excited since the second Molly appeared on screen that I haven’t been able to do much more than flail, but THANK YOU for thinking out exactly what’s going on with her in the narrative.

I want to add…  what if the reason Sherlock appears “not to know” she’s “really” a woman (even though it’s his dream/fantasy/hallucination, so obviously on some level he does) is…  he doesn’t give a shit?  What if Sherlock is like, “well, this person dresses as a man and seems to prefer male pronouns, so who am I to argue?  I have work to do, and the data about what gender he was assigned at birth is irrelevant to the case.”

(Of course it turns out not to be irrelevant, but he hasn’t figured that out yet.)

John’s basically outing Hooper in this scene, showing off that he has figured out this aspect of Hooper’s history.  Kind of similar to how he insists on trying to ferret out Sherlock’s sexuality, even when Sherlock is clearly uncomfortable with the conversation.

Sherlock, otoh, respects people’s right to define themselves as they will, and doesn’t see a need to make a point of it until it’s relevant to some crime.